The bible-Is it true?

[hamzahf]

Moderator Message:
Please be more respectful of the other poster - you are close to bating him which is against the Rules (see top of page).

I for one have found his answers have been very honest and far from entrenched, based on his posting here.

Clariman

Sorry I responded to Mike before seeing your message.

Regards
Hamzah

[beeswax]

Of course its a fact that the church and parents teach children AND adults that the Universe was created in 6 days. That Adam and Eve were created by God as we are now and in his image

Is it...which church?

I went to a cathedral school in the 1960s and was never taught that as the literal truth.

I think you will find that it is not the current thinking in the mainstream C of E.

John

Ah...Not taught as the 'literal' truth? What does that actually mean John?

It was taught as true but not literal?

My own experience which of course could well be different from others such a yourself is that every single church I attended over the last 60 years was that the bible is God's inerrant word and cannot be disputed and like many things in the bible stories like creation and the flood and the garden of eden were just read through quick with no questions being asked by adults as WHY. The problem with sermons in Church is that you sit there and have a bible reading and nobody shouts out "hang on, that's sounds a bit suspicious" they all just sit there and nobody challenges anything and even after the services when you may have a cup of tea they talk about families and holidays and health matters and never about the scriptures they have just heard. Now that was all non denominational and the Catholic and Anglican Services we didn't get tea and so who challenged anyone on the way out? What Catholic ever said to the Priest. "Are you sure this is the body and blood of Christ" ? No, its taught to children and its all just accepted when you become adult. How many think about Noah's ark and Kangaroos and why did God create the Dinosaurs if he created every living thing which included cancer by the way?

No..much of the population were indoctrinated mainly as kids and obviously that is now on the wane here in the UK but the real problem is Islam where and I'm no expert but that almost every child born to Muslim parents will be indoctrinated into the muslim way of life and their holy text and why schools here in the UK some Islamic Schools have been closed or put into special measures only for them and Muslim teachers to reappear elsewhere and this is in the UK...What chance of mixed faith of no faith in theocratic countries? The real problem is these religions Jews and Muslims, not so much Christians now strictly forbid marrying across the faiths and no faith and so how on earth are they going to integrate with a non religious population or people of other faiths? How much is this discussed by the mainstream? We all read what the punishment is for trying to leave one's faith.

A few years ago Newsnight had a woman Professor on who wanted to leave her Muslim faith and she found it almost impossible to do but she also said she feared going out alone because she was taught never to do that because men would try to rape her...Her words...She said that was drummed into her as a girl and even though she lived in the UK was frightened every time she went out alone. Now is this the thing we want teaching anywhere in the world, never mind the UK? Its still the law in Saudi Arabia that women must have an escort! Its obviously a by product of men owning women culture and not allowing other men to see them and even then have to wear hijabs and full veils and what not...

Its all just so pathetic just because some blokes dreamed they had visions of God many centuries ago..and we have billions now who follow them and their so called teachings...

You say its not taught in CoE nowadays?

Have they now been taught that Adam and Eve was not literally true then? The fall never happened? That God didn't condemn the whole human race from that day on and that Jesus is the only way back to him? That we are ALL sinners and need redemption? Only go into any evangelical church in my area of the UK and that is exactly what is being taught...

The problem then becomes IF that was taught as not literally true, then what role do they have in society? The Pope won't condemn gays which is great and he wants his church to welcome them with open arms and he set up a meeting with all the main Cardinals across the world to try and convince them to do this and they refused and rebuffed his ideas as they did when he suggested allowing divorced people to attend the Mass. That is no surprise but he could have done that by proclamation as the head of the Catholic Church and as yet hasn't done so. Why not? Because of mass resignations? I don't know...

The Pope is not allowed to change scripture where gays were condemned to death and why indeed they are thrown from tops of buildings by radical muslim groups now today and yet never ever admit that is all because its in their holy text...which is where this thread started..

[beeswax]

A friend of mine wanted to marry a divorced man and she as a Christian wanted to get married in her church and her Pastor refused to do it.

The Catholic Church's rules on divorce are still as strict as they ever were when Jesus said that adultery was the only way to get a divorce and then they should not get married to anyone else as that would be adultery too...Didn't mental and physical abuse of women take place back then that meant that many abused women had no choice but to carry on being abused and raped and what not...

