Faith-Based Dieting
So says Reverend Steve Reynolds who has started a fitne... er, weight loss program at his church called - ready? - Bod4God. Reynolds is a former fattie. Here's how it's different:
Unlike Weight Watchers and other mainstream diet programs, religion-based plans such as Weigh Down and First Place use biblical teachings to show followers that their bodies are temples that belong to God and are intended to glorify God and that gluttony is a sin.
Outside of the god talk, how exactly is that different than Weight Watchers? And wait, you guys? Weight Watchers is a lifestyle, not a diet!
Just like these other lifest... er, diets, there's money involved. Bod4God costs $50 and another called First Place costs $80; these costs contribute to the whopping $64 billion diet industry.
The article tries to pin fat on religion, too, suggesting that Baptists and fundamentalists are fatter because moderation isn't really preached in those circles.
Interestingly, Reynolds said that no one had a problem with him being fat.
When he was 340 pounds, no one seemed bothered by his weight, Reynolds said. "In my mind, something's wrong with that picture," said Reynolds, who described ice cream as his "drug of choice" to cope with stress. "I was sinning against the Lord in this area—I was not allowing him to control me."
These programs are very much in the "love the sinner, hate the sin" vein. Honestly, I think these should be an affront to members of religions that are allowing these programs to happen. It's exploitative and manipulative.
Paul Campos Examines The Fear of Fat | Quick Hits
Posted by paul on February 28, 2008
I expect that at some point in this weight loss program participants are expected to go into the wilderness and fast for 40 days and 40 nights? I mean, 'cause that's what Jesus did.
I've got to love their "success" numbers--300 people participated losing 2000 lbs.? At 6.7 lbs. per person, they've done...nothing about any so-called "obesity epidemic."
Why do I have a feeling that if you took the same article and replaced references to fat with references to homosexuality, anyone would consider it an object of ridicule?
You know, Baptists aren't supposed to drink or dance either, so you know. Take this with a grain of salt. That said, the non-denom evangelical church I attended also had a weight loss program based on scripture. I didn't participate because I thought it was BS. Aside from the whole thing just setting fat people up for more self-hatred, it also sets up Christians for the same thing. The ones who won't find success in the program will likely be derided for a lack of faith, which is enough to fuck up a Christian for a good long time (kind of like asking them how they know for sure they're going to Heaven...yeah...but are you REALLY sure? How do you KNOW?). Also, he wasn't allowing God to control him? What happened to free will? Or is this an anti-free will church? Yeesh.
My friend went on one of these religious diets. She lost 23 lbs, but couldn't lose anymore. She hit her plateau, and is a size 22/24. She does not eat the stereotypical foods fat-haters imagine she and the rest of us do, but is still big. So please don't tell me that fat is always a result of gluttony.
Isn't the basic concept of Christianity supposed to be love, acceptance, and tolerance? I sincerely doubt God cares about how fat we get. This is just an attempt for a church to bilk money out of its members. How about Love Your Bod 4 God instead?
So, what happens when these people inevitably gain the weight they lost back and more within five years - as so many dieters are apt to do. Is their name crossed off the VIP list at heaven's gates?
Religion-based diets are especially heinous, because it exploits something, that for many people, is foundational to their very belief system and existence. If they're unable to lose the weight and keep it off, they think they are sinful and blasphemous. I think it would behoove the Reynolds and his flock to focus on some of Christ's other preachings - you know, the whole "love your neighbor" bit.
Oh, yes. The article cites lower obesity rates amongst such religions like Buddhism, because they teach moderation. I am Buddhist, I eat in moderation and I'm still fat.
Oh, yes. The article cites lower obesity rates amongst such religions like Buddhism, because they teach moderation.
Not because a large percentage of Buddhists are Asian??
"Lord, let my words today be sweet...For I may have to eat them tomorrow"
And by the way, any statue I've seen of Buddha shows he was no skinny mini!
"Lord, let my words today be sweet...For I may have to eat them tomorrow"
NOT REFINED SUGAR?!
Zero isn't a size, it's a warning sign. - Carson Kressley
Shades of Gwen Shanklin and the cult that is the Weigh Down Workshop. Thank you, but no thank you. Last time I checked, the Bible said we were made in the image of God, and that includes the fatties.
