Is Using Ashes Biblical If God Never Commanded It?

A common objection raised by some Christians against Ash Wednesday and the use of ashes is simple and forceful: “Where did God command it?” or “Is it explicitly in the Bible?” On the surface, this sounds like a serious biblical concern. However, this argument rests on a flawed assumption that only practices commanded by direct wording are acceptable to God. Scripture itself does not support this approach. The Bible consistently shows that while God does not issue a formal command to use ashes, He sees, accepts, and responds to repentance expressed through ashes. That distinction matters greatly.

Throughout Scripture, God calls His people to repentance, humility, fasting, and turning back to Him (Joel 2:12–13). The form that repentance takes is often culturally and contextually expressed. In the biblical world, sackcloth and ashes were the recognized and meaningful outward signs of inward conversion. God did not reject this practice. Instead, He repeatedly responded to it with mercy.

The clearest example appears in the book of Jonah. The king of Nineveh proclaimed fasting and ashes after hearing God’s warning (Jonah 3:5–6). Scripture explicitly states that God saw their actions, recognized their repentance, and relented from judgment (Jonah 3:10). If ashes were an unauthorized or offensive practice, this would have been the moment for correction or punishment. Instead, God accepted the visible sign as evidence of genuine interior change.

This pattern is repeated elsewhere. Job repented in dust and ashes and was restored by God rather than rebuked (Job 42:6, 10). Daniel prayed and fasted in sackcloth and ashes while confessing the sins of Israel, and God responded by sending revelation and reassurance (Daniel 9:3, 20–23). Mordecai wore sackcloth and ashes during a national crisis, and deliverance followed (Esther 4:1–3; 8:16–17). Kings, prophets, and entire nations expressed repentance through ashes, and Scripture presents this as acceptable to God.

This becomes even more striking when contrasted with moments where God did punish people for improper worship or unauthorized practices. Nadab and Abihu were struck down for offering unauthorized fire before the Lord (Leviticus 10:1–2). Uzzah was punished for touching the Ark in a way God had forbidden (2 Samuel 6:6–7). Saul was rejected for offering sacrifice in disobedience (1 Samuel 13:8–14). These examples prove that God is not indifferent to how He is approached. When God rejects a practice, Scripture records it clearly.

Yet when ashes are used as a sign of repentance, God never condemns the practice. Instead, He accepts it, responds to it, and even assumes its legitimacy. Jesus Himself referred to repentance in sackcloth and ashes as the appropriate response cities should have made when confronted with God’s works (Matthew 11:21; Luke 10:13). He did not dismiss it as human invention. He treated it as a meaningful biblical response.

The issue, then, is not whether God issued a technical command, but whether God accepted the practice. Scripture answers that question decisively. God saw repentance expressed through ashes and granted mercy. To reject the practice today on the grounds that “God never commanded it” is to apply a standard God Himself did not apply.

When kings, prophets, and entire nations used ashes, it was acceptable to God. When fellow Christians do the same today as an act of humility and repentance, some reject it outright. This raises an uncomfortable question. Is the rejection rooted in faithfulness to Scripture, or in pride, reactionary theology, or a misunderstanding of how God actually works in the Bible?

Scripture teaches that God looks at the heart, but He also recognizes outward expressions that truthfully reflect inward conversion (Isaiah 58:6–7). Ashes have no power on their own, but when used as Scripture presents them, they become a visible confession of dependence on God. To dismiss what God accepted is not biblical caution. It is biblical inconsistency.

When rightly understood, the use of ashes stands not against Scripture, but firmly within it.