And people suggest the bible teaching was a defining and great moment in promoting goodwill and moral guidance for us all?

They clearly have not studied it or thought about it much...

Christopher Hitchens wrote a best seller, 'Religion poisons everything'..

There are many youtube links to his debates with religious people and well worth watching...

[redsturgeon]

Ah...Not taught as the 'literal' truth? What does that actually mean John?

What it says, not taught as the literal truth...ie. it never actually happened. I was taught to me, by a C of E vicar in the 1960s at a cathedral grammar school that the stories of the OT were aetiological sagas, myths, to explain things that the people of those days did not understand.

My own experience which of course could well be different from others such a yourself is that every single church I attended over the last 60 years was that the bible is God's inerrant word and cannot be disputed and like many things in the bible stories like creation and the flood and the garden of eden were just read through quick with no questions being asked by adults as WHY.

Hmmm, not my experience at all, what type of churches were they, sounds very fundamentalist to me.

The problem with sermons in Church is that you sit there and have a bible reading and nobody shouts out "hang on, that's sounds a bit suspicious" they all just sit there and nobody challenges anything and even after the services when you may have a cup of tea they talk about families and holidays and health matters and never about the scriptures they have just heard. Now that was all non denominational and the Catholic and Anglican Services we didn't get tea and so who challenged anyone on the way out? What Catholic ever said to the Priest. "Are you sure this is the body and blood of Christ" ? No, its taught to children and its all just accepted when you become adult. How many think about Noah's ark and Kangaroos and why did God create the Dinosaurs if he created every living thing which included cancer by the way?

Transubstatiation is mostly a Catholic thing with most other christians seeing it as a symbolic memorial.

No..much of the population were indoctrinated mainly as kids and obviously that is now on the wane here in the UK but the real problem is Islam where and I'm no expert but that almost every child born to Muslim parents will be indoctrinated into the muslim way of life and their holy text and why schools here in the UK some Islamic Schools have been closed or put into special measures only for them and Muslim teachers to reappear elsewhere and this is in the UK...What chance of mixed faith of no faith in theocratic countries? The real problem is these religions Jews and Muslims, not so much Christians now strictly forbid marrying across the faiths and no faith and so how on earth are they going to integrate with a non religious population or people of other faiths? How much is this discussed by the mainstream? We all read what the punishment is for trying to leave one's faith.

I am against faith schools in principle.

A few years ago Newsnight had a woman Professor on who wanted to leave her Muslim faith and she found it almost impossible to do but she also said she feared going out alone because she was taught never to do that because men would try to rape her...Her words...She said that was drummed into her as a girl and even though she lived in the UK was frightened every time she went out alone. Now is this the thing we want teaching anywhere in the world, never mind the UK? Its still the law in Saudi Arabia that women must have an escort! Its obviously a by product of men owning women culture and not allowing other men to see them and even then have to wear hijabs and full veils and what not...

Yes of course this is wrong

Its all just so pathetic just because some blokes dreamed they had visions of God many centuries ago..and we have billions now who follow them and their so called teachings...

Yes indeed but I'm not sure pathetic is the best way to describe billions of your fellow man though, clearly they get something important from their faith.

You say its not taught in CoE nowadays?

Saying it was not taught to me in the 1960s

Have they now been taught that Adam and Eve was not literally true then? The fall never happened? That God didn't condemn the whole human race from that day on and that Jesus is the only way back to him? That we are ALL sinners and need redemption? Only go into any evangelical church in my area of the UK and that is exactly what is being taught...

I'll have to take your word on that.

The problem then becomes IF that was taught as not literally true, then what role do they have in society?

Not sure I follow, Are you saying that unless the bible is totally and absolutely the truth then religion has no place?

The Pope won't condemn gays which is great and he wants his church to welcome them with open arms and he set up a meeting with all the main Cardinals across the world to try and convince them to do this and they refused and rebuffed his ideas as they did when he suggested allowing divorced people to attend the Mass. That is no surprise but he could have done that by proclamation as the head of the Catholic Church and as yet hasn't done so. Why not? Because of mass resignations? I don't know...