Yeah, I was raised Baptist, and there wasn't preaching about moderation only because they were too busy preaching about deprivation (no drinking, no dancing, no sex, no divorce, no eating outside of Sunday fellowship, no music outside church choir, no spending money outside of tithing, etc.). I was never really a good Baptist, that's for sure.
I've always thought that dieting was kind of like a religion. This takes it to a new (scarier) level.
It's ironic that with all the over-consumption that goes on in our culture, some people of faith choose to focus on body size. They assume that a larger than average body - which is in reality determined mostly by genes - equals over-consumption.
Perhaps instead, they should be critical of people who drive large, energy inefficient vehicles 100+ miles a day to work and back with one person on board, or people who live in unnecessarily large houses that need to be heated, air conditioned, and furnished. What about people who are constantly buying new consumer items that they don't really need, and throwing things away instead of putting a little effort into fixing them? What about people who replace their entire wardrobe every year? Now, that's gluttony. But, as long as those people are rich and thin, then they're virtuous. They've earned it. It's just evidence of God's favor.
Seriously, it doesn't surprise me. Body puritanism meets the classic type. The weight loss religion meets big daddy Christianity.
Well, at least they're honest about moralizing weight. The rest of the world does it and denies they think "thinner is superior" - while living by that moral belief system.
That being said, I agree with what someone said above: make this about homosexuals and not fatties, and people would be in an uproar. "Jesus wasn't fat" also doesn't make much sense, even within their Christian worldview: Jesus supposedly starved, suffered, and was crucified to allegedly save us from similar fates, not to deliver us into them.
My first reaction to this story was, “You’ve got to be kidding me. But the truth is that this isn’t surprising at all. Fat hatred has always had a large component of supposed morality to it, so it’s logical that organized religion would latch onto it.
The fatal flaw in this logic is this: if God didn’t want us to be fat, why did he create our bodies to be so gosh-darned flexible?
This pastor is, obviously, presuming that body weight is an outward manifestation of self-indulgence or gluttony. And he no doubt believes that diets are useful and helpful and lead to reduced body sizes, and that a smaller body size is, in itself, a good thing.
These are hardly viewpoints limited to Christians. I might point out that nearly all doctors would agree with him. Though some physicians might say that it's a bit more complicated than calories in vs. calories expended, doctors recommend diets to fat people all day long, every day.
And the U.S. government certainly agrees with him. Even nearly all fat people agree with him. Practically everybody in the country, and possibly the world, agrees with this pastor about why fat people are fat.
It is easy to forget, in SA, how far out of the mainstream our opinions are, and to blame people for simply believing and acting on what nearly everybody believes to be true. This is not reasonable, and it's not helpful.
Addressing the mistaken beliefs -- slowly, patiently, and systematically, and with an eye to changing minds -- will be a great deal more useful to SA than caricatures and accusations of bad faith. Why should anybody pay any attention to us if that's what we do? I wouldn't.
Excellent point, catrandom! Have you joined COFRA yet?
One of the women cited in the article remarked on she never realized that eating fast food was "sinful" before she signed up for the program. The concept of "good" foods and "bad" foods are hallmarks of eating disordered behavior. What does this say of a program who labels foods not only as "bad" foods, but as "sinful" foods? I bet this kind of rhetoric would have really resonated with folks like Catherine of Siena (who starved herself to death in the name of religious asceticism).
Slow patient and systematic explanations, that sounds like an excellent idea, I wonder why none of us thought of that.
Liz Curtis Higgs, in her book One Size Fits All...And Other Fables (a terrific size-acceptance book by a Christian publisher that is, sadly, out of print, although I think Higgs sells an anthology of her work independently now that contains portions of it) talked about having founded and run such a program at her own church while still in the honeymoon period of her Weight Watchers "success," called "My Will Surrendered to God's Power," before "seeing the light" and realizing that such programs "simply [were] not Biblical." (She explains why beautifully in this book, which is why I wish all these assclowns who run programs like this would be forced to read it. But just for starters, gluttony is considered "sinful" not because it makes you fat, but because it makes you mentally foggy and sluggish, like when you eat a giant meal at Thanksgiving, which is something that happens to everyone regardless of weight.) She said such programs were quite common then -- one she mentioned was called "More of Jesus, Less of Me" -- and this would have been a good 20 years ago.
