I always saw Lent as a Catholic practice.  Beyond that I never really gave it much thought.

Marie wrote on Mar 10^th, 2006 at 11:45am:


Lent and it's associated tag-along holidays (Mardis Gras/Fat Tuesday) are ridiculous and completely irrelevant.

The problems with the concept of Lent are many-fold.  It's a tradition started by the Catholic church that partially survived the Protestant Reformation and is carried on in both the Catholic church and certain protestant denominations.  I'm neither Catholic nor Catholic-derived, so the holiday doesn't really apply to me.

Quote:


The problem with Lent is that it's observers completely misunderstand the basic premis of fasting.  Fasting is good.  However, it has to be done for the right reasons and with the right mindset.  If you are fasting "because the Pope told me to" or "because it's what everyone else is doing" or "because the calendar says it's that time of year," you're doing it for the wrong reason.

Fasting is a highly personal experience with God.  It's something that nobody needs to know about.  Not your spouse, not your parents, not your best friends, and certainly not the Pope.  It's a personal commitment to God to forsake a significant factor in your life for the benefit of gaining a closer relationship with God.  It's a time of purging sinful tendencies from your life to attain a more intimate walk with the Creator.  None of this needs to be public knowledge, and it's certainly not the kind of thing you can plop on a calendar.

People that walk around saying "Hey, I'm fasting" are doing exactly what Jesus warned against in the verse above.  They're doing it for themselves.  They aren't fasting for the rewards they'll get in heaven, but rather for the rewards they get immediately by having other people think they're pious and upstanding.

Nowhere in the New Testament will you ever find an apostolic (or Christ-given) exhortation to support an "annual" fast of any kind.  According to the Catholics, in 461 AD St. leo told his parishioners to abstain so they could "fulfill with their fasts the Apostolic institution of the forty days."

I'll start observing Lent as soon as someone can point out an apostle that even mentions a fast that satisfies the following conditions:

1) Mandatory.
2) Follows a strict schedule.
3) Applies to all members of all churches.
4) Specifically declares what can and cannot be eaten.

If any of you can find that, and I'll stop eating meat this very instant.  I've got two beautiful steaks in the refrigerator right now that are just begging to be cooked, so I don't make this claim lightly.

I wouldn't have any problem with the Catholic concept of Lent if they didn't rabidly lie about its origins.  The fact the Papacy has to push such outright fallacies to cover up the source of this corrupt exercise is what's really irksome.

Irksome.  I like that word.  I think I'll use it more often.

-b0b
(...mmm, steaks!)

The one I am refering to is in the OT somewhere and I have it in my notes and for the life of me I can't find it.  I will look later today (seeing as it's 4:42 as of right now).

There are a few NT:

Mat 6:17  But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face;
Mat 6:18  That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.

And Bob, I do agree with everything you said above for the most part.  But I would have to say that if I wish to fast for all the right reasons 40 days before Easter...I think that is a good thing.

X

Come on guys, lets face the truth.  Fasting is Satans work.  God supplied us with delicious foods and Taco Bell so that we could consume them in his honor.

I for one will not be fasting!  (Ok I will be, but only because I'm poor)