Ha ha, the pope would be condemning a significant proportion of his own priests if he condemned homosexuals! Although I believe the church makes a distinction between "homosexuals" and "homosexual acts".

The Pope is not allowed to change scripture where gays were condemned to death and why indeed they are thrown from tops of buildings by radical muslim groups now today and yet never ever admit that is all because its in their holy text...which is where this thread started..

I think that popes are allowed to change things by Apostolical Constitutions, Papal Bull or Encyclicals. These may not alter the words of the bible but may affect how they are interpreted. Of course the Catholic church is a man made highly political organisation and there is only so much that one man...even a pope can do. Damn it, I watched Spotlight, I know how corrupt the Catholic church was and is ( and no doubt most other organised religions too).

I agree with you on much...surprisingly. I just differ in my approach at dialogue.
John

[Voxvoci]

Certain religionists may teach that the universe was created in 6 literal days but the Bible doesn't.

How much time elapsed after the creation of the heavens and earth mentioned in Genesis 1.1 and the start of verse 2? The Bible does not say. How long was the process described in Genesis 1.1 again the Bible does not say.

Modern science agrees that the universe had a beginning. A recent scientific model suggests it to be almost 14 billion years old.

The word "day" is only used in connection with what happens on the earth after it and the universe was already in existence.

The Bible does not say the "days" of creation were a literal 24 hours long.The Bible uses the word day to describe various lengths of time. Evidently the "days" of creation lasted many thousands of years.

[beeswax]

How do I choose one quote and one reply and then go onto the next quote and so on please? Do I have to cut the whole page and just leave the relevant one between the quotation marks?

I was going to add that all of the churches I went to were non denominational and so were virtually 'fundamental' in that they taught the bible was/is the 'literal' inerrant word of God. They are called 'Evangelical' Churches as far as I can tell. My own experience is that is still taught that way.

I have to apologise to Clariman and Hamzah and anyone else that my 'style' of writing leaves a lot to be desired and probably more in rant mode and obviously comes across as disrespectful and can only say it as I think. I have come to despise all organised religion for what it has done in its name in its past and present and its frustrating to me to see how many billions believe in it and its my own view based on my own experience that its because so few THINK about what they believe in and its more a cultural abuse of children's minds where they really do have a problem letting go when they are adults. I'm not gay or obsessed by the subject but I use that to show how out of touch religion is when they use ancient text to justify their beliefs. Slavery is another one and its not a problem when most Christians and Jews may say they believe its God's word but don't act on it and wouldn't dream of doing so today. Why then just admit that the bible is NOT the word of God but of men of their times? And even Israel seems to have left all that behind too apart from the die hards. My worry is that Islam is more difficult to change because its taught as a 'culture' from birth and not a religious choice as say Christianity is or was. Jewishness is also based on a similar cultural past as well. And maybe its possible Muslims will come to the same conclusions one day.

As a child, I never heard the word 'muslim' or Islam and now it almost dominates our whole existence. I think the other poster had it more right in that we should respect everyone no matter what they believe but not what it is they do believe and especially when its not the truth and its causes so much harm as fundamental Islam is doing today. Donald Trump will backtrack on allowing muslims into the USA but people are worried that its spread across the world is not what we want UNLESS believers come to the same degree of apathy towards their faith as Christians and Jews have.

Its is FACT and not fiction that secularism shows more tolerance, more love and respect and more everything than ever organised religion has ever done and why that model is more preferable even with its flaws. Homosexuals, womens rights and slavery show that to be the case just to re-quote them as examples. So is there anything good about religion over secularism? Love one another, the good Samaritan, love your enemies? Good works and charity? Of course, but its not essential either and it comes with great cost...or did do.

I'm not against a belief in God or a Creator as clearly I'm a Deist. The problem is when organised religion tells you what God thinks how you should live your life, what to eat, what to wear, what wars and who to fight and a lot more where they try to control every aspect of your life based on what I believe was false revelation.

I was watching the film recently the trials of Oscar Wild and his 2 year imprisonment in Reading Jail just for being a homosexual with consenting adults. That wasn't that long ago..and shows what secularism and political will can have over these ancient texts that shackled us for so long. Islam, take a lesson please!

