The following will be based on The History of Human Marriage, Volume 2 by Edward Westermarck, previous Professor of sociology in the University of London.

 What is the basis for our aversion to pagan associations?   Duet 12:29-32, Gen 35:4,  Isa 30:22, Jude 23, Exo 34:13, Duet 7:25, Num 33:52, Rev 2:14, 20 (knowingly), 2 Kings 10:22-28, 2 Kings 23: 4, 5, 6, 7 ,2 Chron 23:15, Dan 1:8, 2 Kings 16:4, 10, 2 Chron 13:9,  Exo 23:13, Duet 12:3,30,  Josh 23:7.  The purpose of this is so these religions will be forgotten and Yah’s people will not ensnared by them. So, we determine what needs to be destroyed by this standard: could this thing that was used for idolatry of itself remind some person to return to that idolatry or of itself be a path back to it.

What is the basis for our aversion to superstition? 1 Timothy 4:7 ; Acts 17: 20-23

The Wedding Cake

Cakes are sacrificial foods all throughout the Torah, especially in the book of Leviticus. Cakes are never used in a wedding in the Torah.  Edward Westermarck discusses the issue of the wedding cake and its origins in The History of Human Marriage, Volume pages 464 and 476. The pagan origins of this custom are spelled out in more detail in A Witch’s Guide to Faery Folk by Edain McCoy, Published by a large pagan publishing company, that says,

 “Wedding cakes were once a part of pagan fertility rites”, page 131.

The cake was to be eaten to enhance fertility. This is very common reason for most wedding customs.

Throwing rice or some type of small berry

Westermarck points out on page 478-479 that this is a fertility rite as well.

The Bridal and Garter Toss

This is lewd superstitious nonsense and a ceremonious homage to the goddess of fortune, in the Roman tradition this is Fortuna. This is mentioned in Isaiah 65:11: 11 “But you who forsake Yahuwah, Who forget My holy mountain, Who set a table for Fortune, And who fill cups with mixed wine for Destiny.

Bachelor parties and the such are heathen Bacchian rites.

1 Peter 4:3 For the time already past is sufficient for you to have carried out the desire of the Gentiles, having pursued a course of sensuality, lusts, drunkenness, carousing, drinking parties and abominable idolatries.

I will make some more statements critiquing the typical Christian wedding but I will do so in passing as I deal with:

A Biblical View of Marriage

The Oath

Now what do we do with Yehoshuwah’s statement:

MAT 5:34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

?

Just 15 verses earlier he said that he did not come to do away with the law and now he is abrogating Deut. 6:13, 10:20 and Lev. 19:12. Well, as Natsarim I know that the New Testament was written in Hebrew and the Greek manuscripts of Christianity are translations and in some areas, deliberately butchered. According to the Torah, we are not to swear falsely, but according to the name of Yah. Yehoshuwah must have said, “Swear not falsely at all.” If the command was absolute why do we have Rav Shaul swearing by Yah in 2 Cor. 1:23 Moreover I call God for a record upon my soul, that to spare you I came not as yet unto Corinth?

Moreover Heb. 6:16 teaches that swearing is still a valid practice.

For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife.

Now regarding the act of betrothal The Jewish Encyclopedia states,

“Marriage

The first step toward marriage was betrothal, involving the consent of the parent or guardian of the girl and the payment of a price. The act of betrothal is expressed by the Hebrew word “aras”; the price paid, by “mohar” (see Gen. xxxiv. 12; Ex. xxii. 16-17; Deut. xx. 7, xxii. 29; Hos. ii. 19-20). The mohar may be in the form of service in the field or in war (Gen. xxix.; I Sam. xviii. 25). Probably it was customary, even in early times, to give the bride some portion of the mohar, or at least to give her presents (Gen. xxiv. 53, xxxi. 15, xxxiv. 12). After betrothal the bride might be taken to her husband’s house and the nuptials celebrated either immediately or later (Gen. xxiv. 49-67; Judges xiv. 5 et seq.). The initial steps, it appears, were customarily taken by the parents of the suitor, who formally made the proposal (Gen. xxiv., xxxiv. 4-6; Judges xiv. 2, 10). Not infrequently, however, in the comparatively free social intercourse of those days, the young man and woman had met and formed a mutual attachment resulting in a love-match (Gen. xxix. 9-12, 18; I Sam. xviii. 20, 28).

