Isaiah, the Lord's order of marriage, and 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single by 2030 per Morgan Stanley.

[nuclearfuels]

It’s estimated that 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single by 2030, according to a study by Morgan Stanley. 

With the modern dating market, nearly half of women in their “childbearing” years will be without a companion. 

https://medium.com/hello-love/study-predicts-45-of-women-will-be-single-by-2030-1fbc99bad6a8

This is tragic and sad, IMHO. I'm sure there are many, many causes, reasons, both men and women being at least partially responsible.

It seems correlated to what Isaiah prophesied, to me anyway.  

Isaiah 4:1

And in that day ^aseven women shall take hold of one ^bman, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy ^cname, to take away our ^dreproach.

Institute Manual (https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-student-manual-kings-malachi/chapter-13?lang=eng)

 

(13-23) Isaiah 4:1. “Take Away Our Reproach”

Verse 1 of chapter four seems to continue the thought of chapter three rather than to begin a new thought. This phrase suggests that the condition mentioned in verse 1 is caused by the scarcity of men, a result of the devastation of war mentioned in Isaiah 3:25–26. The conditions under which these women would accept this marriage (“eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel”) are contrary to the Lord’s order of marriage (see Exodus 21:10; D&C 132:58–61). To be unmarried and childless in ancient Israel was a disgrace (see Genesis 30:23; Luke 1:25). So terrible would conditions in those times be that women would offer to share a husband with others and expect no material support from him, if they could claim they were married to him.

- Our cultural hypersensitivity to polygamy seems to have influenced the Manual's content on this verse, no?

- I could be wrong but I don't believe that women "eating their own bread and wearing their own apparel" is contrary to current Church teachings and doctrine. I'm not aware of this being a problem, is it? Is it contributing to the 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single by 2030? I don't know. 

- Isaiah's dualism, to me, seems to be prophesying about the Babylonian Captivity as well as the latter days trails, wars, tribulations, etc. (why else would Nephi include this chapter and verse?) If my view on his dualism is correct, does that not suggest that Isaiah 4:1 predicts and prophesies plural marriage's return (not only in the recent past, and NOT in the present) but possibly in the future? 

 

[Stargazer]

26 minutes ago, nuclearfuels said:

It’s estimated that 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single by 2030, according to a study by Morgan Stanley. 

With the modern dating market, nearly half of women in their “childbearing” years will be without a companion. 

https://medium.com/hello-love/study-predicts-45-of-women-will-be-single-by-2030-1fbc99bad6a8

This is tragic and sad, IMHO. I'm sure there are many, many causes, reasons, both men and women being at least partially responsible.

It seems correlated to what Isaiah prophesied, to me anyway.  

Isaiah 4:1

And in that day ^aseven women shall take hold of one ^bman, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy ^cname, to take away our ^dreproach.

Institute Manual (https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-student-manual-kings-malachi/chapter-13?lang=eng)

 

(13-23) Isaiah 4:1. “Take Away Our Reproach”

Verse 1 of chapter four seems to continue the thought of chapter three rather than to begin a new thought. This phrase suggests that the condition mentioned in verse 1 is caused by the scarcity of men, a result of the devastation of war mentioned in Isaiah 3:25–26. The conditions under which these women would accept this marriage (“eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel”) are contrary to the Lord’s order of marriage (see Exodus 21:10; D&C 132:58–61). To be unmarried and childless in ancient Israel was a disgrace (see Genesis 30:23; Luke 1:25). So terrible would conditions in those times be that women would offer to share a husband with others and expect no material support from him, if they could claim they were married to him.

- Our cultural hypersensitivity to polygamy seems to have influenced the Manual's content on this verse, no?

- I could be wrong but I don't believe that women "eating their own bread and wearing their own apparel" is contrary to current Church teachings and doctrine. I'm not aware of this being a problem, is it? Is it contributing to the 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single by 2030? I don't know. 

- Isaiah's dualism, to me, seems to be prophesying about the Babylonian Captivity as well as the latter days trails, wars, tribulations, etc. (why else would Nephi include this chapter and verse?) If my view on his dualism is correct, does that not suggest that Isaiah 4:1 predicts and prophesies plural marriage's return (not only in the recent past, and NOT in the present) but possibly in the future? 

