The 40 Lental days and the gospels

I'm still confused as to why lent is adhered to. It's not ordered by by god, Jesus, or the bible....

Originally posted by LadyV
I'm still confused as to why lent is adhered to. It's not ordered by by god, Jesus, or the bible....

I dunno.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

Originally posted by gboudx
I'll do my best. But remember, google is your friend.

what did we do before Google?

1) Observing Lent is not found in the Gospels.

Then why the observance?

2) The 40 days of Lent signifies the 40 days Jesus spent in the desert being tempted by Satan.

What does this have to do with ending at his death, palms and ashes?

3) Fasting is a part of Lent. Again, the desert and Jesus. He fasted those 40 days.

What does this have to do with his death, palms and ashes?

4) Muslims have a similar difference for children and Ramadan. Children aren't considered adults in the eyes of the Church until Confirmation.

We are talking Christianity.

5) Ashes remind us of our mortality. It's symbolic.

How so, and who decreed this? Light reminds me of my immortality.

6) I assume you are referring to Palm Sunday. Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the Sunday of Passover. People lined the streets waving palms at him. Why palms? Don't know. I'm assuming something symbolic again.

So then, are you saying that palm Sunday and ash wednesday coincides with his tempation by the devil and his 40 day fast?

7) don't know who that is.

He, was a fellow who argued to keep the Lenten season.

8) Are you serious?

Absolutely I am.

[edit on 2/10/05 by SomewhereinBetween]

It looks like you have enough links to keep you busy and help you find the answers. However, from your replies to me, I don't think you were seriously looking for answers to those questions. I think you were fishing for something else, or just trying to have a little fun with Catholic traditions and history. In any case, good luck.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
And I frankly don’t care who carried out the punishment, that is not the issue.

Why would the sanhedrin issue a proclamation of death and notice of 40 days of mourning and witnessing if they were not the ones doing the execution? Who carried out the punishment is important here.

the governor was required to send the criminal to Rome for trial if the penalty involved dealth

Only roman citizens had a right to trial in rome.

however, your tales are not true

How could his answers be 'not true'? Whatever the original import of the season he gives its current usage.

inasmuch as these things had been always [so] observed by John the disciple of our Lord, and by other apostles with whom he had been conversant;

You quoted the above, you have the answer. Why'd the early christian community do this? Becuase the apostles did it when they were leading the apostolic church. If later church fathers didn't know why, well, then what of it? Your saying that when the sanhedrin punished someone there was this 40 day period, and that jews at the time would put dirt/ash on their heads to mourn. I suppose the implication is that the apostles did this, and now every year repeated it as leaders of the apostolic church. Seems reasonable enough. But why go about this method of putting forward this hypothesis? To embarass christians? Why? And how should it embarass them? What does it matter that they don't know the jewish origins of the lent season, what do they care about jewish pratices?

Originally posted by Nygdan

Not correct.

How could his answers be 'not true'? Whatever the original import of the season he gives its current usage.

Because they are not.

You quoted the above, you have the answer. Why'd the early christian community do this? Becuase the apostles did it when they were leading the apostolic church. If later church fathers didn't know why, well, then what of it? Your saying that when the sanhedrin punished someone there was this 40 day period, and that jews at the time would put dirt/ash on their heads to mourn.

Please apply yourself to my words. I said ash comes from mourning, as in Esther. I also explained the 40 days and the ashes, kindly revisit my post and pay attention this time rather than rush to critique.

I suppose the implication is that the apostles did this, and now every year repeated it as leaders of the apostolic church.

I am of the impression that you read the first two words and decided to challenge me. RE-read my post, the answer is there as to the differing times observed.

But why go about this method of putting forward this hypothesis? To embarass christians? Why?

It is either that I must be a glutton for repetition, or I intend on penetrating stone. Let me state it once more, as simply as I can possibly make it. No Christian that stepped up knew the answer, neither did the patriarchs of the church 1900 years ago. Lent is an observance shrouded in Jewish practice and pagan ritual, which lends itself to shielding Christians from the truth as to how the 40 days came to be, or your gospels would be seen for what they are: bogus!

And how should it embarass them? What does it matter that they don't know the jewish origins of the lent season, what do they care about jewish pratices?

See above. Why do you observe such a serene time when you know absolutely nothing about it?