Your body is a temple? And so if you are fat, you should starve it?
If people treated their temples/churches the way they are expected to treat their bodies when they are fat, I suspect the spiritual leaders that are paid through contributions to said temples/churches would have a problem with it.
Thanks, kelly_cs -- not yet, since I'm not 100 percent sure I'm an activist, but I'm very much considering it.
(And wriggle99 -- I am sorry I came off so righteous, now that I read it over, though I did mean what I said. It's just that some things said here seemed a bit unfair, to my eye, in the larger and enormously fatphobic context.)
Fair play to you catrandom, there are strong forces acting on society but collusion cannot be denied people want to think of us as intrisically morally flawed. And think about what can happen when your body represents sin in a religious context.
Sad, but nothing new. Don Colbert's "What Would Jesus Eat" diet has been around forever and was a big deal even in secular Britain when it came out. And I know of several 'Christians' who fiercely believe that you have a responsibility to take care of the body God gave you, which of course includes not allowing it to become fat.
Obesity has become the fifth horseman of the apocalypse; preventing it a new religion, complete with commandments, doctrine, temples and sacred texts. In fact I'm surprised it's taken the obesity industry so long to realise that organised religion can be co-opted as a natural ally. What greater original sin for the perpetually guilty to have to atone for than morbid obesity?
Quite frankly if the Pearly Gates are now to be fitted with width restrictors and Saint Peter issued with a scale and a tape measure I'm more convinced than ever I made the right choice to be atheist. Any deity that would condemn a large proportion of those supposedly created in his/her own image to damnation on the basis of their size is not one I want to believe exists.
I can't count the number of times that some pastor would quote that whole passage about the body being a temple, to pause, glaring pointedly over his Bible at me.
Jackass.
You can find me at:
http://fatchic.dianarajchel.com
http://magickalrealism.etsy.com
I wrote and delivered a sermon at a local UU church here on the topic of "thin privilege." My argument was that the UU church needs to take into account thin privilege as one of the many privileges that goes against its principle to respect the inherent worth and dignity of each person. The sermon went over like a lead balloon, I think, because the so-called humanists, who should really be called followers of science, could not accept that it was not "unhealthy." The most they could accept is that, of course, people shouldn't throw things at them and that, if they were treated better, they might feel more comfortable at the health clubs (and would thus lose weight). These are good people for the most part, but they do find it hard to accept the idea that fat/thin matter, and certainly they would find it difficult to see how they have privilege from their thin bodies. Because one person loved the sermon and said it was well-written, I submitted it to the national UU magazine, but it was rejected with no comments. I don't want to criticize the UU church since I like a lot about them, but it is interesting that you can find on their website (unofficial) documents that use fat as a synonym for exploitor (or overconsumer), and while you can find discussions of all sorts of other prejudice, you can find none on weight-prejudice (at least last time I checked). I'm sure a HAES approach would work better with many UUs, but I just don't care to give into the healthism that is so rampant in our society. I hope more people will begin to approach these groups with HAES and then maybe eventually they will be more able to think of the power relations related to body size.
I go to a UU church and a couple weeks ago the minister used a reading about our consumerist culture in which obesity was used to illustrate over consumption and the depletion of the earth's resources. It's not new. I'm always hearing the the "obesity epidemic" cited as proof American culture is lazy and gluttonous. I don't know what you know about the UU church, but their first principle is a belief in the "inherent worth and dignity of every person". Unless you're fat, I guess. Because I sure wasn't feeling very valued while she read that. I hang my clothes to dry, walk to the grocery store, participate in a cow share that helps support a local farmer, buy my daughter mostly used clothes- but I get to be the personification of what's wrong with America and humanity's destruction of the environment based soley on my body size. This particular church has quite a few fat people and I wondered how the thin people in the church felt about it. Did they not notice because they aren't fat? Did they feel bad for the fat person sitting next to them? Or were they hoping all us fatties were taking the hint?
The UU church is made up of people from many different faiths as well as secular humanists. There's no expectation of a belief in a higher power. I guess that doesn't make body size any less of a moral issue for some them.
