Does God require fasting?

In Scripture, fasting is going without food, and sometimes without drink, together with prayer, mourning, seeking God, or repentance. Esther's instruction spells it out:

Jesus' forty days in the wilderness are described the same way. Matthew says he hungered afterwards, and Luke says he ate nothing:

Not every use of the word is a religious act. Sometimes it just means going hungry, and then Scripture answers it with food. Jesus would not send the crowd away hungry, and Paul urged the men on the ship to eat:

So the word appearing in a verse does not by itself mean God is commanding something, or even approving it.

Elsewhere in the same chapter, Acts mentions "the fast" only to say what time of year it was:

That verse marks the time. It does not command anyone to keep that fast, and nothing here builds a Christian fasting calendar on it.

Daniel tells of three weeks in which he gave up particular foods while he mourned and humbled himself before God. The chapter does not use the word "fast". It is related to fasting by those plain details, not by assuming it was the same practice:

"Afflicting the soul"

The Old Testament often speaks of "afflicting" or "humbling" the soul. Scripture itself ties this to fasting. Ezra proclaimed a fast "that we might afflict ourselves"; a psalm says "I humbled my soul with fasting"; and in Isaiah the people put fasting and afflicting the soul side by side:

But the same Hebrew word does not always mean going without food. It is used for oppressing the helpless, and for Pharaoh humbling himself by letting Israel go:

God also humbled Israel both by letting them hunger and by feeding them:

So the word's sense is read from each passage, never from the word alone. Fasting is one way Scripture shows of humbling oneself. It is not the only meaning of the word.

Scripture uses the word "require" itself. Moses told Israel that God required them to fear him, love him, serve him and keep his commandments. Micah, answering someone who offered lavish sacrifices, named justice, mercy and walking humbly with God:

These summaries do not cancel the particular commands God gives. So the question becomes: has God actually commanded fasting, to whom, and on what occasion?

Yes. Through the prophet Joel, the LORD himself called his people to fast. The setting was a disaster that had wiped out the land's food and worship, with "the day of the LORD" at hand. Priests, elders and everyone living in the land were told to gather and cry to God:

These are real commands, with "saith the LORD" on them. They are not just a record of people deciding to fast. So the claim that God never commands fasting, and that every fast is only a human invention, would make Joel 2:12 false. It is ruled out.

Joel ties fasting to turning to God "with all your heart". The next verse asks for torn hearts, not just torn clothes. The command is also set in a place and a time: Zion, during the land's calamity, for the assembly called together there. That keeps it from becoming one unchanging calendar for every person everywhere. Gathering the children, nursing babies included, is a call to the assembly; the passage gives no instructions for how any child should go without food.

That God has commanded fasting: Scripture teaches this.

The Law of Moses gave Israel a yearly Day of Atonement, on the tenth day of the seventh month. It applied to Israel and to the stranger living among them. It is called a statute "for ever", and anyone who would not afflict himself that day was to be cut off from his people:

For those it addressed, this was not optional. The command itself is to "afflict your souls", together with rest and offerings. Fasting is one way Scripture shows of afflicting the soul, as the verses above showed, so these passages weigh seriously as an appointed fast. But Leviticus does not itself spell out rules about food and water, and its wording is not quietly swapped for a more detailed rule.

Can this yearly day be laid, unchanged, on everyone who belongs to Christ, and used to judge them? Scripture answers this itself. Hebrews ties the first covenant's yearly high-priestly entry with blood to Christ, who entered once by his own blood. It says those first-covenant ordinances were imposed "until the time of reformation":

Colossians then forbids judging anyone over food, drink and holy days, calling them a shadow whose substance is Christ:

When some insisted that Gentile believers must keep the Law of Moses, the apostles refused to lay that burden on them. They named a few necessary things instead:

The claim that the yearly Levitical observance may be laid unchanged on all disciples, as a ground for judging them, fails against Colossians 2:16-17 and against Hebrews 9:7, 9:10, 9:11 and 9:12. This does not throw out Leviticus because it is older. The statute was real within the covenant it belongs to, and it is Hebrews that names how that covenant's yearly service relates to Christ. Neither Colossians nor Acts 15 forbids praying with fasting, and Acts 15 does not say every command about the body is gone; it keeps its own necessary abstentions.