Why would the sanhedrin issue a proclamation of death and notice of 40 days of mourning and witnessing if they were not the ones doing the execution? Who carried out the punishment is important here.

Moved to the end because:

My post does not say the Sanhedrin issued a 40 day mourning period, does it? If you cannot understand so few words, how can you possibly understand the thousands between the covers you call divinely inspired?

It matters not to me who carried out the punishment, as the question is the 40 days prior to the Lenten period. The only question you should be asking anyone, foremost yourself is; why would Jesus be dragged before the Sanhedrin and then turned over to the Romans for sentencing after being found guilty, if they could have put him to death? Where, I have already provided this information, perhaps you did not understand it or cannot find it within the gospels, but I will recount the event for you:

Matt 26:57 And they had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest…
26:59 Now the chief priests and elders sought false witness against Jesus to put him to death;…
26:60 …at the last came two witnesses
26:66…He is guilty of death
Mark 14:64…And they all condemned him to death.
Matt 27:1 when the morning was come,…bound him and led him away to Pontius Pilate…

Now the story takes a twist in Luke.
23:6 When Pilate heard of Galilee, …and as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod.

You will find an interesting piece to the puzzle in John 7:14:15; 25:39: most interesting is 37 and 38.

Had they the power to kill them they would have done so without taking him to Pilate, or the story makes no sense, does it? Now all this is recounted as though it took place within a day, which unless the Sanhedrin and Pilate were sitting around waiting for something to do, is unlikely. While the impending death is presented as a foretelling, many disciples leaving him after the walk across the sea is quite a puzzle, unless one reads Josephus. Nevertheless, given the requirement of 40 days, it is more likely that he was already judged by the Sanhedrin, and knew he would die. This is further supported by the story of James and John requesting to sit on his right hand, and which should succeed (be the greatest) him.

As you should be able to see, I have recounted how the trial was portrayed, and had the gospels been forthcoming with the nature of the charge, then you and I would both have an answer to one of the mysteries of this story. However, it appears you look to the gospels to tell you the scope of the Sanhedrin to question my statement, where all I, or you can do, is look to history to find out why, as I have and explained. When you get to history, let me know.


[edit on 2/17/05 by SomewhereinBetween]

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Not correct.

The quoted portion was empy, was it in reference to the citizen bit? Its entirely possible that I am wrong, what sources conclude this? I recall Paul supposedly invoked his right as a citizen to trail in rome. I have never heard of governonrs not being able to execute rebels without sending them to rome.

Because they are not.

My original statement was garbled. What it should've read as was if the tradition is that lent is celebrated for such and such reason, and no one states that its celebrated for the jewish reason, then how can the 'traditional' reason be 'untrue'? No one is celebrating it as the jewish cutsom, so its not 'not true'. Its 'become' a representation of the 40 days, heck it was even thougth to be so in teh early days of the church, just not by everyone.

kindly revisit my post and pay attention this time rather than rush to critique

What are you saying I missed?

I am of the impression that you read the first two words and decided to challenge me

Then you are under the wrong impression.

and pagan ritual

You have only noted a jewish influence, not a pagan one.

or your gospels would be seen for what they are: bogus!

How does that follow? If the apostles were smearing dirt on their faces to mourn the comming death of jesus in the 40 day period prior to execution, how does that make a difference?

Why do you observe such a serene time

I don't observe lent, i don't smear dirt on my face as a religious custom. I find the ashheads walking around at this time of year rather amusing.

My post does not say the Sanhedrin issued a 40 day mourning period, does it?

Ah, i see, yes, the 40 day period is the lead up to execution and you are saying that the ashes to mourn are used because they killed jesus, he died, and that was it, so they smeared dirt on their faces to mourn, not used it in the 40 day lead up. But why have the ashes at the begining of lent? By this reasoning ashes shoudl come in at the end of lent. And the apostolic church would've gotten it right.
Heck, the apostolic church wouldn't've used the tradition of ashes to mourn at all, because they'd, in your idea, know that jesus was dead and hadn't come back, and have tried to cover it up by creating these gospels where he did come back. So why would there be any lent at all?

You will find an interesting piece to the puzzle in John 7:14:15
"14Not until halfway through the Feast did Jesus go up to the temple courts and begin to teach. 15The Jews were amazed and asked, “How did this man get such learning without having studied?”