 

An interesting situation that developed in Paraguay as a result of the War of the Triple Alliance in the 1860s some of which turned out to resemble that which was prophesized by Isaiah. That war was brutal, with dire results to the male population of Paraguay.

"A 2012 piece in The Economist argued that with the death of most of Paraguay's male population, the Paraguayan War distorted the sex ratio to women greatly outnumbering men and has impacted the sexual culture of Paraguay to this day. Because of the depopulation, men were encouraged after the war to have multiple children with multiple women, even supposedly celibate Catholic priests. A columnist linked this cultural idea to the paternity scandal of former president Fernando Lugo, who fathered multiple children while he was a supposedly celibate priest." -- from the Wikipedia article about the war.

Another result from the war was a great improvement for the rights of women in Paraguay:

"Paraguayan women played a significant role in the Paraguayan War. During the period just before the war began many Paraguayan women were the heads of their households, meaning they held a position of power and authority. They received such positions by being widows, having children out of wedlock, or their husbands having worked as peons. When the war began women started to venture out of the home, becoming nurses, working with government officials, and establishing themselves into the public sphere. When The New York Times reported on the war in 1868, it considered Paraguayan women equal to their male counterparts."

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, nuclearfuels said:

It’s estimated that 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single by 2030, according to a study by Morgan Stanley. 

With the modern dating market, nearly half of women in their “childbearing” years will be without a companion. 

https://medium.com/hello-love/study-predicts-45-of-women-will-be-single-by-2030-1fbc99bad6a8

This is tragic and sad, IMHO. I'm sure there are many, many causes, reasons, both men and women being at least partially responsible.

It seems correlated to what Isaiah prophesied, to me anyway.  

Isaiah 4:1

And in that day ^aseven women shall take hold of one ^bman, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy ^cname, to take away our ^dreproach.

Institute Manual (https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-student-manual-kings-malachi/chapter-13?lang=eng)

 

(13-23) Isaiah 4:1. “Take Away Our Reproach”

Verse 1 of chapter four seems to continue the thought of chapter three rather than to begin a new thought. This phrase suggests that the condition mentioned in verse 1 is caused by the scarcity of men, a result of the devastation of war mentioned in Isaiah 3:25–26. The conditions under which these women would accept this marriage (“eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel”) are contrary to the Lord’s order of marriage (see Exodus 21:10; D&C 132:58–61). To be unmarried and childless in ancient Israel was a disgrace (see Genesis 30:23; Luke 1:25). So terrible would conditions in those times be that women would offer to share a husband with others and expect no material support from him, if they could claim they were married to him.

- Our cultural hypersensitivity to polygamy seems to have influenced the Manual's content on this verse, no?

- I could be wrong but I don't believe that women "eating their own bread and wearing their own apparel" is contrary to current Church teachings and doctrine. I'm not aware of this being a problem, is it? Is it contributing to the 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single by 2030? I don't know. 

- Isaiah's dualism, to me, seems to be prophesying about the Babylonian Captivity as well as the latter days trails, wars, tribulations, etc. (why else would Nephi include this chapter and verse?) If my view on his dualism is correct, does that not suggest that Isaiah 4:1 predicts and prophesies plural marriage's return (not only in the recent past, and NOT in the present) but possibly in the future? 

 

YouTube and other video steaming services are currently awash with hundreds of videos (with many more being added daily) that attest to the phenomenon that marriage is rapidly becoming passé because men are less and less willing to risk the 50% chance of going through a divorce in which they will be financially destroyed and estranged from their children. So rather than risk ruination by a marriage that’s very likely to end in disaster (you’d get better odds playing Russian Roulette with a six shot revolver), these men are either engaging in an endless stream of meaningless casual relationships to gratify their desires, or they watch pornography and live pathetic lives of sexual fantasy.