Wow, it's stuff like this that makes me realize why I renounced Christianity and became an atheist.
That happened at a UU church? WTF? I'd hope that most would be very very much in support of fat rights.
Wow, Ivy! You're obviously a better person than I am. I would have ostentatiously gotten up and walked down the center aisle and out on that particular sermon and never darkened the church's door again.
I was sitting in the middle of the very front row directly in front of the minister. I considered walking out, but up until then, I'd always really liked this minister. So instead I sat there fuming, not laughing at her jokes and staring at her until the last word of her sermon and then I walked out before the singing and hand holding and being sent off with messages of love. I've been composing letters to her in my head about her bigotry ever since, but I know I'll probably never have the nerve to send one. I can't help but feel all she'll see is a fat woman in denial.
catrandom, I realized a few weeks ago that just living my life as if I deserve good things no matter how fat I am is an act of activism, as is reading and posting on this blog. I didn't really consider myself an 'activist' until that realization, so don't sweat it if the label doesn't quite fit you. When you're ready, we'd love to have you or any other fat-accepting folks as members of COFRA, even if you're not ready to be 'activists' just yet.
Junkfood science reported recently on another religion-related diet for the African-American community.
Yes, gluttony is a sin. So? What's that got to do with being fat? And did someone give him a freaking crystal ball so he knows what size Jesus was? We know nothing of his looks - except that he probably looked Israeli and his hair was likely quite curly ("like lamb's wool" - though that might have been a metaphor.) I call BS on the whole thing as a Christian and it looks like I have a whole new front on which to fight.
The only thing I have to be a bit careful of as a Christian is the self-love, and that isn't exactly a problem - it's hard enough just to not hate yourself and to accept yourself to start worrying about getting vain and proud. God made me like I am, and he gives me breath and life - isn't that enough? Jeesh, these people are some of the worst.
By the way, *feasting* is a huge deal in the bible. When you serve the *best* you serve the *fatted* calf. The *fat of the land* is a good thing. Sorry, cab's here, more later.
Zero isn't a size, it's a warning sign. - Carson Kressley
And they have the nerve to put "Fitness" in the link.
I used to be hard on Catholics for what they did to homosexuals, and now my denomination is WORSE.
(SIGH)..... "Evangelicals" in a baptist church...
I'm Neopagan, and one line from a text called "The Charge of the Goddess" written by a woman named Doreen Valiente goes like this: "Let My worship be in the heart that rejoices, for behold, all acts of love and pleasure are My rituals." I usually take pleasure in eating, personally.
**************
"A diet counselor once told me that all overweight people are angry with their mothers and channel their frustrations into overeating. So I guess that means all thin people are happy, calm, and have resolved their Oedipal entanglements."
Sarahbear, it's supposed to be so for Christians too - eating and drinking are to be enjoyed and to be given thanks for at all times.
Zero isn't a size, it's a warning sign. - Carson Kressley
If that had happened in a church I went to, I don't think I could have stood it. I would have said, "Do we believe in the worth and dignity of every person, or only that of thin people? Because I'm fat and I am completely offended that you would cast me as wasting resources just based on my body size." (Typically UU churches are smaller and people sit in a circle around the minister, so you'd better believe they'd hear something like that.) Yeah, you're not supposed to interrupt a sermon. I'd probably be kicked out and invited never to return. But there's no excuse for that shit. It's completely hateful, especially in an environment where everyone is supposed to feel safe.
I have a missionary friend who once said there is a good reason that the Bible doesn't say much about what Jesus looked like, and this sort of thing is exactly why.
Jesus may have been a pretty amazing person, but there's plenty about him that no one who doesn't want to go out in a blaze of glory at the age of 33 should try to imitate. He had terrible manners - does that mean we should all cultivate terrible manners? He did not care a whole lot about the concept of the nuclear family - not something I can see the Baptist Church getting behind. He wasn't at all interested in procreation, apparently. Maybe we should all stop having babies (and sex) so we can be more like Jesus.
Also, as others have pointed out here, Jesus cared very little about his health or his body and seemed to think of it mostly as a vehicle for experiencing the joys and suffering of humanity. If Jesus did get fat, I seriously doubt he would have bothered to do anything about it. In the time and place Jesus lived in, it was easy to starve if you didn't work really, really hard not to - hence, probably-skinny Jesus. Jesus got thin *because* he did not care about his bodily health.