25-39
[a crowd in reference to jesus] "But we know where this man is from; when the Christ comes, no one will know where he is from.”
Then Jesus, still teaching in the temple courts, cried out, “Yes, you know me, and you know where I am from. I am not here on my own, but he who sent me is true. You do not know him, 29but I know him because I am from him and he sent me.”

most interesting is 37 and 38.
37On the last and greatest day of the Feast, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink. 38Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.”

I'll just say, right off the bat, that thats interesting because jesus refers to the scripture. But perhaps this means jewish scripture.

also, i would think that this supports your idea

30At this they tried to seize him, but no one laid a hand on him, because his time had not yet come

So he was allowed to wander around for 40 days, after having been convicted and sentenced to death, with guards tailing him?

Now all this is recounted as though it took place within a day, which unless the Sanhedrin and Pilate were sitting around waiting for something to do, is unlikely

Why is this unlikely? They'd wait 40 days but one day is suspiciously long?

However, it appears you look to the gospels to tell you the scope of the Sanhedrin

No, i have not.

is look to history to find out [the mystery]

What mystery? The discrepancy between the pharisees sentencing him to death and bringing him to pilate?

Originally posted by Nygdan....

Here let me rein you in. These are my questions:

Where is this to be found within the gospels?

Why is it observed?

Why the food restrictions?

Why the restrictive differences in observance for children?

What is with the ashes on Ash Wednesday?

What does a Sunday have to do with palms and the gospels?

Why was lent important to Athanasius?

Is this a pagan observation?

Edited the header as it seems my fingers were thinking one thing I was thinking another. I hope it works

Your answers without beating around the bush and attempting to sidetrack the issues, would be?

Here is your big chance to show me what you think you know.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Where is this to be found within the gospels?

Nowhere, as far as I know.

Why is it observed?

Christian Tradition, apparently of vague origins.

Why the food restrictions?

The food restrictions on meat apply to other days, sometimes it even applied to any and every friday. Probably in part to mourn the death of christ and probably in part to deny that which is 'luxurious'; ascetism.

Why the restrictive differences in observance for children?

I am unfamiliar with any such differences.

What does a Sunday have to do with palms and the gospels?

Sunday has simply become the sabbath, the high holy day of the week, and thats also become the day that christ is re-vivified.

Why was lent important to Athanasius?

www.freerepublic.com...
The Festal Letters of St. Athanasius Letter I
Let us keep the Feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. Putting off the old man and his deeds, let us put on the new man, which is created in God,’ in humbleness of mind, and a pure conscience; in meditation of the law by night and by day. And casting away all hypocrisy and fraud, putting far from us all pride and deceit, let us take upon us love towards God and towards our neighbour, that being new creatures, and receiving the new wine, even the Holy Spirit, we may properly keep the feast, even the month of these new fruits

Letter II

For the God of all hath commanded, saying, ‘Speak, and the children of Israel shall keep the Passover.’ And the Spirit exhorts in the Psalm; ‘Blow the trumpet in the new moons, in the solemn day of your feast.’ And the prophet cries; ‘Keep thy feasts, O Judah.’ I do not send word to you as though you were ignorant; but I publish it to those who know it, that ye may perceive that although men have separated us, yet God having made us companions, we approach the same feast, and worship the same Lord continually. And we do not keep the festival as observers of days, knowing that the Apostle reproves those who do so, in those words which he spake; ‘Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.’ But rather do we consider the day solemn because of the feast; so that all of us, who serve God in every place, may together in our prayers be well-pleasing to God. For the blessed Paul, announcing the nearness of gladness like this, did not announce days, but the Lord, for whose sake we keep the feast, saying, ‘Christ, our Passover, is sacrificed;’ so that we all, contemplating the eternity of the Word, may draw near to do Him service.

What is with the ashes on Ash Wednesday?

Penitence. In some protestant churches, instead of palms, its lists of sins that are bured. Smearing the face with dirt is an old tradition for ascetism and penitence.

from the same as above, from 'David Mills':
“When you fast,” Jesus says to us in the Sermon on the Mount, “do not be like the hypocrites, with a sad countenance. For they disfigure their faces, that they may appear to men to be fasting. Truly, I say unto you, they have their reward. But you, when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face; that you appear not to men to be fasting, but to your Father who is in the secret place.”