A fast can also become binding because someone promised it. Within the Law, a vow "to afflict the soul" could bind the one who made it, under the rules Numbers gives. Deuteronomy adds that not vowing at all is no sin:

So the idea that a freely chosen fast can never bind, even after a vow, fails against these passages, under their own conditions. They also do not show that everyone must make a fasting vow. You have not mentioned a vow, so none is assumed here.

Scripture also records God commanding one named man not to eat or drink in one particular place, and it calls his breaking of that command disobedience:

This is not called a fast like Joel's. What it shows is that going without food is not always a mere human rule: God can command it.

How to fast

Jesus taught his disciples about fasting right alongside giving and prayer. He told them how to fast: without show, washed and anointed as usual, directed to the Father, who rewards it:

That reward is positive support for sincere fasting as real devotion.

Some say that because Jesus said "when ye fast", fasting must be optional. The same chapter answers that. Jesus says "when thou prayest" in just the same way, and then commands prayer:

So the word "when" by itself does not prove fasting optional. Nor does it, by itself, set how often each person must fast.

"Then shall they fast"

People asked Jesus why his disciples did not fast when others did. Matthew, Mark and Luke all record the same exchange, at the same meal, followed by the same pictures of new cloth and new wine:

This answer rules out readings on both sides:

• That everyone must fast whatever the occasion, even while the bridegroom was with them. Mark 2:19 gives Jesus' reason his disciples did not fast then, and that reason stands.
• That Jesus' disciples would never fast after he was taken away. Matthew 9:15, Mark 2:20 and Luke 5:35 say plainly that they will.
• That since the disciples did not fast at that meal, later disciples should drop fasting altogether. That would turn a reason Jesus tied to that moment into a permanent ban, against what he went on to say.

The cloth and wine pictures teach that a practice must fit its time. They do not erase what Jesus had just said about fasting later. His words are a plain statement of what will happen, not a guess that they might fast. They are an explanation and a prediction, not a dated order telling every later person to fast a set amount.

After the resurrection

Acts records Jesus taken up out of the disciples' sight, and afterwards records his followers fasting as they served the Lord, sent out workers and appointed elders:

Luke also tells of Anna, who served God with fasting and prayer, and of Cornelius, who was fasting and praying when his prayer was heard:

So fasting was not set aside as outdated after the resurrection. Two cautions come with this. In Acts 13 the Spirit's command is to set apart Barnabas and Saul; the narrative records no separate command that every Christian fast on that occasion. And "taken from them" may include the grief of Jesus' death as well as the time after he went up. Either way, later fasting is not forbidden, and nothing makes every day of his absence a fast.

Jesus also told his apostles to teach new disciples to obey all he had commanded:

So what he taught about how to fast cannot be brushed aside as no longer relevant. Passing his commands on does not turn every prediction into a command for each person, though. And his promise to be with them always does not forbid the fasting of Acts 13. Both stand.

That Jesus expects his disciples to fast after he was taken from them, that he commands them to fast sincerely toward the Father and not for show, and that the Father rewards it: Scripture teaches this.

Once the disciples could not cast a spirit out of a boy. Jesus rebuked it and it came out. Afterwards, in private, they asked him why they had failed:

In Matthew, Jesus first names their unbelief, then speaks of prayer and fasting:

Both answers stand: the unbelief and the prayer and fasting. "This kind" refers to what the disciples asked about, the spirit coming out. Some read it as a stray remark about a kind of unbelief, but nothing in the passage supports that. The question is about casting out, and the story has just told of the spirit coming out. The Greek word for "kind" elsewhere means a sort of fish in a net, a nation, kinds of tongues, or one's countrymen. It gives no technical list of spirits; the setting tells what it refers to here. The text cannot honestly be cut down to "prayer" alone.

So the claim that fasting is never necessary for anything is too strong. Jesus states a real necessity for this case. That statement has limits. It does not promise that fasting makes any wished-for result happen. It does not say no one can pray, be forgiven, or serve God without fasting. And it does not hand everyone the same task, as Paul's questions show:

The Bible text used for this reading carries a note that copies differ at Matthew 17:21. No manuscripts or other editions were consulted. The verse was kept whole, fasting included, and nothing here rests on leaving it out.

