For millennia peoples across the globe have searched for a means of getting closer to and finding god. Elaborate ceremony, choreographed rituals, ornate clothing, enormous houses of worship and convoluted oral histories have all been employed to this task. But the simple answer to god’s discovery has been right under our noses, or tongues, the entire time. We just need to skip the mid-day meal and god will appear before us. God is a chicken sandwich left uneaten.
The three dominant monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam all suffer similar appeals to the ridiculous. Virgin birth, parting seas, resurrection, talking snakes, 400-year-old men, geocentrism, six-day creation, theodicy and prayer are just a few examples where reason is abandoned in the search for god. Another is the idea that missing one meal during the day is a spiritual experience.
The association between self-denial and god is common in most religions. Christians have their 40 days of semi-fasting (which means semi-eating) during Lent to commemorate the death and resurrection of Christ. Jews have Yom Kippur, one day of fasting and repentance to atone for past sins. Muslims have Ramadan, the holy month during which fasting is meant to promote self-restraint and heighten spirituality.
What is so curious about these supposed episodes of “self-denial” is how little is being denied in the effort to get closer to god. If missing a meal is a criterion for spirituality, every anorexic supermodel is going straight to heaven. For such an important goal we offer very little. Let’s take Ramadan as our example since we are now in the midst of that celebration. Muslims “fast” from the first light of dawn, about an hour or so before sunrise, until the sun sets. So you wake up, have an early big breakfast, work during the day, come home and have dinner. The only thing you’ve done is miss lunch. That is not fasting, and that is not much self-restraint. Yet the holiday is explained in terms of the most amazing feats of self-denial as exemplified by quotes in my local newspaper in a story about Ramadan:
“Hopefully one grows each year as part of denying the physical self and growing the spiritual self.”
“Anyone who is not Muslim will see it as punishment. But we look at it spiritually, as a way to be closer to God.”
“Fasting is the most interesting thing I do each year” because it exposes me to the “essence of hunger.”
One would think these suffering people have endured a three-week hunger strike consuming nothing but water. They skipped lunch.
Christianity is no less ridiculous in its claims of fasting. Spirituality is reduced to avoiding potato chips between lunch and dinner. During Lent, adherents simply must restrict themselves to one full meal in a day, with no food between meals. That meal can be a huge brunch, with rich desserts. Throw in some wine, too. Jews have elaborate psychological preparations so they can go an entire 25 hours without stuffing themselves. Go to a synagogue, take a nap, sniff spices, don’t talk about food…
C’mon people, get a grip. If missing a meal is all that is necessary to get close to god, the threshold is awfully low. No wonder that seeing an image of Jesus in some burnt toast is considered a miracle. This is the problem with religion. We have this deeply ingrained taboo against calling out the obviously ridiculous for what it is for fear of offending. Well let’s throw caution to the wind to state the incredibly self-evident: folks, missing a meal or two during the day does not constitute deprivation, does not qualify as self-sacrifice, and does not count as self-denial. To claim otherwise is an embarrassing admission of an extraordinarily shallow concept of suffering. If missing lunch is all that is required to know god or to gain self-understanding or to grow spiritually, those goals are not terribly interesting. Such an easy and cheap entry fee diminishes the value of the prize, or reveals so-called fasting for the self-delusion that it really is. If you feel righteous for missing lunch or going a day without eating, you live a life too sheltered. If you really want to get closer to god, switch places with one of the billion human beings who go to bed hungry every night. If one skipped meal is a means of “growing the spiritual self” just think what you’ll experience with ceaseless pangs of hunger every minute of every day, with no relief in sight.
Pain and Piety
Even more intriguing than the idea that self-sacrifice is necessary to know god is that the assumed association between pain and piety largely goes unquestioned or is dismissed with the useless idea that “god works in mysterious ways.” What cruel god would require us to suffer to know him? The guy is supposed to be all-powerful and all-knowing. He just as easily could have created a world in which every human is born with a deep understanding of god with no further ado. Heck, he could appear before us right now if he felt like materializing today as a giant talking turnip in Area 51. He could have us born into a world of plenty, in good health, full of joy never to be diminished by sadness.
Since that utopian ideal is not our reality, we need to make elaborate excuses for how an omniscient benevolent god could tolerate the pain, suffering, hunger, disease, crime, war and depraved behaviors we witness today and throughout human history. Our first feeble attempt to reconcile the irreconcilable is to fabricate the notion of divinely-granted free will as a get-out-of-jail pass for god. But the pass turns out to be a fraud sold to us by unscrupulous scalpers. If god is all-powerful, he could have created a species of humans who chose to use the gift of free will only for good. That his creations chose to behave badly means that such behavior was either god’s original intent, or that god is not all-knowing. Perhaps a benevolent god created a world with evil, but he chose to do so for good reasons. He created evil, but is not evil himself. This is the heart of the argument for those who believe that evil and suffering are necessary in order to know god. Well, that is simply another example of solving the problem by defining it away, and ultimately contributes nothing. The counterargument is trivially obvious. Since god is all-powerful, he could have just as easily designed the world such that suffering was not required to know him.