On the flip side, there are

an increasing number of women who believe they were conned by women’s liberation into believing a job and personal financial security would bring them happiness and contentment, only to realize too late that traditional marriage, motherhood and family life is what they really wanted and needed. It’s absolutely pitiful watching the videos of an endless procession of weeping women who feel betrayed because they realize they allowed themselves to get snookered by a death cult philosophy of planned human obsolescence. The bottom line is that it looks like the Marxist dream of the abolition of traditional marriage and family is coming to pass as the world continues to rapidly ripen in iniquity.

Add to the above the fact that the scriptures prophesy endless wars are going to proliferate throughput the world as the Second Coming draws nearer, which means that the pool of marriage age men is going to be greatly diminished, and it’s not hard to imagine that polygyny will become a practical necessity just to be able to get the the human race up and running again. 

The following video is typical of the long playlist of videos of desperate women who feel betrayed by the modern anti-family zeitgeist…

 

Edited April 3 by teddyaware

[Calm]

2 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

I could be wrong but I don't believe that women "eating their own bread and wearing their own apparel" is contrary to current Church teachings and doctrine. I'm not aware of this being a problem, is it?

 

So you are okay with a man having no financial responsibility to care for his wife and children?  And you think the Church is too?

Seems contrary to the Family Proc to me.

[OGHoosier]

The things this will do to our already bad birthrate (a civilizational meta-issue) are horrendous. 

Part of the reason I can't get too caught up in the sexual debates is that we're in the early stages of a world-historic selection event which will likely redefine our entire set of priors regarding family and sexuality over the long-term. 

[ZealouslyStriving]

21 minutes ago, Calm said:

So you are okay with a man having no financial responsibility to care for his wife and children?  And you think the Church is too?

Seems contrary to the Family Proc to me.

I don't believe he is advocating for the man to be a bum (Rocky!) that just lies around having his wives do everything.

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

I don't believe he is advocating for the man to be a bum (Rocky!) that just lies around having his wives do everything.

But that is what the scripture says is going to go on.

[Doctor Steuss]

2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

The bottom line is that it looks like the Marxist dream of the abolition of traditional marriage and family is coming to pass as the world continues to rapidly ripen in iniquity.

If deviating from the traditional western marriage and family structure gets your goat, wait until you find out about this wild new religion founded by a guy named Joseph Smith.

[Calm]

As I understand it most scholars believe 4:1 actually belongs to the previous chapter.  If so, it is part of a pretty nasty condemnation of Zion.

Quote

16 The LORD says, “The women of Zion are haughty, walking along with outstretched necks, flirting with their eyes, strutting along with swaying hips, with ornaments jingling on their ankles.

17 Therefore the Lord will bring sores on the heads of the women of Zion; the LORD will make their scalps bald.”

18 In that day the Lord will snatch away their finery: the bangles and headbands and crescent necklaces,

19 the earrings and bracelets and veils,

20 the headdresses and anklets and sashes, the perfume bottles and charms,

21 the signet rings and nose rings,

22 the fine robes and the capes and cloaks, the purses

23 and mirrors, and the linen garments and tiaras and shawls.

24 Instead of fragrance there will be a stench; instead of a sash, a rope; instead of well-dressed hair, baldness; instead of fine clothing, sackcloth; instead of beauty, branding.

25 Your men will fall by the sword, your warriors in battle.

26 The gates of Zion will lament and mourn; destitute, she will sit on the ground….

1 In that day seven women will take hold of one man and say, “We will eat our own food and provide our own clothes; only let us be called by your name. Take away our disgrace!

Edited April 3 by Calm

[ZealouslyStriving]

20 minutes ago, Calm said:

But that is what the scripture says is going to go on.

Where?

It just says the ladies say, "Hey, we are willing to work, so you don't have to bust your hump trying to provide everything for all of us."

Edited April 3 by ZealouslyStriving

[MustardSeed]

I have believed that the Isaiah chapter 3/4 reference to women is really just a symbolic representation of a larger problem- The term “women” being used as a derogatory term. 
There is so much of the Bible that we take literally to support our own agendas imo. 
 

I know that there are men who don’t like the idea of women being financially independent. There’s a lot of power in providing. 