[Stonge]

And more:

http://www.andrewmbailey.com/ap/How_to_ ... ealist.pdf

https://explorable.com/realism-and-antirealism

http://www.loyno.edu/~folse/Realism1.html

[Voxvoci]

Beeswax when it comes to organised religion it seems to me you would have some sympathy with Jesus view as stated in the gospel of Matthew chapter 23. Jesus is addressing the religious leaders of his day.

Matthew 23:23-28

23 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. 24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel. 25 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean. 27 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. 28 In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness."

[beeswax]

Beeswax when it comes to organised religion it seems to me you would have some sympathy with Jesus view as stated in the gospel of Matthew chapter 23. Jesus is addressing the religious leaders of his day.

Matthew 23:23-28

23 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. 24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel. 25 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean. 27 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. 28 In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness."

Indeed, I did at one time and thought if I could just follow the spirit of what Jesus said and stood for about helping the poor and loving God and even the other people I didn't even know then I could make progress with my complex mixed up version of what I really believed in..And have had some thoughts that I could one day return to the feet of the Saviour, to coin a phrase..But now I can't believe it was necessary for him to die for ours sins or that God separated himself or any fall took place in the garden? Oddly, I don't think the evidence of his life shows that up either....More deceit from the established church!

And then the Church, even the Evangelical ones just had to get in the way and skepticism took over once again with their rituals, rules and hypocrisy, even needing to be baptised which I refused to do anyway and then maybe lost sight of the REAL Jesus of Nazareth but I still very much believe in God the Creator of us all and think deeply about love and respect for every living thing on this planet including how we treat our animals by mass slaughter and those stupid Islamic rules on Haal meat and slaughter process, I kept thinking who are these idiots that say such stuff and demand even today that each Muslim commits to animal sacrifice each year...Yes I know I'm drifting thoughts again but Jesus had no problem sacrificing innocent creatures at the Temple either and should have said so instead of being more worried about money changing hands in the outer Temple Courtyard and NOT the inner sanctum where only the HIgh Priest was allowed etc...

I also disagree profoundly with Jesus' stance on divorce where he only considered the sex angle as being important and not whether other reasons were just as important. However my research shows that Jesus may not have said many things attributed to him in the Gospels and so maybe he didn't say that about divorce either. Its why we can say today that we have a better idea of love and compassion for others that far supersedes that according to what religious text offers.

I probably think there was more to Jesus than we can ever know!

[beeswax]

Hi Voxvoci,

I'm guessing you are a Christian with your replies so far and so pleased to see you on this forum as they are pretty rare and don't normally want to engage with atheists and agnostics..

I said I love all kinds of music and play and sing in my MIL's care home and another one where my Auntie is and that includes some Christian ones too and one song always chokes me up when I sing along with them this one..

Amazing Grace...

I once was lost but now am found, was blind but now I see..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_DqmyI_YNE

[Voxvoci]

"I probably think there was more to Jesus than we can ever know!"

Agreed

"Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." John 21:25

Enjoy my music as well. Wish I could sing well, unfortunately I do not have the voice for it.

Yes I am Christian. However I do not wish to be associated with so called mainstream Christianity when I see what goes on in many of the churches then Jesus words at Matt 15:3-11 are apt.

3 "Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’ 5 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is ‘devoted to God,’ 6 they are not to ‘honor their father or mother’ with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition. 7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: 8 “ ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. 9 They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.’” 10 Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen and understand. 11 What goes into someone’s mouth does not defile them, but what comes out of their mouth, that is what defiles them.”

---------------

I often find the behaviour and teachings of some Christians to have little to do with the example of Jesus.

Having said that all too often I find my own behaviour to be less than ideal James 3:2 applies " We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check."

The new personality (Ephesians 4.24) is a work in progress, but I am working on it and there is progress as I endeavour to build a friendship with God.

[RowdyReptile]

I am really far more concerned by the repressive direction of politics at the moment than reacting to the same old same old rhetoric in atheist-religionist dialogue. I can't speak for Rowdy Reptile, but I'm not interested to engage in stale old arguments on this new forum. If that means just chipping into discussions on essentially humanist or secular arguments that will be fine and interesting for me.