The bride did not always go to her husband empty-handed. Sometimes she received gifts from her father, and a king’s parting gift to his daughter was in one case a conquered city (Josh. xv. 16 et seq.; Judges i. 12 et seq.; I. Kings ix. 16). In post-exilic times mention is made of a wife’s dowry and of a woman being able, by her own wealth, to support her husband (Tobit viii. 21; Ecclus [Sirach] xxv. 22). Mention is made also of a written marriage-contract (Tobit vii. 14).”

Speaking of the Ancient Jewish practice Westermarck pointed out that , in the presence of two witnesses, the groom gave the bride some token of his commitment to provide for his wife’s physical substance (See the section on the dowry above; I have known a man who actually purchased a Life Insurance policy for his bride in obedience to this command) then he stated, “be consecrated to me”.  This changed into a ring in  the middle ages. (Westermarck, 407-408, also The Jewish Law of Marriage and Divorce in Ancient and Modern Times, Moses Mielziner 77-80.)

Two witnesses

What is the basis for witnesses?

Deut. 19:15 on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed.

This is applied in a murder case in Deut. 17:6 and Yahushuwah uses this to refer to Congregational discipline in Matthew 18:16.

“But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed.”

The First Year of Marriage

Deut 24: 5 When a man hath taken a new wife, he shall not go out to war, neither shall he be charged with any business: but he shall be free at home one year, and shall cheer up his wife which he hath taken.

This passage is not saying that a man is not to work. That would contradict Exo. 20:9. The point is, that he is not to go out to war or take some kind of citizen responsibility like jury duty, that would take him away from his home. This passage insures that the new marriage is solidified through intimacy and hopefully a pregnancy.

The Groom

Isa. 61:10 does mention the groom wearing a garland.

Groomsmen are mentioned in Judges 14 and also by John the Baptist in John 3:29.

Wedding Veil

Gen. 24:62 Now Isaac had come from going to Beer-lahai-roi; for he was living in the Negev.63 Isaac went out to meditate in the field toward evening; and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, camels were coming. 64 Rebekah lifted up her eyes, and when she saw Isaac she dismounted from the camel. 65 She said to the servant, “Who is that man walking in the field to meet us?” And the servant said, “He is my master.” Then she took her veil and covered herself. 66 The servant told Isaac all the things that he had done. 67 Then Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah’s tent, and he took Rebekah, and she became his wife, and he loved her; thus Isaac was comforted after his mother’s death.

In Gen. 29:23-25, the marriage of Jacob and Leah, the veil was over Leah the entire ceremony, which is how Laban fooled Jacob. The veil should be removed the evening of the Marriage when Bride and Groom are alone.

Also The Antiquities of Israel by Heinrich Ewald, page 202, gives a general basis for the veil covering of a married woman.

This is not to be confused with the Muslim Burqa.

White garment, bride

The white wedding dress is not pagan. The Messiah’s Bride is wearing white in Revelation 19:8-14.

Wedding rings:

In Haggai 2:23 Yahuwah refers to his servant Zerubbabel as his signet ring; The signet ring being a common secular instrument used by Kings and magistrates to authenticate their signatures on documents. As I have already documented from Westermarck and Mielziner, in the Jewish tradition, in the presence of two witnesses, the groom gave the bride some token of his commitment to provide for her physical substance And during the middle ages the Jews changed this to a plain ring.

In Westermarck’s work, pages 443-444, he speaks to the history of the wedding ring. There is no mention of anything religiously pagan. Now the Egyptians did impute some religious meanings to the ring, but the use of the ring itself is not pagan. We already read in Gen. 35 where Jacob demanded to remove earrings that had a religious association imputed to them. However Yahuwah commanded in Exo. 21:6 that a slave that was committed to his master should have his ear pierced for a recognition of his commitment.  In Exo. 35:22 gold rings and earrings are accepted offerings unto Yahuwah. So wearing jewelry on the finger or ear in the shape of a ring is not in itself pagan.