But the boss apparently did not get that memo. Since pain and suffering seem to be divine gifts, we celebrate god by simulating pain and suffering as a way to get closer to our cruel deity. Without the real thing, though. We pretend by pretending to fast, but with a few meals thrown in so we do not actually get hungry. Our attempts at piety through pain are as comical as they are misguided. Ramadan, Lent and Yom Kippur are not periods of self-denial but another collective example of religion’s absurdity. Please, let’s stop with the nonsense that a foregone brioche is a spiritual experience.
Follow Jeff Schweitzer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JeffSchweitzer
That is precisely the interesting thing about spiritual fasting-- it ends--always-- with a feast.
Wow, 200 days a year?
"That is precisely the interesting thing about spiritual fasting-- it ends--always-- with a feast."
......................................................................Maybe, it should -- end -- always --with an orgy!
I still think these are silly rituals, but, I'm starting to admire the commitment! ;)
This is off topic, but, I just stumbled across two discussions on YouTube, from 'The Gregory Mantell Show', that you had with a couple of theists.
You have been accused of arrogance, on this thread, and I couldn't help thinking about that accusation, while I watched these discussions. I really have to hand it to you. You showed an unbelievable amount of restraint, and politeness toward Elijah, who came across as as absolute blowhard (he thinks he should receive a Nobel prize?).
In the one called 'What's Wrong with Religion?', I thought it was nice that they were given the opportunity to have the last word, without you being there for any rebuttal ... nice.
*For those interested:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6GNCOXxlbA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q5aPvPbkQI&feature=related
The problem is that anybody challenging relligious dogma is immediately labeled arrogant or insensitive by many believers. The very act of questioning the idea of faith is considered offensive. In spite of that, religion and faith are legitimate targets of satire and ridicule, no different than any other human endeavor.
I respect and will defend the right of others to hold different beliefs than mine but that does not obligate me to have respect for those views. Depending on circumstances and mood, and the desired result from the discussioin, my views on the absurdities of religion can be expressed through seriouis discussion, humor, satire or ridicule. All are legitimate means of expression. In the case of Elijah, I thought it best out of respect for the host to lean toward serious discussion in spite of the abundant material Elijah provided for satire.
And it is a completely bogus assertion on your part that " The very act of questioning the idea of faith is considered offensive." You are not so revolutionary that your very ideas inspire offense.
When you look at it, agnostacism and atheism is just another religion. So I dont 'get' what this blog is about.
What I have found are atheists who are fanatical about not having their lives infringed upon by religion, something they regard as silly.
Imagine if the Cat in the Hat decreased your ability to live a long and healthy life, you'd be stupified.
That's how atheists feel seeing things like stem cell research stopped by fairy tales.
Why is it a sin to eat meat on Friday but not Thursday or Saturday?
Fasting allows for more time to pray and demonstrates that you are serious enough about your request to pay a personal price. God rewards fasting, deep desire and praying in faith. Fasting releases God’s supernatural power.
Fasting is not earning an answer to prayer. God cannot be blackmailed. Fasting simply prepares us for God’s answer.
God is love.
Yes, "God’s supernatural power" can be trapped in your digestive system, and bogged down by food (especially fatty foods).
And the rumbling sound that you hear coming from your stomach, is really the sound of your god's supernatural powers, struggling with the last traces of your last meal, about to burst forth and perform feats that will amaze you ... and other god-type stuff!
It's well known, that food can be to God, what kryptonite is to Superman ... that's just a fact.
You make two contradictory statements: fasting is not an answer to a prayer; god rewards fasting. Which one is it? If he "rewards" fasting you're trying to get something from him by fasting.
They must believe that their God is very unambitious.
He knows when you're awake
He knows if you've been bad or good (or grabbed a Snickers)
So, be good for goodness sake
Malkin72, you're just begging for a lump of coal!
Most of the time a typical Ramdan fast lasts, 12 hours, in Moscow it lasts 17 hours.
So going without food & water & doing your normal stuff , just as you do year round is not easy.And it certainly ask for some effort from the believer.
well Ramdan is also about, fasting of all your sense, .
Not hurting some one with your tounge,
not watching ...porn etc.
not bacbitting, slandering abuses etc.
since you consider it so easy as missing a meal, why don't you keep fast for 30 days & explain your feelings in online journal.
Fast from food & other stuff.Sunrise to Sunset. & go about about your normal life,with only few chnges.
I believe you are an atheist, this will certainly be an intresting study. What do you say.
Well something i wish to know.Nothing against you how you fast or do it.
How many hours, i know othere religious fasting to be more difficult but for smaller duration.
My cousin was in Moscow for 6 years during his studies, at that the time from dusk to dawn was 17 hours, & he & all his muslim friends kept fast for those 17 hours.
