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 agree, @Ddakji.

The example I posted yesterday, about the Lenten fasting in the Tudor court shows that, even 500 years ago, the fast meant giving up certain foods, not going nil by mouth all day. And Henry VIII could eat fish during Lent, but not meat, so he had waterfowl like ducks and geese reclassified as fish, so he could eat them during Lent. Poor man - the suffering was real!

• Textual scholars generally agree that the Bible has been remarkably well-preserved and that there is no evidence of systematic revision, editing, or tampering.
• Focus on Reliability:
• The sheer volume of biblical manuscripts, coupled with the meticulous work of scribes and scholars, allows for a high degree of confidence in the reliability of the text.

Just because something's been done for thousands of years doesn't make it sensible or reasonable. As our knowledge grows, we gradually realize that various religious beliefs are nonsense and that there are natural explanations for things (like thunder, life, disease etc) that don't require made-up stories involving a god.

There are studies backing up the health benefits of fasting and it was done by religious communities for thousands of years before the health benefits were known.

Explanations for natural phenomena are often speculation and made up. Science cannot explain everything. Theories often change. So many of these theories have proved to be nonsense such as scientists originally believing that the baby was in the sperm 😂

Did you get this from ChatGPT?

If there is no evidence of systematic revision, editing or tampering, why are there so many versions of the Bible? I used to work in Special Collections and there are hundreds of versions of the Bible which all differ.

There are a number of different versions of the bible - the King James and more modern translations. Apart from the language used, they are extremely consistent. I could write a huge long post on this (archaeology has proved the existence of the Hittites etc) but suggest you have a look at gotquestions.org.

how can that be? what did those traditional people who went vegan do with the milk and eggs?

Wasn't that how pancakes came about? People had to use up all their eggs and milk by Shrove Tuesday as they couldn't be eaten during Lent.

One thing Catholics are (I think) really lucky with is that all of us worldwide use the same Lectionary - anyone who went to Sunday Mass anywhere on the planet this weekend heard about Joshua's men at Gilgal, Psalm 34, about us being ambassadors for Christ, and the parable of the two brothers.

I am a lapsed Catholic. I will take my mother to church for Thursday, Friday and Sunday and despite not having stepped into Church since Christmas, will know exactly what is going on, the readings etc, no matter where we go. Even if I don't have to go to church I'll feel weird if I'm in Tesco's or something at 3pm on Good Friday, so Ill make sure I'm at home. My DH is a strident atheist and doesnt really understand why. I find the ritual of it quite comforting.

I worked with a bible specialist in special collections and there are vast differences in the Bibles. They are some consistencies but huge differences. See for yourself - there are plenty of Special Collections libraries up and down the country with good collections of Bibles.

The Biblical canon has been fixed for the Eastern and Western Christian church since the 4th century, 46 Old Testament books, 27 New Testament books, each with the same number of chapter, each chapter with the same number of verses.
The Copts have a slightly extended canon, notably the book of Enoch.

Within the canon there are tiny variations in translation and interpretation, but even in books where there is minimal agreement, such as the minor (but delightful) Book of Tobit, verse for verse the book is the same in all versions. (Afair the difference in that is mainly varied opinion as to whether a very young newly married couple leapt straight into bed or whether they stayed up praying for 24 hours then leapt into bed.) There are two ways of numbering the Psalms, and two ways of numbering the Commandments, but the text is the same.

I'm not sure what your library held - Apocryphal books maybe, or lots of translations. But the Bible is the Bible, and unless you were looking at pre-4th century material they all the same contents. The Protestant churches re-defined some of the canon as 'apocrypha' in the 16th century, but didn't alter the verse/chapter contents of those books.

That was probably because children aren't required to fast. Only Catholics between the ages of 21 and their 60th birthday are required to fast, and not the pregnant, the breastfeeding, those caring for the sick or very small children, nor those in bad health.
'Abstinence', which in Catholic terms means abstaining from meat, only kicks in from the 14th birthday, and only applies to Ash Wed. and Good Friday, although we are requested to also abstain from meat on Fridays.

I'm a Christian (not Catholic) and I've never heard of this being done routinely within most Christian churches. This is something I'd associate more with the Muslim faith and with Ramadan.

To me lent is about depriving yourself of something in order to resonate more closely with the deprivation Jesus went through and to force yourself to lean more closely on God for self discipline and resilience. I don't believe that necessarily has to involve all food or drink or even any food and drink. Especially as for many people fasting is unhealthy or unsafe. To me lent is also about financial donation, increased prayer and religious meditation and I can understand why for some people going off social media is a big thing given how much a lot of us use it and what a distraction it can be and how much time it can take up and how that could be refocused into more a spiritual direction.