I agree with hamzahf. I have no interest in the same stale arguments either. We all know what divides us, as we have beaten that to a pulp. I am almost certain that some people of faith can find common ground with the secular/humanist/atheist/agnostic or whatever you want to call yourself.

RR

[hamzahf]

How do I choose one quote and one reply and then go onto the next quote and so on please? Do I have to cut the whole page and just leave the relevant one between the quotation marks?

I am guessing one needs to copy and paste further quote and end quote delimiters into the original quoted text to highlight the bits to retain whilst deleting the rest.

As a child, I never heard the word 'muslim' or Islam and now it almost dominates our whole existence.

Likewise, but schools now play a role in providing a general introduction to all faiths in the UK which can help breakdown ignorance. The majority of world history was also ignored in my time at school unless it involved specific consideration of British involvement. Thus the history of China was about the opium wars and nothing else. As for the monomania of the mainstream media, no doubt when you were not hearing about Islam you would have been hearing a lot about Communism.

I'm not against a belief in God or a Creator as clearly I'm a Deist. The problem is when organised religion tells you what God thinks how you should live your life, what to eat, what to wear, what wars and who to fight and a lot more where they try to control every aspect of your life based on what I believe was false revelation.

I think even a religious adherent needs to question just why they are adopting a particular practice. I don't drink alcohol or eat pork and I fast in Ramadan but all these practices are followed because I can justify them for reasons other than just "that's the rules". There is a lot of customary practice based on the Sunnah (some rather trivial in my view) which I find less important.

See what I did there? You can edit the quote tag.

That was a two for the price of one post. Nested quotes complicate the quoting, so if chopping out quotes the preview button really is worth using to check that what you see is actually what you wanted.

Regards
Hamzah

[redsturgeon]

I think even a religious adherent needs to question just why they are adopting a particular practice. I don't drink alcohol or eat pork and I fast in Ramadan but all these practices are followed because I can justify them for reasons other than just "that's the rules". There is a lot of customary practice based on the Sunnah (some rather trivial in my view) which I find less important.

I just copy and paste the bit I wish to quote, highlight it and click the "quote " button above.

Hamzahf, I am interested in the quote above from you.

Not drinking alcohol, I can understand the health and social benefits there.

Not eating pork I am a bit more dubious about. What is it specifically about pork? Vegetarianism or veganism, I can understand...but of all meats, picking out pork? Why?

And fasting, I fast 2 days per week and there seems to be some scientific evidence for doing so, but specifically fasting from dawn to dusk not even a drink of water? And for a period of time that could be 16 hours or more in the North! Can there really be sensible reasons rather than religious dogma to this practice? And once a year?

Genuinely interested

John

[gryffron]

Not eating pork I am a bit more dubious about. What is it specifically about pork? Vegetarianism or veganism, I can understand...but of all meats, picking out pork? Why?

Pigs are forest floor scavengers. They'll eat anything. In the wild they stay pretty healthy on this diet.

But in ancient times, domestic pigs were kept in pretty appalling conditions, fed on offal and rotting waste, and were rife with disease. Eating them could often make people sick. Jewish rules forbid eating pork too, for precisely the same reason. In fact, many of the jewish/old testament restrictions on food have pretty good solid health science behind them. Probably came from centuries of observations on what food made people sick.

Now if god had only thought to mention "wash your hands before touching food", one could almost believe the rules were supernatural. It took until the C18th for science to work that one out.

gryff

[redsturgeon]

Not eating pork I am a bit more dubious about. What is it specifically about pork? Vegetarianism or veganism, I can understand...but of all meats, picking out pork? Why?

Pigs are forest floor scavengers. They'll eat anything. In the wild they stay pretty healthy on this diet.

But in ancient times, domestic pigs were kept in pretty appalling conditions, fed on offal and rotting waste, and were rife with disease. Eating them could often make people sick. Jewish rules forbid eating pork too, for precisely the same reason. In fact, many of the jewish/old testament restrictions on food have pretty good solid health science behind them. Probably came from centuries of observations on what food made people sick.