Even i find the , not eating part easier as compared to keeping control over my mind.But when you conciously fast & miss a meal that's a whole lot of difference.but all easier & difficult is relative.My grand parents are more then 70, they still keep the fast(all), when i miss a few.
you are in prime of your age, fast & othere restarins tests every one differently.
For some not eting or not drinkng for 12 hours or more is tough. For some keeping your mind offf all the bad stuff we normally do is difficult.For some not smoking is difficult.
For some not using an abusive word is dificult.
I can only speak about Ramdan, it tests kids differently(it's most easy to fast when u are a kid, coz once i was also a kid. & can tell from personal experience.)
It tests parents differently..............
Just coz not eating is easy for you, don't be too arrogant about it.
not watching ...porn etc.
not bacbitting, slandering abuses etc."
So, if Ramadan is about not indulging in these goodies, what does that say about the other 11 months?
Ramdan snapps you up from your normal life, & forces you to consider what we all are doing.what wrong are we commiting Isour behaviour correct or not.
And hopefully , those things remain with ous.But Allah knows humans are not really good at lerning, so i believe that's why Ramdan comes every year.Not once in your life time.
Goodies..........i wish i could refrain from these goodies, it's not easy.And we all sccumb to it .
Do you belong to a different religion now?
Ok, here's my critique : Clearly you recognize the danger of defining god as a being. (Will it offend Her if I do not capitalize?) The supernatural is, by definition, unknowable. Thus to posit god as an immensely powerful uber-being is to assert something about that which you do not - and cannot - know.
But what does that leave? Either the god-concept must remain indefinable, or you are simply attaching the label "God" to things which are already understood to exist sans god(s).
In the first case, by refusing to define "God" so as to avoid allowing dogma to creep in, you destroy religion - for how can two people discuss their disparate god-concepts without imposing their particular definition upon the other?
In the second case, you are really saying nothing at all - saying things like, "God is a metaphor", "God is an ideal", "God is love", etcetra, are just attempts to attach a new label to things that you value. But these things already have names.
So, what or whom is this god of which you speak?
.
Ranti worships The Ultimate Context.
Like WHAT?
Don't you all think it is interesting to note that Christian Fundamentalists do NOT fast.They don't believe in it. They don't have an Easter Lent before Easter and they don't have a Christmas Lent before Christmas. Why do you think they reject fasting?
Moreover, you are not really fasting if as St. Basil points out, you watch everything that goes into your mouth but devour your brother (with your anger or your criticism) instead.
"Another is the idea that missing one meal during the day is a spiritual experience."
The usual Schweitzer disinformation ...
Orthodox Christians participate in an ascetic fast for approximately 150 days of the year: 49 days before Easter, 40 days before Christmas, 15 days before the feast of the Dormition of the Mother of God, about 10 days for the Apostles, and every Wednesday and Friday. We eat vegan during this period, with no alcohol and no oil (oil and alcohol are allowed on the weekends) because of the connection of Saturdays to the Sabbath and Sundays to the Resurrection. Exoskeletal animals are allowed, but no fish. We are supposed to eat less as well.
.
This kind of diet actually saves money as long as you don't eat shrimp and lobster as your exoskeletal animals. Usually I eat legumes, stewed vegetables, and tofu. You are supposed to give the money you save to the poor. When I had first converted, it was a fasting period and my husband brought me a hamburger for lunch because I had to commute and didn't have time to get food. I didn't say anything to him because it was nice of him to surprise me by bringing me lunch. I just took the patty out of the bun and ate the bun. I was getting off the off-ramp of the freeway in downtown LA and there was a homeless guy who was asking for money or food. I told him I had a hamburger patty, would he like it? He said he hadn't eaten meat in 2 months and he was really happy to eat the hamburger. That kind of thing happens all the time when you fast. You are not fasting for a spiritual experience during these fasts-- you fast in imitation of Christ and to learn self discipline. It does affect your spiritual life to fast, but you are not fasting as a spiritual experience.
And the responses that try to skew the debate by talking about the health benefits of fasting completely miss the point. All the points about the ridiculous elements of the religious mandate to fast, and how we really don't fast but pretend to, remain valid whether or not fasting is healthy.
But a couple of inferences about the psycho-chemical effect may indeed be relevant, at least historically. Certainly the modern 'skip-lunch' style of fasting probably won't cause any major brain chemistry changes. I do imagine that in the past when the fast was real and prolonged, that all kinds of hallucination's and psychosis might be caused. This was probably little different from the old sages that were hopped up on whatever opiates were around at that time.
In the discussion with kwinter and wondering and elsewhere I develop the idea that fasting is not just abstaining from food or certain foods, it is about abstaining from devouring one's brother and sister and increasing acts of love that one does in the world. One learns (hopefully) to control the mouth-- including words that come out of it. An increase in prayer accompanies fasting in order for it to be effective as well.
In any case, that is what I find so unconvincing about all of your critiques of Faith in God -- they are arrogantly shallow in a way that reminds me of a very bright student in a freshman writing course who writes well but doesn't really bother to look too deeply into the subject matter.