That prayer and fasting are named as necessary in this casting-out, for the case Jesus describes: Scripture teaches this. It is a statement about that case, not a schedule for everyone.

Paul tells married couples not to deprive each other, except by agreement, for a time, to give themselves to fasting and prayer, and then to come together again:

The idea that one spouse may impose open-ended deprivation in order to fast is ruled out by verse 5's consent, its time limit, and its command to come together again. Verse 6 may refer to that one allowance or to Paul's marriage counsel more widely. Either way, verse 5's limits stand, and verse 6 cannot be stretched into a statement that every fasting command anywhere is optional.

It cannot replace justice and mercy

In Isaiah, the people complained that God ignored their fasting while they went on exploiting their workers and fighting. God answered with the fast he chooses:

The promises that follow depend on actually doing these things:

Isaiah 58 can be read two ways. It may mean a fast from food joined with justice and mercy. Or the prophet may be calling those acts of justice and mercy themselves the fast God chooses. Both readings require those acts, and both reject going without food as a substitute for them. Neither can mean God wants no fasting at all, because Joel 2:12 commands it and Matthew 6:18 promises reward for it. The answer comes out the same under both readings: going without food cannot take the place of obedience and mercy.

Isaiah 1 says the same about worship in general. God refused the people's gatherings and many prayers because their hands were full of blood, and called them to stop doing evil and to defend the oppressed:

That does not make every outward practice wrong in itself. The reason for the refusal is the bloodshed, not merely an empty ritual.

In Zechariah, people asked whether to keep up a fast they had kept for many years. God asked whom their fasting had really been for, commanded justice and compassion, and promised that those fasts would become glad feasts:

These prophets are not describing one and the same fast. What links them is what each says outright: fasting does not excuse oppression, and God requires mercy.

The claim that fasting makes justice and care for the hungry unnecessary: This is not what Scripture teaches.

It does not guarantee a hearing or a result

God told Jeremiah he would not hear the fasting of a people who loved to wander from him:

David fasted and prayed for his sick child's life, not knowing whether God would grant it. The child died, and David then ate again, explaining why that fast had ended:

A fast proclaimed in public does not mean God approves it, either. Jezebel had a fast proclaimed as part of her plot to have Naboth killed. In the same chapter Ahab fasted and humbled himself after judgment was announced, and the LORD took note of that:

At another proclaimed fast, God's warning was read aloud, and the king and his servants did not heed it:

The claim that going without food in itself guarantees a hearing, mercy, or the result asked for, even while wrongdoing continues: This is not what Scripture teaches.

Fasting with repentance: Nineveh

When Jonah warned Nineveh, the people believed God and proclaimed a fast. The detailed ban on food and water came from the king and his nobles. That same decree called everyone to turn from evil and violence, and it hoped for mercy without presuming on it. Scripture then names what God saw: their turning from their evil way.

Their fast was part of their response to God. It was not a calendar God gave the world, and it was not a payment that could stand in for turning from evil.

It does not buy forgiveness

Scripture places salvation in the grace of the Lord Jesus, and cleansing in his blood. It promises forgiveness to those who confess:

Making hunger an extra payment, without which these promises fail, would change the grounds these verses give. This does not mean grace makes disobedience harmless, or cancels a command God has actually given to those it addresses. Freedom in Christ is for serving one another in love:

Jesus' parable of the Pharisee and the publican speaks to the same thing. It was told to people who trusted in their own righteousness and despised others:

Fasting twice a week is the Pharisee's boast, not a command from Jesus, so it is not a Christian rule. The parable does not say that fasting is sinful, that fasting twice a week is sinful in itself, or that the publican never fasted. Its point is that a boast about fasting does not justify self-trust and contempt for others.

The claim that fasting is a payment that secures forgiveness: This is not what Scripture teaches.

Several passages warn against rules about food. Each has its own subject, and none is stretched past it.