So much, you might think, for the traditional imposition of ashes on Ash Wednesday, as practiced by many Western Christians since the early Middle Ages. In liturgical churches, the priest or pastor marks a small cross on your forehead with ashes, traditionally made by burning the palms from the previous year’s Palm Sunday. As he does so, he tells you that you are dust, and to dust you shall return.

This seems to be exactly the sort of thing Jesus rejected. After all, the point of smearing ashes on your forehead is to disfigure it in a way everyone else is bound to notice. But Jesus is referring to a private fast made public so that people would applaud. He is not referring to a public ritual, which by definition cannot be observed in secret and for observing which you earn no applause. Jesus himself observed the public feasts and fasts of his day.
So the imposition of ashes has a double meaning, one despairing, because it describes the reality of what we have made ourselves; the other hopeful, because it describes the new reality God has made for us. For the Christian, hope trumps despair. “In Adam all die” and “In Christ shall all be made alive” are both true, but Christ has conquered death.

But this is not a reason to feel good about yourself on Ash Wednesday. That would be to presume upon God’s good will and take the Lord’s death for granted. Ash Wednesday is a fast day given us to remember what we have done and to try to learn how much of the old Adam remains in us. And of course the more you see what Jesus did for you, the more you will want to face your sins, to track them down to the places they have hidden, drag them into the light, and with God’s help drive them away.

Is this a pagan observation?

The native americans would smear dirt on their faces when they were in mouring. Seems like a close enough resemblance to me to qaulify it as 'pagan', sure.

Here is your big chance to show me what you think you know.

Big chance? How is talking to you a 'big chance' at anything? This is a discussion board, we're all equals here, if you have something to say about lent, and its origins, how about actually saying it then?

[edit on 21-2-2005 by Nygdan]

So after all that running around in circles you acknowledge that lent in the gospels is found

Originally posted by NygdanNowhere, as far as I know.

Whereas you were just wanting to be contrary or just respond for the sake of responding:

Why'd the early christian community do this? Becuase the apostles did it when they were leading the apostolic church. If later church fathers didn't know why, well, then what of it?

So you don’t know either.

Christian Tradition, apparently of vague origins.

And again you don’t know.

The food restrictions on meat apply to other days, sometimes it even applied to any and every friday. Probably in part to mourn the death of christ and probably in part to deny that which is 'luxurious'; ascetism.

Since this does not say why they came about, once more you don’t know.

Re children

I am unfamiliar with any such differences.

So far the only to the point answer given.

Re Sunday and palms

Sunday has simply become the sabbath, the high holy day of the week, and thats also become the day that christ is re-vivified.

I didn’t ask how the Sabbath came to be, I asked about palms on that one Sunday, so again you don’t know.

On the importance to Athanasius you quote him speaking of Passover, very good, refer my earlier comment on lent including Jewish custom. Yet this is supposed to be about Jesus, so as you can see, you have made no headway relative to your original posts, or to Easter.

On Ash Wednesday

Penitence. In some protestant churches, instead of palms, its lists of sins that are bured. Smearing the face with dirt is an old tradition for ascetism and penitence.

And here is a pagan custom as I have stated, for nowhere does it explain why or what it has to do with Jesus, and from your quote: as practiced by many Western Christians since the early Middle Ages. nor does this reflect why: Ash Wednesday is a fast day given us to remember what we have done and to try to learn how much of the old Adam remains in us. Furthermore, this is but just one of many attempts to legitimize and find a reason for this practice. Here is another:

The origin of the custom of using ashes in religious ritual is lost in the mists of pre-history, but we find references to the practice in our own religious tradition in the Old Testament….Thomas Talley, an expert on the history of the liturgical year, says that the first clearly datable liturgy for Ash Wednesday that provides for sprinkling ashes is in the Romano-Germanic pontifical of 960. Before that time, ashes had been used as a sign of admission to the Order of Penitents. www.americancatholic.org...

and another:

Once the 40 days of Lent were established, the next development concerned how much fasting was to be done. In Jerusalem, for instance, people fasted for 40 days, Monday through Friday, but not on Saturday or Sunday, thereby making Lent last for eight weeks. In Rome and in the West, people fasted for six weeks, Monday through Saturday, thereby making Lent last for six weeks. Eventually, the practice prevailed of fasting for six days a week over the course of six weeks, and Ash Wednesday was instituted to bring the number of fast days before Easter to 40. www.catholiceducation.org...

My statement that Christians don’t know why they celebrate this still stands, doesn’t it?