Now if god had only thought to mention "wash your hands before touching food", one could almost believe the rules were supernatural. It took until the C18th for science to work that one out.

gryff

Hi gryff, I know all that old stuff and the list of banned Jewish foodstuffs is quite significant, no pork, no rabbit, no hare, no shellfish and the thing with birds is really complicated but what I am interested in is why today anyone would choose not to eat pork specifically except for religious reasons...unless they don't like the taste of course.

John

[gryffron]

That's the problem with gods word being eternal and unchanging. When those infernal scientists come along with a better answer, like healthy pigs, you're stuck with the old one which is now incorrect.

[hamzahf]

Not eating pork I am a bit more dubious about. What is it specifically about pork? Vegetarianism or veganism, I can understand...but of all meats, picking out pork? Why?

A Google search can yield many reasons; parasites, an omniverous diet, digestibility of pork fat, intelligence of the pig, close physiology to humans. One can readily expand these reasons (or counter them) but for me irrespective of the religious ruling I would be doubtful about eating pork.

And fasting, I fast 2 days per week and there seems to be some scientific evidence for doing so, but specifically fasting from dawn to dusk not even a drink of water? And for a period of time that could be 16 hours or more in the North! Can there really be sensible reasons rather than religious dogma to this practice? And once a year?

Again Google can link to differing opinions. Just a couple given here.

http://www.masjidtucson.org/submission/ ... efits.html
http://www.nhs.uk/livewell/healthyramad ... ealth.aspx

From my perspective, it takes several days for my body to adjust to fasting so your twice a week fasting would give me all the short-term downsides (headache being the main one) without any benefit. Although if that fasting is the 5:2 diet, we are talking about calorie restriction rather than fasting in my opinion.

I have now fasted Ramadan in the UK for almost one whole annual cycle (Ramadan moves forward about 10 days every year). Each season has it's own challenges, but the body adapts to the fluid reduction (I am not a rigid 2 litres per day man anyway but drink when thirsty). I don't lose much weight, indicative to me that my homeostatic balance adapts. I would say that I probably consume about 1/3 less calories each day. I never bothered to calorie count the whole of Ramadan, but when I was seriously dieting a few years ago did compare a Muslim fasting day to the 5:2 regimen (which in calorie terms was far more rigid).

A headache in the first few days is common towards the end of the day (I drink way too much coffee, so that reduction alone can be problematic). Tiredness towards the end of Ramadan can be an issue (primarily because one packs too much into the evening and gets much less sleep). I would have a short snooze in my car when working rather than have a lunch break. I'd recommend that even when not fasting!

The biggest benefit for me is self-discipline. We get into an eat and drink on demand mentality that is refreshing to break. Since one can't eat or drink during the day, feelings of hunger quickly pass.

Regards
Hamzah

[redsturgeon]

<i>Although if that fasting is the 5:2 diet, we are talking about calorie restriction rather than fasting in my opinion.</i>

On my fasting days I will generally no have eaten since 6.30 the day before, I then will just drink water or black tea (no sugar) in the day and not eat until 6pm so in fact no calories taken in for almost 24 hours. In fact now I come to think of it, more of a fast than Ramadan. I would have no problem with the lack of food during the day but not being able to drink at all seems harsh, especially if indulging in manual work, sport or exercise.

John

[hamzahf]

On my fasting days I will generally no have eaten since 6.30 the day before, I then will just drink water or black tea (no sugar) in the day and not eat until 6pm so in fact no calories taken in for almost 24 hours. In fact now I come to think of it, more of a fast than Ramadan. I would have no problem with the lack of food during the day but not being able to drink at all seems harsh, especially if indulging in manual work, sport or exercise.

I think that tea on an empty stomach would not agree with me. Yours is a spartan regimen. One can be physically active in Ramadan, but it is important to be mindful of dehydration if engaged in intense physical activity. Each individual probably has to understand their own tolerance to dehydration and plan the day accordingly.

I noted an increase in endorphin levels in the NHS article I quoted. Some of the effects of Ramadan fasting take time to appear (as do 5:2 benefits) so I would view each method as having merit. As for reduced fluid intake; honestly the body gets used to it. Remember also for many people having water to drink involves considerable hardship in fetching and carrying. I never really understood my work colleagues diligently sipping from their water bottles, it just didn't suit me.

Regards
Hamzah