First Timothy condemns teaching people to abstain from foods God created to be received with thanksgiving:

Its target is rejecting God's good food. Reading it as a ban on every fast with prayer would contradict Matthew 6:18 and Acts 13:2, and Joel 2:12's command. Treating fasting as proof that food is evil would contradict this passage itself.

Colossians condemns subjection to human rules about touching and tasting, which only look wise:

These are "the commandments and doctrines of men". The passage does not cancel God's own summons in Joel.

Romans 14 deals with believers who differ over foods and days. It forbids despising or judging one another, and asks each to act toward the Lord, with thanks and in faith:

Romans 14 is not plainly about going without food entirely, so it is not used on its own to declare all fasting optional. It does forbid turning food and day choices into grounds for contempt and judgment.

First Corinthians 8, about food offered to idols, says food does not commend anyone to God, and calls for care toward a weaker brother:

This does not forbid choosing to fast in devotion. It positively commands love toward the brother.

No fasting calendar or set frequency for Christians

Every passage the searches found under Scripture's fasting words was read (see "How far this reading reaches", below). None of them sets Christians a fasting calendar or a required frequency. Colossians 2:16 forbids judging anyone in food, drink or holy days. Choosing a day for devotion is not made sinful by this. And this does not settle whether an individual Christian may have some duty to fast; that question is taken up below.

The claim that a fixed fasting calendar or frequency may be imposed on Christians, and used to judge them: This is not what Scripture teaches.

Scripture records many fasts, each with its own occasion. They show what fasting is for. They are not one set of instructions for every reader.

In military distress, all Israel wept and fasted until evening:

At Mizpeh, Israel fasted while confessing sin and turning away from idols:

In mourning for the dead, some fasted seven days, others until evening:

Facing invasion, Jehoshaphat proclaimed a fast to seek the LORD's help. Before a dangerous journey, Ezra did the same, and God was entreated:

In grief and confession, Nehemiah fasted and prayed, and the people later gathered with fasting to confess their sins:

Esther's three days came in an emergency (Esther 4:16, quoted above). Later the Jews took on yearly observances that included "the matters of the fastings and their cry". That was a named people's own undertaking, not a command to every Christian:

A distressed king spent a night without food. Daniel sought God with fasting and confession, asking for mercy, not pleading his own righteousness:

The psalms tell of fasting that brought reproach and left the body weak:

Moses twice went forty days without bread or water:

Paul lists fastings among the hardships and labours of his ministry:

These lists are reports, not commands to the reader. The reading does not rest anything on sorting out which items in them were chosen fasts and which were hardship.

Some going without food is not devotion at all. Men who wanted to kill Paul swore to eat nothing until they had done it:

None of these durations (one evening, three days, seven days, forty days, three weeks of plain food) is commanded to every reader. No regimen, length of fast, or medical instruction is drawn from them.

Following Paul's example

Paul does call believers to follow him, and asks that stewards be found faithful. So apostolic example carries real weight; it cannot be dismissed as "only a story". The same chapter, though, lists hunger among hardships Paul endured, alongside being naked, beaten and homeless, and describes his faithful response of blessing those who reviled him:

Following Paul's "ways which be in Christ" does not mean deliberately arranging every hardship he suffered. Nothing in the chapter sets a minimum amount of fasting for everyone. It does add weight to taking the apostles' fasting seriously as a pattern of devotion.

One narrower question remains: does Jesus' expectation that his disciples will fast put a duty on every individual Christian to fast at least sometimes, so that never fasting is itself always a sin?

The reading weighed two answers against every passage gathered.

First reading. Jesus set fasting beside prayer (Matthew 6:16), said "then shall they fast" (Matthew 9:15), told the apostles to teach "all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:20), and Paul says "be ye followers of me" (1 Corinthians 4:16). Together with the practice in Acts, this is read as a general duty for every disciple to fast, with the occasions left to wisdom. This reading keeps food good and sets no calendar. No verse gathered proves it false simply because Scripture sets no frequency. The passages about food and days deal with judging over food, human rules, and the goodness of food. They do not expressly abolish every possible general duty to fast, so they cannot rule this reading out by stretching them further.