Jesus was always getting testy with people for getting all worked up over side issues and losing sight of what's really important. Based on Biblical evidence, isn't it more likely he would be furious with someone for wasting their energy and attention on the size of their ass? After all, when Martha was bustling around and Mary was sitting listening to Jesus teach, he actually chastised Martha and praised Mary for having made the better choice. I have a hard time imagining him then going on to say "but Mary, you had better go out and do some squat-thrusts after I'm done talking so you don't get too buttery in the hindquarters."
>>Based on Biblical evidence, isn't it more likely he would be furious with someone for wasting their energy and attention on the size of their ass?
Absolutely and well put!
As a practicing Christian I find that statement "Jesus was not obese" to be so stupid and shallow and disrespectful.
And the scriptures concerning our bodies being the temple were written concerning sexual purity - not losing weight!!! And as DeeLeigh wrote above, gluttony is not just about eating - there are many ways to be gluttonous.
But as always the fault is on food and fatties.
This is just the same old regurgitated diet crap we hear day in day out. Let's see what the results of this program will be in five years. Ha! I'll bet we already know.
*kicks and screams*
I could go on and on about how Jesus and fat hatred don't go together...but I need to calm down first.
This is just too much! It’s proof positive that food really IS morality for so many people, and this just disgusts me. Furthermore, it’s not even anything new. Ever hear of the book “Help, Lord! The devil Wants Me Fat”?
Here comes a long, rant, folks. The situation is so bad, I could not think of any way to address it other than a point-by-point rebuttal.
“Jesus Christ was not obese.” REALLY? How would you know?
“…pointing to a passage that descirbes Jesus walking 40 miles in one day.”
Because, of course, a person who gets that much activity cannot POSSIBLY be fat. Fat people are lazy. I see.
“Bodies…are intended to glorify God and that gluttony is a sin.”
OK. First, what is it about a fat body that DOESN’T glorify God? Or are we to believe God is as shallow as people when it comes to concepts of glory and beauty? This guy is enshrining vanity as a virtue!
Second, what about people who, from a Christian standpoint, can be said to be abusing their bodies in a way that doesn’t glorify God, like, um, I dunno, STARVING it, even though God has blessed you with enough to eat?
Third, define gluttony. If you mean eating to excess, there’s plenty of thin gluttons — while NOT all fat people are gluttonous. Does God give thin people a pass on gluttony? What if you define gluttony like I do: A surfeit of ANYTHING , that is sought after and indulged AT THE EXPENSE OF THE THINGS IN LIFE THAT MATTER? Then even more people are “gluttons.”
Another thing that irritates me is he professes to be concerned with health and spirituality…yet he charges people for the program. I read the Bible daily, and I’m pretty sure Jesus did not charge people a fee for miracle, or institute a per-plate fee at the miracle of the loaves and fishes (no plates either, of course!) I’m equally confident Jesus did not turn anyone away from meals if they were fat, with a stern warning about gluttony. Thus, in this case, the answer to “What Would Jesus Do?” is: Not what this dude is doing.
Oh, and because of the fee, plus the insistence that Bod4God is about health, it’s simply untrue that this program is any “different” from commercial diets!
Skipping down: “I didn’t think what I was doing was sinful. Going to McDonalds was getting a hot meal.” Gaaaa! Before this crazy train came along on got her on board, this woman’s attitude toward food was HEALTHY! Because going to McDonalds IS getting a hot meal and it ISN’T sinful! To borrow from another BFB’er: headdesk! headdesk!
This of course begs a classic question, one we pose often, but the mainstream usually misses: Is going to McDonalds NOT a sin for thin people? Also, is it not possible to order a low-cal, low-fat meal at Mickey Ds, if that’s what you want?
The second woman was even sadder, IMO. She said “she doesn’t drink or smoke and, as a single woman, abstains from sex, but she knows she has a problem with overeating.”
Who told her she did? Further, if a competent health professional were assessing her based on the above statements, he/she would be mostly delighted because Cassandra’s lifestyle is pretty damn healthy, even if it cannot be considered “fun.”
