Biblical Weddings

Recently over on a post from 2011 a lively if sometimes strange discussion took place regarding the biblical perspective on marriage. (The post was on the Bible on Sex and, of course, held the position that biblically moral sex only occurred within a marriage, so, of course, the question had to be asked, "What constitutes a biblical marriage?") In the end, more than one voice in that discussion argued that weddings were not biblical. (I was not one of those voices.) Not that they are bad, mind you, and maybe they are even recommended at least in today's culture, but they are not biblical in the strictest sense, as in biblically standard or recommended. So I thought I'd take a closer look.

First, the Bible does not prescribe a marriage ceremony. There is no explanation of what processes should take place, what vows should be exchanged, who should be there, or what to serve at the reception (because, of course, no receptions are commanded, either). So we're not going there. There are, however, biblical accounts of weddings. Perhaps the most famous is the wedding at Cana. It is commonly understood that the mere presence of Jesus at that wedding constituted His (and, therefore, God's) endorsement of weddings. That is, by Jesus being there, He was saying, "I'm in favor of a wedding at the beginning of a marriage." Indeed, Jesus spoke often of weddings (e.g., Matt 9:15; 22:2-13; Matt 25:1-12; Mark 2:19; Luke 12:3; 14:8). All well and good. So those who would argue that weddings are not biblical will need to explain why Jesus endorsed same. Second, we know that Revelation ends (or nearly ends) with a wedding -- the Marriage Feast of the Lamb. Clearly weddings in Scripture are a good thing, endorsed and encouraged by God.

Earlier versions of marriage in Israel (I'm using Israel because they operated as a theocracy and as God's chosen people and the rest ... didn't) also included a wedding. This is because the Old Testament version of marriage was not a "solemn commitment", but a covenant (Mal 2:14). A covenant is, among other things, a binding agreement, typically formal, between two (or more) persons to do something specified. This is far more binding than an agreement or commitment. It is even more binding than a contract, another common term we use when speaking of marriage. Contracts typically have loopholes, clauses that allow the contract to end. "If you do xxx then I will do yyy." And, of course, if you don't, I won't. A marriage covenant, though, is "I will do xxx and you will do yyy without recourse if xxx and yyy are not done." Contracts focus on "what do I get out of it?" and covenants aim for "what am I required to bring?" The Hebrew word for "covenant" is berith, which means "to cut", because the Hebrew concept of a covenant included a cutting ceremony in which blood was shed to indicate, "May God to this to me if I fail to fulfill my promises." It's serious, folks.

Jesus's parable of the virgins (Matt 25:1-12) provides an illustration of a traditional Jewish marriage process. (It's a process, not an event, because it takes place over time.) The typical process started with the father sending the son to purchase his bride-to-be, paying the price for her. He would then leave and return to his father to prepare a place for them to live. Having accomplished the preparations, he would return (at a not clearly known time) with a shout and a trumpet to retrieve his bride. They would marry (with family and friends present) with great celebration and, having consumated the marriage, he would take her home to be with him. Now, I'm sure you can see a parallel there to something bigger. And that's part of the point. Marriage is something bigger. It is between a man and a woman, sure, but it is an image of Christ and His Bride. Christ came and paid the price for His Bride. Then He returned to prepare a place for her. He will come, at a time not clearly known, with a shout and retrieve His Bride. They will share the Marriage Feast of the Lamb (you know, like a wedding) and then return to be with Him forever.

In Scripture and in Jewish history, marriages were more than just "consummation". There are those that argue that biblical marriage is just "leave and cleave" -- if you choose to be married, you're married. Live together and have sex and the marriage is consummated. End of discussion. It doesn't quite fit with the biblical picture. Nor does it fit with history. From dowries and arranged marriages on, more than a mere "Let's just be hitched" has been the norm rather than the exception. Abraham formalized a wife for Isaac and so on. History shows that Egypt made a big deal about weddings. In Rome, Caesar Augustus (you know, the one in charge when Jesus was born) penalized men who put off their weddings. Rome even gave us the word "matrimony". Public weddings "sealed the deal", so to speak, making it publicly clear that these two were married. So Scripture, Jewish history, New Testament accounts, and general human history all attest to the value of weddings.

If you, as a single person, should, some day, find yourself on a deserted island with no hope of rescue with a woman to whom you are not married but wish to be, clearly a wedding would be out of the question. I'd say go ahead and solemnize your marriage between the two of you. If you, on the other hand, find yourself living in a civilized country that makes marriage laws that you are able to obey, I'd suggest (based on Rom 13:1-5) you follow the legal procedure and, indeed (based on the principle of Rom 14:20-21), have a wedding. It doesn't define "marriage", but it isn't an unbiblical or uncommendable part. Jesus favors (present tense, given He has one coming up) it. Just my recommendation.