to wonder why Lent fasting has become so diluted?

[Wonderingwhyyy]

I was talking to a Christian who told me she fasts the traditional way in Lent. No food or water from sunrise to sunset. She was the first I had met who actually abstains from food and drink for a significant period of time.

Other Christians I know choose to give up one food e.g. chocolate, wine, tea, coffee. One Christian told me she gave up Facebook for Lent.

The Christian who said she fasted the traditional way told me she gained many benefits such as spiritual closeness to God, self discipline, greater self control.

It did make sense. Giving up Facebook doesn't seem likely to bring many benefits although may it did for that one person.

I wonder why it became diluted and whether Christianity has lost its followers by allowing most things it did not used to.

I am not making assumptions. The Church has never required worshippers to stop eating for 6 weeks of every year. "Fast days" in the Christian church have never meant "not eating anything". That's why ducks were deemed to be fish - therefore not meat, and fine to eat on a fast day.

Whereas you are saying that someone who gives something up is a figure of fun, and to be sneered at.

Yes, absolutely. But ‘fasting’ was/is one scant, meatless meal and two collations, not no food or water between dawn and dusk.

Female Rabbi's, Bat Mitzvah, interfaith marriage without conversion, surgical circumcision without the bris ceremony acceptable. Married Jewish women not covering their hair or shaving their heads. Muslim women not dressing halal.

Because people have realised that religion is rubbish. It's pure fantasy designed to control people.

Diaspora Judaism is very different from 2nd Temple Judaism that existed until 70 AD. It wasn't just the Christians that stopped the blood sacrifices.

The big problem here is the definition of fasting. It has meant different things throughout history. In Tudor times, they would refrain from eating meat at certain times and consider that a fast, but what they considered meat or fish might seem unusual to us!

I’m a theology student and just wrote a paper on worship in the early Christian church (for my purposes that was pre the conversion of Constantine in 313 CE). The only repeated mention of fasting in the primary texts that I read was that converts should fast in the days preceding their baptism. One suggested that Christians ought to fast on a different week day to the Jews. The earliest records made no mention of Lenten fasting, although it may have been custom slightly later than my research focused on.

The OP defined it as not consuming anything sunrise to sunset. When I was at school fasting before morning communion meant not eating breakfast and drinking only water from rising until after the service. There was a school communion for those who wished to attend and there was a breakfast of milky coffee or tea with biscuits after communion and before going to lessons. Now I understand that attending communion fasting means nothing for one hour before the service. To me this seems to be taking it back to the original intent which was to go straight to church on rising but all of us had bus or train journeys to get to school first which resulted in quite a few of us fainting.

A faith becomes diluted not if someone does not follow it but if the overwhelming majority agree that parts do not need to be followed, that is a dilution.

Judaism as a whole does not agree with female Rabbis, interfaith marriage without conversion etc,

Just become some Muslim women do not dress halal does not mean the faith has become diluted. The majority of scholars still state that men and women should dress halal.

There are still more people of faith than atheism in the world.

where do you find out that eg. aliens don;t exist and where do you access that information?
Clue: it's the internet

Yes, she did. I was just saying that that is not always what is meant. We can look back at old texts and misunderstand what was meant, so someone might think their version of ‘fasting’ is what was always done, but it isn’t necessarily so. Meanings of words evolve.

Oh I agree.

So now you are an expert on Judaism too?

@Wonderingwhyyy I don't know where your 'friend' gets their information from, but it would fare you well to stop spreading goady made up stuff and perhaps read the instructions in the New Testament for yourself. I gave you more detail upthread. For anyone who doesn't know: nowhere in the New Testament, remembering that Christians are under a new Covenant in Christ Jesus, are disciples of the Messiah commanded to fast.

Christ Himself did not routinely fast - he did so just the once whilst in the desert prior to His crucifixion and resurrection. However, knowing His disciples would follow His example, he did leave some Biblical guidance (again, see upthread), the main one that any fast should be done in private and without 'announcement'.

To fast is a personal thing, to be done prayerfully between the individual and the Lord God Almighty, and any expression of church that demands it, is in error. When you are deciding how to fast, it is crucially important to remember what fasting is all about—changing yourself, not changing God.

Judaism as a whole? Orthodox Judaism does object to these things; Reform Judaism doesn't. I am sure that many Orthodox Jews do consider that Reform Jews are diluting the faith; but, as the saying goes, 'two Jews, three opinions'.

How I am spreading goady made up stuff? I mentioned what a friend told me. Should my approach be if someone tells me about the way they practice their faith to say that it is misinformation and goady? They have the right to practice fasting as they wish.

A couple of other posters have also mentioned Christians fasting the same way.

I am not sure reading the New Testament would help. There are hundreds of versions of the Bible that were constantly changed.

Never play chess with a pigeon.....

There's a girl on tick tok I follow. She was Sikh then turned Christian. She is doing proper fasting from sunrise to sunset. I just assumed, that was the traditional fasting but majority of Christian's don't do it. I had a Christian friend at school that gave up crisps for lent. I thought that was ridiculous (no offence).

fasting is supposed to kill cancer cells. You can read about it. There's lots of fasting in Hinduism too.

It depends how much you love crisps. Its been posted on here that a common one used to be giving up sugar in hot drinks. If crisps were take it or leave it for you, I get why it seemed ridiculous.

Fasting seems to have developed as part of Christian asceticisim in North Africa in the 2nd or early 3rd century, at a time when Christians would still have been very conscious that living in end times really did mean end times. Many of us forget that now.

The benefits of fasting on physical health come from an absence of food long enough to trigger autophagy.

Giving up meat, tea, chocolate, wine etc wouldn't do this.

I know someone who is Greek. Orthodox. They don’t fully fast but give up a lot. The amount they can’t eat gets progressively more as lent progresses. They are vegan the whole period I think and no sugar and at somepoint also have to give up anything fried. They can drink but only water.

What has that to do with religious beliefs and those of your friend?