I think there's a really negative connotation of people "picking and choosing" within the Christian faith and I can fully understand why people may feel that way. But for me I think faith is a very individual thing, it is open to interpretation and personally I think it's empowering to question WHY we do things a certain way rather than just blindly following along. Being able to be flexible with certain religious rituals like lent allow people to engage with them in potentially more meaningful ways.

For me I've given myself a harder walking commute every day. It's saved me money which I can donate to charity, I use the time I now spend walking to do spiritual reflection and pray and it's a pain in the backside so it takes self discipline when the weather stinks or I'm tight for time and would rather drive. Its also opened lots of positive conversations with my colleagues about what I'm doing and why.

I would be unable to fast in the way you describe and do the job I do safely so that's not an option for me. But I find the process of choosing a significant thing to give up really beneficial because - for me- it also brings more self reflection to the process.

I do think in general, it can potentially be a negative thing to follow along the bible to the 'T'. In my mind its important that we read it in the context of the time it was written and the fact it was written by human beings who are flawed and was put together by human beings. It's as important to me to find what I feel is the right balance between what I read biblically and what I feel God is spiritually calling me to do and how I understand his word. I do wonder if this is a personality thing - I'm pretty comfortable living in the grey area of things in general whereas I know there's others out there who feel safer when there are clear rules to live by which is understandable.

This makes a lot of sense @Lavender14 thank you for sharing your perspective

in that case, I fast twice a day every day

Science doesn't claim to know or explain everything; it is a constant search for knowledge which relies on tangible evidence. It's religions that claim to be able to explain everything - with no evidence whatsoever. I agree that fasting seems to have some tangible benefits, but you don't need religion for that.

My dad is devout and does it. Most people don’t even know about it - I wouldn’t if it for him going on about it 🤣. My mum used to give up chocolate but I think she’s given up giving up.

Which religions claim to be able to explain everything?

I perhaps didn't word it well! I just meant that religions explain our origins by saying some god made everything. So they use 'god' as an explanation for things we don't yet understand.

Come on. All three Abramic religions are right up their own fundamental orifices, be it God's chosen people or the lot with an "infallible" man at the head of the church or the other lot whose prophet is so inviolate, you are entitled to behead anyone who depicts his image according to an awful lot of his followers.

I haven't been exposed much to other religions besides these three, but I am not convinced there are any that are any more rational. It always seems to boil down to a man in dodgy robes who wants either to fleece his flock financially or get his end away.

Science doesn't explain everything yet. Theories can change but 'Scientific theories' are not the same as guesses or speculation, a theory in the scientific sense is the explanation of how that works looking at the available evidence. New evidence can support this theory or it can go against it.

So if you drop a ball from a window it will fall to the ground. That is your evidence. One theory of why that works is 'the theory of gravity'.

Now to apply the scientific method tot he theory you try to disprove it.

OK so now you throw the ball out of the window in a hurricane. Now the ball doesn't immediately drop to the ground. Does that mean your theory is wrong?

No it means your theory needs more development.

If you read the article you linked to it is not that scientists, 'originally thought' it is that when sperm were first seen (could not be seen until the telescope was invented) the explanation of their role was debated so there were competing theories.

Further evidence did not support this theory so it fell out of favour.

As for fasting being practiced by religious people they were not the first. The first were just people trying to survive. Actually before we evolved in to people our genetic ancestors were subjected to 'feast or famine'.

As for fasting being practiced by religious people they were not the first. The first were just people trying to survive. Actually before we evolved in to people our genetic ancestors were subjected to 'feast or famine'.

There is a difference between fasting for religious reasons and being in a famine situation. It is not a deliberate act to fast when there is a famine.

It absolutely can be when you are trying to make food last longer or spread around more people.

Prompted by this thread I had a look at Peter O'Dwyer's book on the Céli Dé and the 8-9th century Irish penitential documents. People were expected to fast (deciding for themselves how and when) but also obliged to feast and eat well on days of celebration, and there were penalties for those who did not, so it isn't a simple as saving resources. It's about individual spirituality but also about binding the church community together.

A look at Fergus Kelly's book on early Irish law reminded me that fasting was also an integral part of some forms of casting curses on people or even making protests against them (see also hunger strikes).

The lack of relevance.
Only just including women in senior roles.
Still not great about the gays - although a fair amount of clergy are gay.
Allowing child abuse for years to go unreported and when it was reported to be ignored.