Also I think women need to take personal responsibility and accountability for the decisions that they make. They are capable humans who don’t need to blame feminism, men, other women, etc. for their own life situations.

[Calm]

20 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Where?

It just says the ladies say, "Hey, we are willing to work, so you don't have to bust your hump trying to provide everything for all of us."

I disagree.  If they are only asking to be called by his name, they are not asking for anything else from him, not even companionship. 

Edited April 3 by Calm

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

YouTube and other video steaming services are currently awash with hundreds of videos (with many more being added daily) that attest to the phenomenon that marriage is rapidly becoming passé because men are less and less willing to risk the 50% chance of going through a divorce in which they will be financially destroyed and estranged from their children. So rather than risk ruination by a marriage that’s very likely to end in disaster (you’d get better odds playing Russian Roulette with a six shot revolver), these men are either engaging in an endless stream of meaningless casual relationships to gratify their desires, or they watch pornography and live pathetic lives of sexual fantasy.

For every one person who gets seven divorces there are seven people who don’t get a divorce. Statistics like these are skewed by the high numbers. When I hear the average American has a sexual body count of just under 10 people it is worth noting that there are literally people with body counts in the thousands skewing the average.

Also the US divorce rate has fallen every year with only one exception since 2008. Whatever we are doing it is lowering the divorce rate.

2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

an increasing number of women who believe they were conned by women’s liberation into believing a job and personal financial security would bring them happiness and contentment, only to realize too late that traditional marriage, motherhood and family life is what they really wanted and needed. It’s absolutely pitiful watching the videos of an endless procession of weeping women who feel betrayed because they realize they allowed themselves to get snookered by a death cult philosophy of planned human obsolescence. The bottom line is that it looks like the Marxist dream of the abolition of traditional marriage and family is coming to pass as the world continues to rapidly ripen in iniquity.

Death cult? Planned human obsolescence? Marxist dream of abolishing traditional marriage?

All the real problems in the world and you are making up more?

2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Add to the above the fact that the scriptures prophesy endless wars are going to proliferate throughput the world as the Second Coming draws nearer, which means that the pool of marriage age men is going to be greatly diminished, and it’s not hard to imagine that polygyny will become a practical necessity just to be able to get the the human race up and running again.

Support women in the armed forces to equalize gender death counts!

2 hours ago, teddyaware said:

The following video is typical of the long playlist of videos of desperate women who feel betrayed by the modern anti-family zeitgeist…

LOL

It is funny seeing the same people who were whining about high divorce rates and teens having sex too young now somehow assume the world is ending because *checks notes* people are waiting longer to have sex and a falling divorce rate. PICK A LANE! There is just no pleasing some people. It is almost as if they are primarily just interested in spreading fear.

[Raingirl]

3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

YouTube and other video steaming services are currently awash with hundreds of videos (with many more being added daily) that attest to the phenomenon that marriage is rapidly becoming passé because men are less and less willing to risk the 50% chance of going through a divorce in which they will be financially destroyed and estranged from their children. So rather than risk ruination by a marriage that’s very likely to end in disaster (you’d get better odds playing Russian Roulette with a six shot revolver), these men are either engaging in an endless stream of meaningless casual relationships to gratify their desires, or they watch pornography and live pathetic lives of sexual fantasy.

On the flip side, there are

an increasing number of women who believe they were conned by women’s liberation into believing a job and personal financial security would bring them happiness and contentment, only to realize too late that traditional marriage, motherhood and family life is what they really wanted and needed. It’s absolutely pitiful watching the videos of an endless procession of weeping women who feel betrayed because they realize they allowed themselves to get snookered by a death cult philosophy of planned human obsolescence. The bottom line is that it looks like the Marxist dream of the abolition of traditional marriage and family is coming to pass as the world continues to rapidly ripen in iniquity.

Add to the above the fact that the scriptures prophesy endless wars are going to proliferate throughput the world as the Second Coming draws nearer, which means that the pool of marriage age men is going to be greatly diminished, and it’s not hard to imagine that polygyny will become a practical necessity just to be able to get the the human race up and running again. 