The reason given for the ring being placed on the left hand ring finger is a pagan superstition that the third finger was connected directly to the heart by a route that was called “the vein of love” or the Vena Amoris.  This was a superstition in Greece and Egypt. The Yahudim should avoid this. The English puritans wore the ring on the middle finger or the thumb to avoid this pagan association.

Diamond rings:

First, take into consideration that the scriptures guide us to a modest life and warns us against 1 Peter 3:1-3 warns us of replacing virtue with jewelry. However, the Messiah’s bride is said to wear jewels in Psalm 45.

The regular use of diamonds for wedding rings just got started in the last century with the diamond mind discoveries in South Africa.

The South African Boers were Protestants who fled Europe to America and to South Africa. They had a very similar history to ours.

In 1886 Gold was discovered near Johannesburg. A massive influx of Uitlanders came in search of employment and fortune. The discovery made the Transvall the richest nation in Southern Africa.  Ridpath describes this  in The Story of South Africa, pages. 231-233,

“He [Cecil Rhodes-DS] then sailed again for South Africa and lost no time in making his way to Kimberley, where, by shrewd investments in mining claims, he not only added greatly to his wealth, but acquired a marked influence in affairs. The history of all great booms shows that the abnormal prosperity was followed, in a short time, by depression which is as abnormal as the original rise in values. It is these depressions which form a golden opportunity for shrewd capitalists. Cecil Rhodes availed himself of the chance thus offered him by a slump in the value of the mining claims. He expended every dollar in buying up shares, claims and lands, and then formed the idea of uniting in a monopoly or syndicate all the diamond industries of that country. [Things like this don’t happen anymore….right?-DS]

This was so stupendous a scheme that it was far beyond the reach of Mr. Rhodes and his friends. With that resolute audacity which is a distinguishing trait of his nature, he went to the Rothschilds, those colossal bankers whose clients are the leading Powers of the world, briefly stated his wishes, and asked them to advance the necessary capital. It is hardly necessary to say that Mr. Rhodes was successful, and he took back with him to Africa all the money necessary to buy the remaining claims or property in the Kimberley district. The great De Beers Company was formed and Rhodes was made managing director for life, at a salary of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year. The annual dividends of this vast corporation amount to fifty per cent, and nearly half a billion dollars worth of diamonds have been placed in the markets of the world. This success is mainly due to the marvelous ability of Mr. Rhodes.”

1895- The Jameson Raid? This was a coup attempt to overthrow the Boer Government in the Transvaal. Cecil Rhodes wanted to control Boer Gold and so he plotted the Jameson Raid to rise up the Uitalnders (Migrant workers) to supplant the Boers and bring the gold mines under his British control. This Raid was led by Leander Starr Jameson, the Administrator General of the Chartered Company (Cecil Rhodes was Chairman).

1899-1902- Second Boer War- Here we have the Annexation of the South African Republic into the British Empire under Edward VII. This is the first attempt to eliminate the Boers. This is also the first appearance of concentration camps in the West. Boer women and children were the primary occupants of the concentration camps.

 1910-Creation of the Union of South Africa under the British Empire. The Boers and Zulus now supplanted, King Edward VII, through his friend J.P. Morgan, Papal Financier of America, incorporated South Africa’s Gold and Diamonds into the International Banking Cartel, now firmly in their possession; funding for the coming World Wars was now in hand.

Basically Diamond Rings and pretty much the entire Diamond industry, is dominated by Cecil Rhodes’ De Beers Company and you would be patronizing the  businesses of international criminals.  However, if you can find a diamond seller who has no connection to the De Beers company go ahead but good luck.

http://www.vanessanicoleengagementrings.com/engagement-rings/

Engagement Rings

This is a Popish tradition.

“In 860 A.D., Pope Nicholas I decreed that an engagement ring becomes a required statement of nuptial intent. He insisted that engagement rings had to be made of gold which signified a financial sacrifice on the part of the prospective husband.”

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02537c.htm

As far as the wedding ceremony, The Puritans put together a good guide in their Directory for Public Worship. The Solemnization of Marriage.

http://www.covenanter.org/Westminster/directoryforpublicworship.htm#marriage

The document needs to be Yahudimed a bit but overall it is good.