Big chance? How is talking to you a 'big chance' at anything? This is a discussion board, we're all equals here, if you have something to say about lent, and its origins, how about actually saying it then?

Refer my first line in this post, and as you have read, I have said a lot, no one knows why this season is kept, or how it originated, but they just keep it anyway and observe same as one of the holiest times of the year. The Christian religion is supposed to be about adhering to Jesus, not about observing strange and unexplained rituals.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Whereas you were just wanting to be contrary or just respond for the sake of responding

Hey, guess what, I never said that its in the bible. Is that the point of your original post to demostrate that its not in the bible? Or are there possibly other considerations that can be discussed here? No one claims that lent is in the bible, so why pretend its a surprise that I say its not there?

So you don’t know either.

My answer is an answer. Its a traditional holiday, the origins of the holiday are perhaps lost. IOW, people do it because of tradition.

The Christian religion is supposed to be about adhering to Jesus, not about observing strange and unexplained rituals.

Jesus christ is that you whole point? That no one knows the origins of lent, outside of vague universal traditions?

Ok, great. Good job.

Originally posted by NygdanHey, guess what, I never said that its in the bible. Is that the point of your original post to demostrate that its not in the bible?

yes, and had you been diligent you would have noticed my saying this.

Or are there possibly other considerations that can be discussed here? No one claims that lent is in the bible, so why pretend its a surprise that I say its not there?

Where am I pretending it is a surprise? You express interpretation problems once more Nygdan.

So you don’t know either.

My answer is an answer. Its a traditional holiday, the origins of the holiday are perhaps lost. IOW, people do it because of tradition.

Yes yours is an answer only beacuse you replied, and it screams. You could have saved many posts by just admitting this.

Jesus christ is that you whole point? That no one knows the origins of lent, outside of vague universal traditions?

perhpas I shold issue Coles notes, do you know what they are? Yes that is correct once more, no one knows, but they blindly turn up en masse at church to celebrate this anyway. Such pagan traditions for a religious following who preaches to be one true faith renders the theology of same baseless.

Ok, great. Good job.

Thank you.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween
Such pagan traditions

Who says its a pagan tradition? I noted that the amerindians smear dirt on their faces when in mourning, and I agree that this might be a similar sentiment, but why state that there is a geneological relationship? If anything it might be a jewish tradition, which might be based on a pagan religion.

for a religious following who preaches to be one true faith

Catholicism does not preach that its the one true faith. Its part of the ecumencial movement and recognizes that there are mutliple paths to salvation.

renders the theology of same baseless.

That does not follow. Communion was practiced by the elusion mystery cults. Circumcision is also a non-christian thing. All sorts of stuff that christians do are also done outside of christianity, so how can that make it an invalid religion, especialyl when its admited that its not required by the faith, that its only something that some of its members do, ie a tradition?

Originally posted by NygdanWho says its a pagan tradition? I noted that the amerindians smear dirt on their faces when in mourning, and I agree that this might be a similar sentiment, but why state that there is a geneological relationship?...

This is not the first time you have distorted my words and presented them as having said something they did not. Yours is either a purposeful dishonesty or a comprehension issue. I do no appreciate the former, and am not on ATS to help you correct the latter.

Catholicism does not preach that its the one true faith.

Secondly, you are well advised to not be making emphatic statements unless you can emphatically support them, as that invites embarrassment upon yourself. This is from the Baltimore Catechism, one of many endorsed by the See.

L11-136 The Church is the congregation of all baptized persons united in the same true faith, the same sacrifice, and the same sacraments, under the authority of the Sovereign Pontiff and the bishops in communion with him. L12-152:7: The one true Church established by Christ is the Catholic Church. We know that the Catholic Church is the one true Church established by Christ because it alone has the marks of the true Church. By the marks of the Church we mean certain clear signs by which all men can recognize it as the true Church founded by Jesus Christ. The chief marks of the Church are four: It is one, holy, catholic or universal, and apostolic. The Catholic Church is one because all its members, according to the will of Christ, profess the same faith, have the same sacrifice and sacraments, and are united under one and the same visible head, the Pope. The Catholic Church is holy because it was founded by Jesus Christ,..

With that Nygdan, I can honestly say I have been stultified with your posts, and henceforth I care not to embarrass you further.


