Marriage vows in the bible
Posted 08 July 2007 - 05:49 AM
If we lived back in the time that Jesus walked the Earth, how do you think the wedding ceremony would be held? Are the wedding vows they took back then the same as it is now or different?
Who wrote these vows?
Do you BRIDE'S NAME take GROOM'S NAME to be your husband – to live together after God’s ordinance – in the holy estate of matrimony? Will you love him, comfort him, honor and keep him, in sickness and in health, for richer, for poorer, for better, for worse, in sadness and in joy, to cherish and continually bestow upon him your heart’s deepest devotion, forsaking all others, keep yourself only unto him as long as you both shall live?
Posted 09 July 2007 - 12:06 AM
A man is to take care of his family to love an cherish his wife, to give her everything including his life and the woman is to honor and respect her husband as the head of the family in a union that honors God.
The basis of a Christian marriage is the following scripture
24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.
This unity is meant to be "joined" or "united" together like glue, inseparable for life.
Jesus would never get married to then abandon wife and children, because he knew what He had to do.
The vows in a Christian or Jewish wedding are taken from the scriptures.
Many read what the scriptures say and Paul said this...
22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
Posted 01 May 2009 - 01:15 PM
I don't remember seeing these vows anywhere in the bible, so who did write them?
Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:03 PM
While these words are not in the Bible I do not think they contradict the Bible or Christ's teaching.
Posted 02 May 2009 - 02:10 PM
Are the marriage vows that you have posted--or their equivalent--also used for civil-only marriages? I know that in some places 'God' has been inserted into the marriage contract by the state. I remember a co-worker complaining vehemently that they had tried to get married in Eastern Canada only to find out that their marriage license had to be signed by a religious official to be valid.
Posted 02 May 2009 - 03:17 PM
On that grounds, I suppose it would make sense, and be perfectly legal, to require the signature of clergy of a marriage license. Canada (like the UK) considers itself a "Christian country", while America never has, from its inception.
Posted 03 May 2009 - 03:46 AM
The Mormon marriage vows, for example, ask for unity between man and wife for eternity in heaven. This doesn't coincide with the Christian view that, upon death, a soul is reunited with the God-head, not with the mate chosen within its earthly existence.
Marriage vows can be very sacred and binding to most people. To others, they're simply a reason to hold on to the financial security marriage brings.
Posted 03 May 2009 - 06:04 PM
Posted 10 May 2009 - 11:42 PM
Book of Common Prayer,’ published in 1549
The History of Wedding Vows
A little wedding trivia for you... In the time of the Roman Empire (17 B.C.- A.D. 476) the lower classes had "free" marriages. The bride's father would deliver her to the groom, and the two agreed that they were wed, and would keep the vow of marriage by mutual consent.
Wealthy Romans, though, would sign documents listing property rights to publicly declare that their union was legalized and not a common law marriage. This was the beginning of the official recording of marriages as we do today.
The oldest traditional wedding vows can be traced back to the middle ages to the ‘Book of Common Prayer,’ published in 1549. Upon agreement to marry, the Church of England usually offered couples a choice. They could both promise each other to 'love and cherish' or alternatively, the groom promises to 'love, cherish and worship' while the bride to 'love, cherish and obey.'
The original wedding vows, as printed in The Booke of Common Prayer, are:
Groom: I,____, take thee,_____, to be my wedded Wife, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part, according to God's holy ordinance.
Bride: I,_____, take thee,_____, to be my wedded Husband, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love, cherish, and to obey, till death us do part, according to God's holy ordinance.
Other well-known phrases from the Booke of Common Prayer are:
"Speak now or forever hold your peace" from the marriage liturgy.
"Till death do us part", also from the marriage liturgy.
Hundreds of years later, on September 12, 1922, (no doubt due to protest) the Episcopal Church voted to removed the word "obey" from the bride's section of wedding vows.
Today, "love, honor and cherish" have largely replaced the historical vow for the wife to honor and obey.
Posted 11 May 2009 - 05:18 AM
This is what it say in the KJB
Mat 22:28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
Mat 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
I don't think the bible has any words to marry a man and woman?
Posted 12 May 2009 - 04:19 PM
It is possible to have a civil marriage without any vows at all in America, and it is possible in many churches to design your own marriage vows. The words of the vows are not set in stone. The tradition of exchanging mutual vows is merely a sweet custom performed in front of witnesses to prove that the couple does indeed intend to live together as a couple, and perform specific duties toward one another. And indeed, if public vows to "love, honor, and cherish" are made, and not kept, perhaps broken by infidelity or domestic violence, these would have been very good grounds for the breaking of the marriage contract by annulment or divorce.
The Catholic Church does not recognize divorce, but Protestant Churches do, and the Catholic Church had always recognized anulment, stating that there never was a true marriage if either party intended to defraud the other at the time of the wedding... a fair decision, in my opinion.