And, as a (backslidden) Baptist myself, the “explanation” about the supposedly higher rates of obesity among the denomination is just plain dumb. I get his reasoning, but it’s stupid. We are not channeling some innate desire to engage in “naughty” behavior into eating. We are not compensating for not being "allowed" to smoke and drink (although you'll find plenty of Baptists who do!) Besides, you’d think he’d be applauding us for NOT smoking or drinking, both of which are far harder on the body than is being fat, and both of which would mar the “temple” that is the body.
Mark DeHaven is paraphrased pointing out the long-term effectiveness of Reynolds' approach isn’t known. This, too, is just like a regular diet, to a degree. However, we do know the long-term effectiveness of those. There is none.
This whole idea is totally offensive, from the point of view of a fat activist, and just mind-blowing from the point of view of a practicing Christian. Reminds me of an old hymn: “When Jesus said ‘whosoever,’ He included me too.”
Maybe Reynolds ought to sing that one a little more.
Thank you Rebelle. Thank you very very much. We don't have an applause smiley, but here's one at ya' anyway
Zero isn't a size, it's a warning sign. - Carson Kressley
I wish someone would do one of these "religious diets" only to switch it up and indoctrinate the participants into HAES and self-love... maybe people would get it then. until then i've got to make a "Jesus loves the size of my heart, not the size of my ass" t-shirt.
I get that religious institutions can offer a lot of support and help address larger issues whithin a community, but why can't they just offer (because I believe the avg american diet is pretty junky and they dont offer them in school anymore) cooking classes and emotionally safe/respectful exercise/dance/walking groups, meditation, etc. And if consumerism is seen as a problem, do media literacy workshops, encourage parishoners to turn off the tv. I literally had a friend tell me "you know, if i didn't watch tv, I'd be ok with myself" and her issue was her hair!
Rachel...I'd like to say that this...this bullshit...has *nothing* to do with the bible. There is no reason to be thrilled about giving it up and embracing atheism just because some idiots do this kind of shit.
I had a friend (yes, had, not have) who started going on and on about joining a gym and dieting, blah blah - she called it "temple care." TEMPLE CARE? Fuck her. Fuck that. Fuck the whole idea. Jesus DID walk a bazillion miles - and he ate like a very sensible person (grilled fish, bread, etc.) but his body size? Who KNOWS? Not you. Not I. He might have been a big fat fatty Mcfatty. It didn't matter. His looks were not the issue. Not remotely. If they were, we'd know more about them. And even if they were, if wouldn't matter if he were thin. Nowhere in scripture is fat denounced - gluttony is, yes - and gluttony doesn't mean just eating too much and it has nothing to do with fat anyway. (Except in some cases which may involve BED and so forth - whole other issue.) Just like people who forbid alcohol because the bible is against drunkenness - when DUH Jesus himSELF made water into the best wine at the whole wedding. Jeesh.
Zero isn't a size, it's a warning sign. - Carson Kressley
"she called it "temple care." "
That must be one of the top-five screwed-up phrases I ever met. Honestly, if someone told me they were doing temple care, I'd think they volunteered to clean the church they attend. How on earth did she come up with such a ludicrous metaphor for dieting?
The body is the temple I guess? Baby seal? She was a VERY strange girl and she got even stranger as an adult. That's all I can say for sure lol. And...er...I'm all for difference and accepting people as they are, but in this case it was not strange in a good way. She likened me to the Mary Magdalene to her Jesus one too many times and eventually I was sick of her suuuuuuperiority.
Temple care lol.
Zero isn't a size, it's a warning sign. - Carson Kressley
As a fat person and as a Christian, this repulses me.
It incenses me to read that because people who claim Christianity have oppressed and victimized others in their own pitiful attempt to claim pious superiority (completely overlooking the fact that according to the bible we are all sinners to the exact same degree), some people find the bible and its message distasteful. The message that people like that are sending is hurtful, and I can’t blame anyone who would not want to hear from the source if his self-appointed spokespeople are mean, haughty, holier-than-thou, and condemning. But it hurts me so much because that message IS NOT FROM THE BIBLE. It is a skewed interpretation of a few sentences coupled with a blatant disregard for the theme of the entire body of work in which those phrases are contained.