[edit on 2/25/05 by SomewhereinBetween]

Vatican II
The Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in these religions. She has a high regard for the manner of life and conduct, the precepts and teachings, which, although differing in many ways from her own teaching, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that truth which enlightens all men.

IOW you don't need to be a roman catholic to get into heaven. Apparently the people in the eastern orthodox church have nothing barring them at all, while other religions don't give the whole message but can give enough for salvation.


Dominus Iesus source of paraphrase

At least some religious truth is subjective: valid for some but not for others;
Concepts from other spiritual sources can be absorbed into Christianity "without regard for consistency, systematic connection, or compatibility with Christian truth;"
Scripture can be read and interpreted independently of church tradition.

[...]
The remaining Christian denominations which have not preserved the Apostolic succession. They are not "churches in the proper sense." However, their members are "incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church."
[...]
Salvation is accessible to those who are not members of the "Church" -- (i.e. not Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox Christians). It comes through grace which originates with Christ and "enlightens them in a way which is accommodated to their spiritual and material situation."

Originally posted by LadyV
I'm still confused as to why lent is adhered to. It's not ordered by by god, Jesus, or the bible....

Hi Lady V....
Lent was and is part of the New and Old Testament beleifs.......first establishe by God Himself in the garden of Eden......then the Old Prophets and Kings and pious people all observed Fasting....

quote//////The history of the development of lent as a religious-moral struggle of man's obedience to God through abstinence from food reaches back to the law given by God even in the Garden of Eden to our ancestor, Adam
"And the Lord God commanded the man,
saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it" (Gen 2:16-17). So lent is as ancient as man himself.....

Yet as we read in the book of Genesis,
our ancestor Adam violated this law on abstinence given by God through the sin of disobedience, which is called the original sin.
Through original sin, the first man introduced corruption into his divine nature, expressed through a tendency towards sin rather than towards good.


In the Old Testament, the holy Prophets of God Moses and Elias both fasted for forty days, thereby becoming worthy to converse with Christ on Mount Tabor (Ex. 34:28; Matth. 17:3).
Prophet Daniel ate no food for 3 weeks (Dan. 10:2-3)
and Ezra for 7 days (Ezr. 8:21-23).
King David prayed and fasted and received through the Prophet Nathan forgiveness for his sins from God (2 Sam. 12:16-20).
The pious Judean woman Judith fasted "all the days of her widowhood," except except on sabbath eves and sabbaths, new moon eves and new moons, feastdays and holidays (Judith 8:6).
Ninevites prayed and fasted "the greatest of them even to the least of them" and turned away God's wrath for their great sins (Jonah 3:5-10).
The Israelites fasted by God's will during the terrible desolation from the palmerworm and the locust (Joel 1:14, 2:12-15).
In order to please God, the Israelites fasted on the 4th, 5th, 7th and 10th months, as we see from the book of the Prophet Zachariah (Zach. 8:19).

On the cusp of the Old and New Testaments,
we see the example of a great fasting ascetic in the person of John the Baptist (Mark 1:6),
and the 84-year-old Prophetess Anna: "And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phan'u-el, of the tribe of Asher: she was of a great age, and had lived with a husband seven years from her virginity, and she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day" (Luke 2:36-37). .

And there is more on fasting in the New Testament...


Christ equated fasting with prayer as a weapon in the struggle against the temptations of the devils, saying "Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting" (Matthew 17:21).

Following the example set by the Savior, the holy apostles and other righteous persons of the New Testaments sanctified fasting through their own lives and teachings.

Holy Apostle Paul wrote of his labors, that he was constantly "in weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness" (II Corinthians 11:27), and, urging others to fast, said of himself: "[I]n stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labors, in watchings, in fastings" (II Corinthians 6:5).

"Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting." (Matthew 17:21)
This means that prayer and fasting is an essential part to being a true Christian....
www.orthodox.net...
And more from here....
www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws...

helen.....

Originally posted by helen670

Lent was and is part of the New and Old Testament beleifs.......first establishe by God Himself in the garden of Eden......then the Old Prophets and Kings and pious people all observed Fasting....

Only by extreme imagination can one correlate Lent or even the absurdity of Jesus to any written words in the OT books, especially so when it comes to something like lent. I recognize that both the OT and NT are pagan, but by God, even this is a stretch.

