Intermittent fasting has been the topic of many recent books and has been studied in animals and in humans. Basically, intermittent fasting is a broad term that focuses on when a person eats not the number of calories or types of food. It always includes a period of voluntary abstinence from food and its proponents approach the subject in different ways. The most popular approach is the 16/8 which requires fasting for 16 hours and an eight hour time slot when you can eat anything at any time. Another version, alternate day fasting, alternates 24 hour periods of fasting with days of eating freely. The 5:2 approach limits fasting to just two days a week, while the Warrior Diet follows a 20-hour fast with one large meal consumed at night. In all of these programs the stomach gets a period of regular rest during fasting.
Thank you for highlighting this information… Following these principles has been a blessing in my Christian experience to the extent I follow them.
I have seen “health reform” in some ways turned into a “cult-like club” just like it can be in any other “reform;” dress, adornment, etc. But, as we grow to avoid extremes in how to teach principles, may we seek the grace of God to relate to others still struggling with how to follow principles and imperfect ways of “sharing the Good News.”
1 Thess. 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and [I pray God] your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24Faithful [is] he that calleth you, who also will do [it].
The highest purpose to learn about and choose a healthy lifestyle is to better serve; this truly will be fulfilling the “weightier matters of the law.”
I have eaten two meals/day for many years now. Not for religious reasons, much less “because EGW said so.” Each organism is different, every person should just find what is best for them on a personal basis. My routine is not better that others’ - just different. Breakfast between 7-9, and dinner between 17-19. No snacks. Basically vegetarian, only some Salmon once in a while. Vegan as much as possible, but not fanatic. Love soy products. A coffee here and there, not a necessity since I like Roma! No alcohol ever. Never touched tobacco or any street/illegal drugs. Love mayo though…
My Dad was very close to the same routine, lived well until 92. One instant coffee (Nescafe) every morning, little real milk, no meat or chicken just some fish. No alcohol or tobacco at all. He was a Sabbath keeper. But he never converted to Adventism… - this is probably why he lived so long (no theological stress!..)… In this regard my chances are not as good as his were…
When we have no food intake for twelve hours, we go into a metabolic state called KETOSIS. This is very beneficial, not just for weight loss, but is now advocated for cancer patients and for those with Alzheimer’s.
Yes, the sixteen /eight plan is the easiest to follow.
Only eat in a window of eight hours, while refraining from food for the balance of the sixteen.
EGW did not just offer optional good health advice that would extend one’s life. She declared that disregarding Health Reform was synonymous with breaking the Law of God. It was part of the gospel, as the hand is to the body. Its practice was for the salvation of the church and the world. The sick were to be treated with God’s remedies, hot and cold water, without drugs. Physicians were to be content with an average working man’s wage, remembering Jesus gave himself as a donation to the world.
EGW believed that “sickness is the result of violated nature’s law.” That is God’s laws saying, “continual transgression of nature’s laws is a continual transgression of the law of God.” Reaching the extreme position which few hold today, “It is a sin to be sick, for all sickness is the result of transgression.”
She further explains, “Any course of action in eating, drinking, or dressing, that injures the fine human machinery, interferes with God’s order. Every needless transgression of the laws of our being is virtually a transgression of the law of God and is sin in the sight of Heaven.” I wonder if eating and apple in-between meals is a sin in God’s sight?
EGW held that the health reform that she taught was “a part of the third angel’s message.” She regraded that “God’s people are not prepared for the loud cry of the third angel,” due to their backsliding from health reform. Food is tied, in EGW’s mind, to God’s last day gospel message. EGW believed that “health reform is for our salvation and the salvation of the world…” Her Health Reform teachings are not optional advice, they should be regarded as an addition to God’s last days requirements.
Very few SDA can or are willing to follow EGW’s Health Reform, embracing its many restrictions and remedies. It is a call for a radical diet “Free from spices,” because spices “inflame the animal passions [sensual urges].” Also “to have fruit at one meal and the vegetables at another.” Think of the millions of SDA’s all over the world, that prepare their food with spices and mix fruit and vegetables together! EGW’s Health Reform is a hard act to follow for most believers, creating a detailed-law based food religion.
this really is vintage egw: overcoming what isn’t in our best interest through a combination of intelligently directed effort and supernatural power…becoming tomorrow what we aren’t today, instead of falling back and becoming discouraged, or inventing an excuse that enables us to feel good about not advancing, is a theme that can be found in all her writings…“i can do all things through christ which strengtheneth me”, Phil 4:13, is the mantra that she’s really taken over completely…no-one else writes with such conviction of the truth of this verse…
I feel very sinful today.
I must have transgressed something yesterday.
I feel I got a light cold over the night…
But I already took a couple of “anti-sin” pills this morning.
Already feeling closer to being a saint again…
Man, I still have to work on that Mayo addiction…
At least I am eating the vegan version now, but it is still called Mayo - and I love it.
Need to work more on that…
That was NOT necessary at all. I doubt that it was God who “strengthened you” do to such a thing because …
“When He had said this, [Jesus Christ] showed [His disciples] His hands and His feet [AFTER the resurrection]. But while they still did not believe for joy, and marveled, He said to them, Have you any food here? So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. And He took it and ate in their presence.” Luke 24:40-43
WHAT IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER, IS GOOD FOR THE GOOSE.
actually, james, if you read egw’s letters and diaries, especially when she was in australia, you’ll see that she didn’t consider fish as meat…by meat, she meant mammals and birds, like cows, pigs, and chicken…it’s interesting that we know now that fish fat is good for you, while cow, pig and chicken fat isn’t:
also, i think you mean what’s good for the goose, is good for the gander…
I so appreciate this article and Spectrum’s seemingly new commitment to allowing for articles that stress the positivity of Ellen White’s messages.
Hi @Cecilly, thanks for your comment. I think you’ll find, if you take a look back through Spectrum’s 50-year history, that we have always sought to provide varied and wide-ranging perspectives on Ellen White, her life, and her writings. These articles have included what one may deem “positive” and “negative” information and opinions, but our goal with discussing EGW - as with all topics - is to look at all sides of an issue. A quick look back through our journal Archives, graciously digitally preserved by the Center for Adventist Research, will show how long we have been committed to discussing all aspects of EGW. You might find our Autumn 1970 issue interesting, for example, as it contains several articles about Ellen White.
Except when it compromises the self-perceived integrity of the gander, then what is good for the gander is only good for the gander, and not good for the goose, as in WO.
The point here is the required nourishment. EGW had a sedentary profession (who also could have been a slow metabolizer) and did no hard manual labor. I doubt two meals a day would be sufficient for a medical intern laboring 18 hours a day or someone employed by the PA Dept of Transportation working on roads.
In this regard my chances are not as good as his were… 