First of all, God created a myriad of food choices, with and endless variety of flavors, textures, tastes, smells, and colors. Eating was created to be an exquisite sensory experience; logic tells me that he chose to provide a delightful abundance because we were meant to enjoy food – otherwise, wouldn’t he just sustain our bodies with manna, like he did the Israelites in the wilderness? But logic alone is never good enough when we’re talking about the big, bad F word, so forgive me for quoting at length from the very book they claim to base this shaming approach on…
While a cursory search of my electronic bible returned over 150 results for the word ‘haughty’ and its closest cousins (think preachy dieters), there are only four references to gluttony: Deuteronomy 21:20, Proverbs 23:21, Matthew 11:19, and Luke 7:34. Two of those four are actually accounts of the Pharisees (think Meme Roth) accusing Jesus of gluttony as a means of discrediting him. The other two merely refer to the sin of gluttony without giving a definition, or any sort of context by which to extrapolate meaning for the term.
According to an online biblical dictionary, “the Hebrew word ‘zolel’…[from which gluttony is translated] means "to shake out," "to squander;" and hence one who is prodigal, who wastes his means by indulgence.” So, in other words, there’s nothing wrong with enjoying a fine meal, every day, even (see Prov 15:15 below); the point is not to overdo it – to the point of wasting one’s entire means on indulgences of the food kind.
BUT NOTICE, there is NO reference to body size. There is NOTHING in the bible that condemns being fat. I’ve been studying it intently for ten years, I’ve read it through and through many times, I read it every single day, and I know this to be true, because as a fat person, I would definitely have noticed if God had a problem with my body size. Yes, gluttony is condemned; it is an action, not a body type – gluttons come in all shapes and sizes. And yes, gluttony comes in many forms – as have been mentioned, there are the gas-guzzling SUVs, the throw-away consumer goods, the list is quite long, and the vice is the same, even if the means of indulging that exist now didn’t exist when Jesus was walking the earth.
Here’s what the bible bothers to mention about exercise: 1 Timothy 4:8: “For bodily training is beneficial for a little; but godly devotion is beneficial for all things, as it holds promise of the life now and that which is to come.” In other words, by all means, do exercise, but fitness is at best an extremely distant second to doing God’s will. And since those two ideas are clearly separated here, obviously fitness is not a key feature of God’s plan for us – it’s a semi-moderately worthy distraction from our real purpose.
And it is extremely interesting to note the bible’s depiction of feasting:
Matthew 22:2: “The kingdom of the heavens has become like a man, a king, that made a marriage feast for his son.” So, the kingdom of heaven – the epitome of holiness – is compared to a feast? Would Jesus (the one making this comparison) compare God’s kingdom to a nest of debauchery, which a marriage feast would surely amount to if eating a big meal = gluttony?
John 2:1 – 4: “Now on the third day a marriage feast took place in Ca´na of Gal´i·lee, and the mother of Jesus was there. Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the marriage feast. When the wine ran short the mother of Jesus said to him: “They have no wine.” But Jesus said to her…” So Jesus, the sinless example for Christians to follow, was present and partaking at a marriage feast.
Proverbs 15:15: “All the days of the afflicted one are bad; but the one that is good at heart [has] a feast constantly.” So, the reward for being good is a constant feast – not a slim figure. I find this one particularly relevant.
Luke 14:1, 7-15: “And on an occasion when he went into the house of a certain one of the rulers of the Pharisees on the sabbath to eat a meal, they were closely watching him…He then went on to tell the invited men an illustration, as he marked how they were choosing the most prominent places for themselves, saying to them: “When you are invited by someone to a marriage feast, do not lie down in the most prominent place. Perhaps someone more distinguished than you may at the time have been invited by him, and he that invited you and him will come and say to you, ‘Let this man have the place.’ And then you will start off with shame to occupy the lowest place. But when you are invited, go and recline in the lowest place, that when the man that has invited you comes he will say to you, ‘Friend, go on up higher.’ Then you will have honor in front of all your fellow guests. For everyone that exalts himself will be humbled and he that humbles himself will be exalted.” Next he proceeded to say also to the man that invited him: “When you spread a dinner or evening meal, do not call your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors. Perhaps sometime they might also invite you in return and it would become a repayment to you. But when you spread a feast, invite poor people, crippled, lame, blind; and you will be happy, because they have nothing with which to repay you. For you will be repaid in the resurrection of the righteous ones.” On hearing these things a certain one of the fellow guests said to him: “Happy is he who eats bread in the kingdom of God.” ” So, using the theme of feasting to illustrate crucial points about a godly way of life, Jesus points out that we must be humble and charitable, but neglects to mention that we shouldn’t enjoy large quantities of food – considering that a story about a feast would be the perfect theme through which to expound upon the evils of said feasting, I find that quite telling….also, people who eat bread are happy.