Anyone can feel free to do away with the sweet custom of marriage vows any time they like, and be officially married with the taking out of a marriage license signed by the proper official. No ceremony required.
But how many brides dream of a wedding like that?
Posted 12 May 2009 - 08:39 PM
Yes I do know all of that!
Since we are now at this bible church, I was waiting to do
our vows again at 50 years. Well my husband and Tom both were against this. So, we did not do it.
But we did go out with Tom and his wife and our son and wife and children for a nice dinner. And I guess this would not come close to our first one.
The church , so formal ! With all the stuff and people.
White gown, bridesmaids, church, breakfast[lunch], and dinner.
I guess I am kind of glad nothing can top that !
Posted 12 May 2009 - 08:57 PM
Some of the duties of marriage are also in the Bible "You who are husbands must show love to your wives as Christ showed love to the Church ," said St Paul (Ephesians 5,25)
Posted 13 May 2009 - 01:26 AM
Posted 13 May 2009 - 04:39 AM
Four years later my Father divorced my Mother and went to live with a woman he'd had a relationship with in Italy during WWII (while married and with three kids at home,) a widow whom he later married.
Count your blessings, folks.
Posted 13 May 2009 - 06:50 AM
I have always felt married ! Even today....
Even when we dropped out of the Catholic Church.
Since the Church has so much going on at the wedding,
how could I not !
And wearing the white gown, and you know what the white means ?
There were not to many even back then.
At 50 years every one talks about doing it over so I wanted
to do the same. But just going out to eat with our son and
his wife and there children. [who are going to have baby 7 this fall.]
And Tom our pastor and his wife.
This was just as good, except our other children live out of
State so could not be there .
Posted 13 May 2009 - 02:17 PM
The wonderful thing is that there was a setup for a wedding on the lawn of the resort we were at, which was used earlier in the day. There was an arbor and seating all set up.
So, we borrowed it for a few moments, a few made a speech, and we took some photos of "Meme and Pepe" under the beautiful arbor.
It was wonderful.
Posted 13 May 2009 - 08:07 PM
We did offer payment for a Mass on the day but my parents could not attend as it involved a long walk and I was working. I am not sure if it would have addede much to the celebrations. My parents were not up to them very close to the parish priest. However after that he got to know us better and was there to help my parents in their last days. He gave them communion at home and the last rites and conducted their requim masses. I think you should celebrate the way that makes you the most comfortable.
Posted 17 December 2009 - 03:00 PM
Posted 04 January 2011 - 01:43 AM
I don't think divorce happened until religion and the State got involved. When the State was involved, marriage became a 'contract' between two people that could only be 'broken' through the legal process.
Religion made it a vow before God to remain committed to each other. That's why most religions decry divorce.
But how many times has that led to 'abusive' marriages?
An abusive marriage can be a marriage that involves physical abuse, yes. It can also involve things that were never seen in a spouse until later--gambling, drug, alcohol, sexual addictions.
Religion, because it's made marriage a vow before God, makes it nearly impossible to rescind that vow. The State demands contract negotiations before declaring the contract null and void.
Come March of this year, my husband and I will have been married for 34 years. It hasn't been all lilacs and rosebuds--I don't think any marriage is.
But we've survived--having gone through both the religious ceremony and the State contract requirements because, one day, on our own and by ourselves, we committed our lives to each other.
We didn't need anything else.
Posted 04 January 2011 - 08:12 AM
The state's involvement remains that of asset division and inheritance and also the rights of any children involved.
If there were no religion, there would still be some form of contract between couples to settle such important issues.
Posted 04 January 2011 - 07:15 PM
Minesadorada, I agree that even without religion a marriage contract
Quote:to settle inheritance and property division.
would be necessary. However I am not sure there was any time in the past where it did not involve religion. There has always been a religion and most marriage contracts recognize this. You only have to look at the detail rules in the Old Testament to know that Jewish law was most concern about property distribution. It also had a law against adultery.
I suspect in the modern world to have a secular contract present many difficulties. Divorce would be far easier and there are still some societies where a man just has to tell his wife we are divorce and thats it. In modern laws in most countries , separation is sufficient grounds for divorce. The idea that you are marriage for life is a religious requirement only.
The divorce rate in secular Australia is almost 50% whereas in religious countries it is much lower. Of course this can lead to an unjust marriage as Lizabeth mention. But this is generally not a requirement of religion. If there is a commandment against adultery or coveting another wife there should be less unjust marriages.Some of the laws about obeying your husband are old fashion and not part of Christian marriage now. Yet there must be obligation by both parties for a marriage to succeed. A successful marriage is necessary not only for the couple but for children.
I have had to deal with the death and sickness of men who were estrange from their children. It is very difficult to contact children and ex spouses in these cases. Sometimes the death of the man is not even recognized. In Australia you must get consent from a funeral director to even publish a tribute in the papers. This can be difficult when no undertaker is involve as the body was donated to a University.
Divorce might be necessary in some cases but it does caused great harm to the spouses, often innocent and their children.