Second reading. Matthew 6 governs fasting when it is done. Matthew 9:15 is a true prediction of what the disciples would do, and Acts shows it coming true. On this reading the prediction is not an added command to each later person. It still keeps every fasting command God gave to those he addressed, the necessity in the casting-out, and every command about how to fast. It does not call fasting worthless, forbidden, or something no one could ever owe.

Here is why the question stays open. Matthew 9:15 says what the disciples will do. It does not say whether that becomes a lifelong duty for every later person, or whether someone who does not fast has sinned by that alone. Matthew 28:20 passes on Jesus' commands without turning his predictions into commands. Acts shows what was actually done, and a narrated example is not, by itself, a command. Paul's call to follow him gives example real weight, but it does not command every narrated deprivation to every disciple. Romans 14:6, for its part, speaks of eating and not eating "to the Lord" in a passage about foods and days, and does not reach far enough to rule out the first reading. Both readings keep every gathered verse true, and none of those verses decides between them.

Whether every individual Christian must fast at least sometimes, so that never fasting is itself sin: Scripture speaks to this, but doesn't settle it. The reason is the one just given: the texts say what Jesus' disciples will do and how they must fast, but they do not say whether that expectation becomes a minimum owed by each person.

So this answer does not tell you that fasting can never be required of you. It also does not say that everyone who does not fast is disobeying God. What is settled: God has commanded fasting; Jesus expects his disciples to fast and tells them how; the early church fasted; no calendar may be imposed on you or used to judge you; and fasting is never a substitute for repentance, justice and mercy, nor a price paid for forgiveness. Only this one further step is open. The open point is narrow; on fasting as a whole, Scripture is neither silent nor unclear.

• God has commanded fasting (Joel 1:14; 2:12; 2:15). Scripture teaches this.
• Jesus expects his disciples to fast after he was taken from them, and commands that they fast sincerely toward the Father, who rewards it (Matthew 9:15; Mark 2:20; Luke 5:35; Matthew 6:16-18). The early church fasted as it served the Lord (Acts 13:2-3; 14:23). Scripture teaches this.
• Jesus names prayer and fasting as necessary for the casting-out he describes (Mark 9:29; Matthew 17:21). Scripture teaches this, for that case.
• For any fast that is undertaken, how to fast is settled: sincerely toward the Father, not for show, and with real obedience and mercy, never as cover for oppression (Matthew 6:16-18; Isaiah 58:6-7). Scripture teaches this.
• A fixed fasting calendar or frequency imposed on Christians and used to judge them (Colossians 2:16-17). This is not what Scripture teaches.
• Fasting as a payment for forgiveness, a guarantee of results, or a replacement for justice and mercy (Acts 15:11; 1 John 1:7, 1:9; Jeremiah 14:12; Isaiah 58:6-7). This is not what Scripture teaches.
• Whether every individual Christian must fast at least sometimes, so that never fasting is itself sin. Scripture speaks to this, but doesn't settle it, for the reason given above.

• What was searched. The reading searched for fasting by its English words ("fast", "fasted", "fasting", "fastings"), by its Hebrew and Greek words, and by related ideas: afflicting the soul, eating no bread, eating nothing, abstaining, food and days, and the words "require" and "required". Every occurrence of the main Hebrew and Greek fasting words was opened and read in its passage. Where a passage quoted older Scripture, the source was found and read too.
• What was not read. Some search results were listed but not opened: some hits for the English word "fast", for "require" and "required", and for related phrases, and many uses of the wider Hebrew word for "afflict". They are listed in the record. Nothing here says what they contain, and no claim of Scripture's silence rests on them. The point about calendars reaches as far as the fasting passages gathered and Colossians 2:16-17's prohibition, and no further.
• Matthew 17:21. A copy-variation note there was not looked into, and the verse was kept whole.
• Your own situation. No vow, date, purpose or health condition of yours was considered, because none was shared. Nothing here sets a length of fast or gives medical advice. If you have a particular fast or vow in mind, its own circumstances would need weighing.
• No judgment on anyone. Nothing here is a judgment on anyone's heart or standing before God, yours or anyone else's.

The full record, with every verse in its chapter and every search, is there for you to check this verse by verse.