Appetite and Self-Control: God’s Design for Life in an Age of Abundance
January 11, 2026
Human beings are marked by powerful appetites for food, pleasure, and stimulation. Evolutionarily, these drives enhanced survival in environments characterized by caloric scarcity. In modern societies of abundance, however, these same appetites are frequently framed as liabilities—contributors to obesity, addiction, and failures of self-regulation. Such framing raises an implicit theological question: Did human design become maladaptive in the modern world?
This question has occupied both scholarly reflection and personal inquiry over time. Nearly a decade ago, I developed and delivered a presentation on willpower and self-control, which prompted sustained reflection on the nature of impulse, discipline, and human agency. More recently, a message delivered at Life Church Leander, addressing health, gluttony, and disciplined living, renewed this line of thought and helped close a conceptual gap that had remained unresolved: rather than viewing desire primarily as a problem to be managed, it became possible to consider desire as a capacity intentionally designed for formation.
From a Christian theological perspective, the conclusion is clear: God’s design is neither mistaken nor obsolete. Instead, human appetite must be understood as a capacity intended to be governed, not suppressed. This article advances the thesis that God designed humans with strong appetites that were essential for survival in scarcity and remain essential today as a means of cultivating self-discipline. In conditions of abundance, appetite becomes a daily training ground for self-mastery, shaping the capacity to regulate not only eating behavior but all forms of consumption.
Before proceeding, it is important to clarify the scope and intent of this argument. The present discussion is not meant to minimize the profound difficulty many individuals face with disordered eating, addiction, or compulsive behaviors. Such struggles are deeply rooted in human biology, neurochemistry, trauma, and environment. I acknowledge this personally, having experienced past struggles with alcoholism. Addiction is not a failure of character, nor is self-control a simple matter of willpower. Rather, the aim of this article is to explore whether a deeper understanding of human design—as biological, psychological, and spiritual beings—can illuminate the purpose of the struggle itself, and offer a framework of meaning that supports recovery, formation, and hope.
Consumption, Control, and Moral Asymmetry
Human life is inherently consumptive. Individuals consume food and drink, as well as images, sounds, information, and experiences. In contemporary environments, visual and auditory stimuli are pervasive and often unavoidable. Advertisements, public media, and social interactions expose individuals to content over which they exercise limited prior control. Once encountered, stimuli cannot be undone, and their cognitive or emotional effects may already be underway.
In contrast, oral consumption is fully volitional. Eating requires deliberate action—selection, preparation, and ingestion. No individual is fed passively (unless medically necessary). This creates a significant moral and behavioral asymmetry: while control over what one sees and hears is partial and reactive, control over what one eats and drinks is proactive and complete.
This asymmetry is central to the present argument. Because individuals have complete control over their eating, dietary discipline is the most accessible and repeatable domain for exercising self-control. As such, it becomes the foundational arena for developing self-regulatory capacity.
Biblical Foundations of Appetite and Self-Control
Scripture consistently portrays appetite as morally neutral but spiritually formative. Desire itself is not condemned; domination by desire is. The apostle Paul writes, “All things are lawful for me, but I will not be dominated by anything” (1 Corinthians 6:12, ESV, 2001), underscoring mastery rather than abstinence as the ethical ideal. Self-control is further identified as a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23), situating disciplined restraint within the process of sanctification.
Biblical warnings against gluttony (e.g., Proverbs 23:20–21) do not indict food itself but the erosion of judgment and obedience that accompanies ungoverned appetite. This pattern is reinforced narratively throughout Scripture. Adam’s fall, Esau’s forfeiture of his birthright, Israel’s rebellions, and Christ’s wilderness temptation all position food as a decisive testing ground for obedience.
These accounts suggest a theological principle: appetite is the first arena of discipline, and mastery of appetite precedes mastery in other domains. As such, disciplined eating is not ancillary to spiritual formation but central to it.
Neuroscientific Perspectives on Self-Control
Neuroscience offers a mechanistic account of why appetite discipline exerts such formative power. Self-control relies on executive functions, primarily mediated by the prefrontal cortex, which regulate impulses generated by reward-related subcortical systems. When individuals resist immediate gratification in favor of long-term goals, they engage top-down regulatory processes that can be strengthened through repeated use.
Research demonstrates that self-control is malleable. Practicing restraint in one behavioral domain enhances self-regulatory capacity across unrelated domains, supporting the view that self-control is a generalizable resource rather than a compartmentalized skill (Muraven & Baumeister, 2010). Eating behavior is especially salient neurologically because food stimuli robustly activate reward systems, making restraint both challenging and developmentally powerful.
Given the frequency and emotional significance of eating decisions, dietary discipline provides repeated opportunities to strengthen neural circuits associated with inhibition, foresight, and goal alignment.
Psychological Evidence for Transferable Discipline
Psychological research corroborates these neuroscientific findings. The strength model of self-control positions discipline as a capacity that increases with regular use. Experimental studies show that individuals who practice small, consistent acts of restraint—such as moderating food intake—demonstrate improved self-control in areas including emotional regulation, attention, and impulse management (Baumeister et al., 2007).
Importantly, self-control is most durable when grounded in internalized values rather than external enforcement. This aligns with Christian practices such as fasting and moderation, which frame restraint as obedience and formation rather than deprivation. Dietary discipline thus functions not merely as behavioral modification, but as character formation.
Appetite as a Divinely Designed Training Ground
Combining these perspectives produces a coherent framework. Human appetite is part of God’s perfect design. In environments of abundance, appetite does not lose relevance; it gains formative significance. Because individuals exercise complete control over what they eat and drink, disciplined consumption becomes the most reliable arena for cultivating self-mastery.
The self-control developed at the table transfers to domains where control is less absolute—what one watches, listens to, speaks, and dwells upon. In this sense, mastery of the mouth becomes mastery of the self. Gluttony is not merely excessive eating but the refusal to train the will; moderation becomes an act of resistance against a culture of excess.
Conclusion
Human appetite is not a mistake in our design, but a God-given capacity meant to be guided and strengthened through discipline. By learning to govern what we eat and drink, we train the self-control needed to navigate every other form of consumption in a world of constant excess.
At the same time, recognizing the formative potential of appetite must not obscure the reality of biological vulnerability. Addiction and compulsive behaviors are real, complex, and deeply human struggles. Yet within a Christian framework, struggle itself need not imply failure or futility. A deeper understanding of human design—as embodied, desiring, and spiritually capable beings—can reveal that the very arena of struggle may also be the arena of formation.
In an age saturated with stimuli beyond voluntary control, disciplined appetite offers a practical and theologically grounded pathway to personal, spiritual, and moral growth. Appetite, rightly disciplined, is not a liability—it is an instrument of sanctification.
Dr. Kyle Stull
References
Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Tice, D. M. (2007). The strength model of self-control. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(6), 351–355.
Muraven, M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2010). Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources: Does self-control resemble a muscle? Psychological Bulletin, 126(2), 247–259.
Duckworth, A. L., & Carlson, S. M. (2013). Self-regulation and school success. In B. W. Sokol et al. (Eds.), Self-regulation and autonomy (pp. 208–230). Cambridge University Press.
The Holy Bible, English Standard Version. (2001). Crossway.