Originally posted by SomewhereinBetween

Originally posted by helen670

Lent was and is part of the New and Old Testament beleifs.......first establishe by God Himself in the garden of Eden......then the Old Prophets and Kings and pious people all observed Fasting....

Only by extreme imagination can one correlate Lent or even the absurdity of Jesus to any written words in the OT books, especially so when it comes to something like lent. I recognize that both the OT and NT are pagan, but by God, even this is a stretch.

Hi
I wansn't going to answer you but........
Who's ''extreme imagination'' may that be?

If one has faith there is no need for extreme imaginations .... faith alone is good....

I just cannot see where you get the idea that the Old Testament and the New Testament are of ''Pagan'' origin?
The Bible itself speaks of God ........
If that solely is your honest and true opinion then I can understand........

Take care.
Christ is Risen
helen...

Originally posted by helen670
Who's ''extreme imagination'' may that be?

Yours.

If one has faith there is no need for extreme imaginations .... faith alone is good....

Faith requires imagination and a great deal of hoping that you err on the correct side. We all have faith of some sort, some of us have faith not because of what we are told we must believe but because we just do.

I just cannot see where you get the idea that the Old Testament and the New Testament are of ''Pagan'' origin?

I can repeat all of my posts in this regard, or you can check my posts for the pertinent information, but for this particular response, I will just respond by saying, I just do not see where you think, or more to the point, where faith based on unsubstantiated writings and preachings of other humans, which translates into gambling on the human fallibility of others, would lead you to believe that it is not.

The Bible itself speaks of God ........

So it does, as do all of the Egyptian texts older than your Bible which speaks to their plethora of Gods, including that which you call your own. Neither of them unfortunately is privy to lie detector tests.

If that solely is your honest and true opinion then I can understand........

It is, I cannot say that I understand yours.

Christ is Risen

As you stand on your piece of soil and think of risen, consider that your up is down to the person directly opposite to you on the other side of the earth.

I wansn't going to answer you but........

But you felt compelled to. Would you have been as reluctant and non-committal to give an answer to the man roaming about your village 2,000 years ago calling your husband, brothers and sons to a war they could not win, or as willing as you are today to place same in the hands of his faith teachings?

Hi Somewhere...

So, how are you?
well........ I hope.

Christ is Risen....This is said for 40 days after Pascha///For 4o days Christ stayed with His Disciples on earth...

Quote///// At His death,
Christ broke down the barrier of sin.
But there was one barrier left: death itself.
This Christ broke down at His Resurrection.
As in Adam all die,
writes St. Paul, so in Christ shall all be made alive.
But every man according to his order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at His coming (I Cor. 15:22–23).
Through Christ's Resurrection, all mankind has been made subject to future resurrection: physical, bodily resurrection.
Those who receive Christ's gift of salvation are resurrected unto eternal life, as He says; while those who reject it are resurrected unto damnation (cf. John 5:29). Once again, this is because human nature is one. St. Paul affirms: For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead (I Cor. 15:21).

My faith is my own and no one has simply told me to beleive what I beleive in.....and no, faith does not come in books......For informing others of things I did not know myself, I have come to understand and have more faith in what I beleive........
Take care/
and God bless you.....
helen..

or even the absurdity of Jesus to any written words in the OT books,

Daniel 3:25


==========

Lent

The Origin of Lent

According to Johannes Cassianus, who wrote in the fifth century, “Howbeit you should know, that as long as the primitive church retained its perfection unbroken, this observance of Lent did not exist” (First Conference Abbot Theonas, chapter 30). There is neither biblical nor historical record of Christ, the apostles or the early Church participating in the Lenten season.

Since there is no instruction to observe Lent in the Bible, where did it come from? A forty-day abstinence period was anciently observed in honor of the pagan gods Osiris, Adonis and Tammuz (John Landseer, Sabaean Researches, pp. 111, 112). Alexander Hislops, The Two Babylons, p. 104-105, says this of the origin of Lent: “The forty days abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess. Such a Lent of forty days, in the spring of the year, is still observed by the Yezidis or Pagan Devil-worshippers of Koordistan, who have inherited it from their early masters, the Babylonians. Such a Lent of forty days was held in spring by the Pagan Mexicans…Such a Lent of forty days was observed in Egypt…”

The origin of Lent is Babylon.
Rome has many if not all of the Babylonian traditions and images.

This is why I continually try to get people to see the difference between Rome and the bible.