The following video is typical of the long playlist of videos of desperate women who feel betrayed by the modern anti-family zeitgeist…

 

Studies show that a man’s financial situation improves dramatically a majority of the time after divorce.  And divorce in and of itself does not estrange a father from his children. If a divorced father find himself estranged from his children, he needs to take an honest look at his own actions. 

[ZealouslyStriving]

22 minutes ago, Calm said:

I disagree.  If they are only asking to be called by his name, they are not asking for anything else from him, not even companionship. 

I guess in the strictest, most reductionist, pessimistic interpretation you are right.

But I personally believe there is more to the story.

[Stargazer]

33 minutes ago, Calm said:

I disagree.  If they are only asking to be called by his name, they are not asking for anything else from him, not even companionship. 

Are you sure you're reading correctly what he wrote? You say you're disagreeing, yet what you wrote above seems to me, at least, to be what he wrote, just in different words. 

And earlier he wrote: "I could be wrong but I don't believe that women "eating their own bread and wearing their own apparel" is contrary to current Church teachings and doctrine."

And you took that as disagreeing with the Family Proclamation, when it didn't. All he was saying was that there's nothing in current church teachings that says a woman can't support herself. The Isaiah scriptures in play here make no mention of children. 

Maybe I'm not following this very well.

[Smiley McGee]

3 hours ago, teddyaware said:

believing a job and personal financial security would bring them happiness and contentment

Nope; it’s about avoiding dependence and its related risks. Frankly, women are just as responsible as their partners for the financial wellbeing of themselves and their family. 

Edited April 3 by Smiley McGee

[The Nehor]

Could also be symbolic of seven hills or seven suburbs of Jerusalem clinging to the holy city.

If we take all marriages described in the Bible as literal than Hosea is a very interesting book. Also everyone is literally getting married to Christ. Even the guys. Gay marriage snuck into the Bible. Uh-oh.

[Calm]

39 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

And you took that as disagreeing with the Family Proclamation, when it didn't. All he was saying was that there's nothing in current church teachings that says a woman can't support herself. The Isaiah scriptures in play here make no mention of children. 

Except in Israel it is barren wives that are in reproach.  Getting married and having no children would not solve any problem.

A woman on her own providing her own needs is not against the family proc nor is her contributing to the family.  Being sole supporter and protector of herself and any children is (unless it is unavoidable such as husband is incapacitated, in prison, etc).

Quote

By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world?lang=eng

Bread and clothing are generally considered necessities.

Edited April 3 by Calm

[Calm]

7 hours ago, Smiley McGee said:

Frankly, women are just as responsible as their partners for the financial wellbeing of themselves and their family. 

Even if they don’t bring in the income because if they are spending the money, they are making equally significant decisions as the partner.  Providing is not just about the income.  You have to buy and prepare/care for everything bought.

Edited April 4 by Calm

[Calm]

46 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

Are you sure you're reading correctly what he wrote?

He said the scripture verse is women only helping out which would imply the author of the verse sees this as some novelty and typically women just sit around and do nothing to provide for the family.  Why would it be noteworthy that they were willing to do this if it was the SOP?

Quote

Hey, we are willing to work, so you don't have to bust your hump trying to provide everything for all of us."

 

Edited April 3 by Calm

[Smiley McGee]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

Even if they don’t bring in the income because if they are spending the money, they are making equally significant decisions as the partner.  Providing is not just about the income.  You have to buy and prepared/care for everything bought.

Or do both. You’re not mitigating any risk by solely being a good spender if you have no employable skills or experience. Both men and women can, and probably should, seek to generate as much income as they can while making wise expenditures.

[Stargazer]

16 minutes ago, Calm said:

Except in Israel it is barren wives that are in reproach.  Getting married and having no children would not solve any problem.

A woman on her own providing her own needs is not against the family proc nor is her contributing to the family.  Being sole supporter and protector of herself and any children is (unless it is unavoidable such as husband is incapacitated, in prison, etc).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world/the-family-a-proclamation-to-the-world?lang=eng

Bread and clothing are generally considered necessities.

I don't see that we're disagreeing here. 