What it comes down to, IMO, is this: throughout the centuries since the bible was written, people have twisted its words to fit whatever agenda they have, with utter disregard for its actual meaning and purpose, and to the direct detriment of others. It pains me to know that many people equate the twisted and selfish human interpretations of the bible with the God the actual text aims to explain, because those hateful, hurtful representations couldn’t be further from the truth.
The opposite of love is apathy. -- Windy
If we get any further into arguing about religion, we'll be slipping down a slippery slope that will make some of us into fervent enemies, just when we need to work together on our MUTUAL issues. Please?
As I read the posts, I keep thinking that the preacher, along with most people we hear about, is making what are probably the basic couple of flaws upon which fat hatred is built. One: There's something wrong with being fat, whether it's moral, medical, or aesthetic. Two: By extension, there's something wrong with fat people, since they choose to be morally, medically, or aesthetically wrong. It's the same old story, wherever we turn. We need to "preach" the truth about fat. That's all.
Religious stuff is dicey, and I ask that we proceed with the conversation cautiously. Inflammatory comments will be taken out back.
I...seriously, I haven't noticed this arguing about religion? It just sounded like people were reacting to this misuse of the religion of the bible, and others are rightfully pointing out that it isn't the bible's fault, it's the fault of idiots who read into it what isn't there. Since this was about a supposed "Christian" diet thing, isn't that appropriate? Naturally we shouldn't be mocking others' religious beliefs, (ok, except faux-religious diet gurus) but no one is
Well it's not my blog - but I have found this to be a hearty, meaty subject with very polite and well-meaning conversation. You want to see nasty religious arguments, just go to any religious message board lol. They all eat their own. But that's 'cause they're gluttons
Slight note: gluttony is a sin in Christianity, but it has little to nothing to do with fat at all. That is all.
Zero isn't a size, it's a warning sign. - Carson Kressley
I come from a background where heated debates over politics or religion usually only end in mutual respect. I'm used to speaking openly and passionately about my viewpoint, and being read as merely expressing my own views but not attacking the views of others. I didn't mean to offend anyone -- I did say that I can understand why people are put off of Christianity, but maybe I ought to have elaborated that I don't have a problem with them or their decision, and I can respect it. Maybe I also ought to have added that, even if it bothers me to see other Christians use religion as a weapon (or Jews or Muslims or really any member of any religion), they are certainly entitled to believe and experience their religion as they see fit.
My intent here was to illustrate that the use of religion as a means to shame fat people is not solidly based in text, as some people claim. It was a counter argument to the premise of these faith-based diets, not to adherents of other branches of Christianity, or other religions, or non-religious people. I didn't mean to say that the only right viewpoint is to believe in the bible. I really just meant to say that if one claims to base an argument upon ANY text, religious or secular, she ought to first read the text thoroughly and then base her argument upon actual evidence within it. That doesn't speak to the trueness of the text, just to the academically accepted way to argue a point.
Rest-assured, I'm perfectly okay with anyone who disagrees with my viewpoints, and I won't get angry if they challenge my views, and I absolutely don't mean to insult anyone whose views do not agree with mine. I think it is important that people who DO hold different views on religion, as well as many other aspects of life, can come together even though they knowingly differ on possibly every other point, and in solidarity work to promote fat acceptance. That's where I'm coming from.
The opposite of love is apathy. -- Windy
I think that this has been a really interesting conversation, and I apologize if I was disrespectful of Christianity. But, nobody has seemed angry or offended. It's been really interesting to read what everyone has had to say.