Fasting for Lent, Part 1: How Did Jesus Fast for 40 Days?

This first full week of Lent begins with the Gospel reading of Jesus' fast in the desert and his immediate battle with Satan's temptations afterward. After all, we get the length of Lent from the 40-day period of Jesus' fast in the desert. Assuming that Jesus fasted for literally 40 days, during which "he ate nothing" (Luke 4:2), has anyone seriously considered how Jesus was able to go 40 days without eating anything when most humans will die within two weeks without food or water? This is the question I try to answer in this post.

"Eating" words from God

Possibly the quickest answer to the question is found in Jesus' reply to Satan when he tried to get Jesus to turn stones into bread. Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 8:3: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." Jesus gave a similar but slightly different response to His disciples who implored Him to eat: "My food is to do the will of him who sent me, and to accomplish his work" (John 4:34). Synthesizing these two verses, Jesus appears to be saying that obeying instructions from God is just as nourishing as physical food.

Jesus isn't the only example of someone being able to endure a lack of an essential need by using some kind of spiritual aid. For example, I remember reading how St. Francis of Assisi would go without warm clothes in winter, claiming that his love for God kept him warm. Also, I remember reading how St. Benedict endured a long fast for Lent (maybe not as intense as that of Jesus) and refused the treats his friend Romanus brought to Benedict's cave of Subiaco for Easter, saying that the simple Easter joy and visit of that friend were enough. However, is any good Christian able to endure 40 days of no food at all simply from hearing the words and doing the will of God, or does that require a special kind of person - a divine person?

Proof that Jesus is the Son of God, but not as proof for Satan

After Jesus completed 40 days of fasting, Satan tried tempting Him. Two of three temptations start with "If you are the Son of God..." Both involve some kind of miracle for Satan's or the world's entertainment: turning stones into bread or jumping off the highest part of a temple without injury. However, I wonder if Jesus already proved He is the Son of God by enduring 40 days without food, not for Satan's or anyone else's entertainment but simply because He could. The longest recorded time that anyone has gone without any food or drink is 18 days. The longest recorded time that anyone has gone without solid food is much longer at 382 days. All of that information is taken from Guiness World Records. Assuming that Jesus didn't carry any kind of drink with Him, or that nobody gave Him any while He was in the desert, 40 days without food or drink would be truly miraculous. Why, then, did Satan ask for more miracles and not get Jesus to do them? I think it was for selfish reasons, just as Jesus' opponents and Herod Antipas asked for miracles knowing that Jesus already performed some. As far as I can think of, every miracle Jesus performed was for the good of the person involved, whether that was healing or casting out demons. In His first miracle, it was to prevent the embarrassment of running out of wine at a wedding feast. Jesus never performed miracles just to entertain or impress someone. If His 40-day fast was in fact a miracle, I might place it in the category of manifesting His divinity, like in the Transfiguration. But what if Jesus' fast was not a complete absence of food and drink?

A Partial Fast?

Perhaps Jesus' 40-day fast was not a complete absence of food and drink, but instead a very reduced intake of those each day. After all, the world record for fasting from food but not drink is 382 days. If the Gospel of Luke's account is literally true in saying Jesus ate nothing for those 40 days, that might not mean He drank nothing. Perhaps He had a supply of water with Him, or maybe wine. He also could have had a few disciples by that time who could have brought Him something to drink. There were also a few towns on the outskirts of the Judean Desert where Jesus is believed to have fasted, including the eastern suburbs of Jerusalem itself and also Jericho. Unless His disciples were good at navigating the desert or were with Him the whole time, however, I'm not sure that these ideas are really the best ones.

Conclusion

The Gospels don't say how Jesus was able to fast for 40 days, or what His fasting entailed. However, if He was alone that whole time (and that seems most plausible), He might not have been getting food or drink that much. Bringing food and drink with Him could have been a considerable burden for a solo retreat into a desert for 40 days. The first temptation thrown to Jesus after the fast, after all, is about turning stones into bread rather than using up leftover food and drink or going into the nearest town to buy some. Therefore, I'm inclined to believe that Jesus was eating and drinking nothing at all, unless He was living on whatever desert wildlife and plants were around. This would mean that Jesus miraculously fasted for over twice as long as anyone in the Guiness Book of World Records has, because Jesus is the Son of God and lives not on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.

With Jesus' 40-day fast in mind as the template for the length of Lent today, how did early Christians fast for Lent without depriving themselves of all food and drink? That's the topic I will research about for the next part.