The original post was addressing the scripturally proposed case where there were too few men to partner with all the women, who then felt obliged to seek an arrangement that provided at least a modicum of social nicety in the marital department -- even if they had to support themselves. 

You seem to be trying to go beyond the premise into territory not covered by the scripture in question, which was clearly dealing with a situation outside the normal.

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, Smiley McGee said:

Or do both. You’re not mitigating any risk by solely being a good spender if you have no employable skills or experience. Both men and women can, and probably should, seek to generate as much income as they can while making wise expenditures.

I was just speaking to the providing aspect, not the risk.

Yes, women have stayed in abusive marriages in the past because the other option was poverty, homelessness, etc.

I don’t think the focus should be on as much income as they can because as written that gives making money top priority for any activity while ignoring other needs.  I suspect you meant while balancing all their needs.

[CV75]

5 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

It’s estimated that 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single by 2030, according to a study by Morgan Stanley. 

With the modern dating market, nearly half of women in their “childbearing” years will be without a companion. 

https://medium.com/hello-love/study-predicts-45-of-women-will-be-single-by-2030-1fbc99bad6a8

This is tragic and sad, IMHO. I'm sure there are many, many causes, reasons, both men and women being at least partially responsible.

It seems correlated to what Isaiah prophesied, to me anyway.  

Isaiah 4:1

And in that day ^aseven women shall take hold of one ^bman, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy ^cname, to take away our ^dreproach.

Institute Manual (https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/old-testament-student-manual-kings-malachi/chapter-13?lang=eng)

 

(13-23) Isaiah 4:1. “Take Away Our Reproach”

Verse 1 of chapter four seems to continue the thought of chapter three rather than to begin a new thought. This phrase suggests that the condition mentioned in verse 1 is caused by the scarcity of men, a result of the devastation of war mentioned in Isaiah 3:25–26. The conditions under which these women would accept this marriage (“eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel”) are contrary to the Lord’s order of marriage (see Exodus 21:10; D&C 132:58–61). To be unmarried and childless in ancient Israel was a disgrace (see Genesis 30:23; Luke 1:25). So terrible would conditions in those times be that women would offer to share a husband with others and expect no material support from him, if they could claim they were married to him.

- Our cultural hypersensitivity to polygamy seems to have influenced the Manual's content on this verse, no?

- I could be wrong but I don't believe that women "eating their own bread and wearing their own apparel" is contrary to current Church teachings and doctrine. I'm not aware of this being a problem, is it? Is it contributing to the 45% of women ages 25–44 will be single by 2030? I don't know. 

- Isaiah's dualism, to me, seems to be prophesying about the Babylonian Captivity as well as the latter days trails, wars, tribulations, etc. (why else would Nephi include this chapter and verse?) If my view on his dualism is correct, does that not suggest that Isaiah 4:1 predicts and prophesies plural marriage's return (not only in the recent past, and NOT in the present) but possibly in the future? 

 

I’m thinking that the sense of reproach depends on the culture in which the women are living. I don’t see women, in general, in the USA seeing marriage on these terms as a solution. They simply don’t see men as essential providers and protectors. Perhaps metaphorically they may compromisingly bind themselves to government, business or other societal safety nets, but so would the men (who, in Isaiah’s dualism, are considered as brides beholden to the bridegroom). So maybe this passage refers to anyone in any culture debasing themselves for survival, which is something I see all the time. It could get worse as a general phenomenon. So I take Isiah's words as perhaps a metaphor for the corruption of the marriage covenant, not the institution of plural marriage within the precincts / under the auspices of Zion.

The only solution is washing away the filth as described in subsequent verses, building Zion and preparing for the Lord’s return. Isaiah may in a literary fashion point to the daughters of Zion, but the sons of Zion are complicit and as I mentioned above have been (as) unfaithful “betrothed” or “brides” to him. We liken the scriptures unto ourselves, and follow the metaphors.

I’m not sure what the Church’s strategy would be, but I was impressed with the article in this month’s Liahona about the difficulty many sisters face in balancing the Church’s standards for attaining self-respect through marriage with certain cultural mores: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2024/04/young-adults/14-leaving-tradition-behind-and-trusting-the-lord?lang=eng