“Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.” Matt 1:18-20
The Joseph story is sometimes lost in our joy about Christmas. He was quite a guy because he was willing to accept Mary’s claim that she was a virgin even though she was obviously pregnant. He was willing to put aside all that he had been taught about how a devout Jewish man should respond in these circumstances and deal with the public ridicule he certainly experienced because the woman he planned to marry was pregnant.
There is a lot that we can learn from that story about how we deal with the whole subject of sex education today.
An interesting study was recently published by Pediatrics journal. It examined how effective abstinence-only sex education programs are. What it found is that those who participated in those programs, as indicated by their willingness to pledge to retain their virginity until marriage, ultimately do engage in pre-marital sex at more or less the same rate as the rest of the population.
That in itself wouldn’t be all that disturbing, but the study also examined the use of contraceptives. It discovered that those who pledged virginity, once they did become sexually active, were 12% less likely to use contraceptives compared to the general population.
One explanation for this difference is that abstinence-only programs either deliberately or inadvertently create negative associations with contraceptives.
The only difference that the study found is that those who had participated in the abstinence programs did tend to delay their first sexual contact longer than the rest of the population. Some who have analyzed the data suggest there is a greater correlation for this delay with the conservative families these people came from (restricted/controlled contact with the opposite sex, same sex schooling, conservative colleges, etc.) than their participation in a particular type of sex education course.
Ultimately, though, what this study states is the obvious. The natural drives to procreate that lead young people to explore and experiment with their sexuality are very strong.
What it also says loud and clear is that the money poured into abstinence-only education programs over the past eight years has not had the desired effect. In fact, the “standard” sex education programs which don’t attempt to place a value judgement on pre-marital sex, but simply educate teenagers about how to responsibly manage their sexuality, appear to be more effective in encouraging young men and women to use contraceptives.
What I’m interested in finding out is whether this makes any difference to those conservative Christians who pushed for abstinence-only programs.
My sense is that it won’t because they will view this as a moral choice rather than an attempt to reduce unwanted pregnancies. It is about pregnancy being an appropriate consequence for pre-marital sex. It is the hubris which suggests that parents can protect not only their own children, but the children of less pious parents, from bad choices by imposing a particular set of religious values.
Jesus spent a lot of time criticizing a similar pride of the conservative Jewish aristocracy.
“And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.” Luke 18:9-14
It is the humility of the publican that leads to the recognition that God directs the lives of all of His children, not us. At the end of the day, it is our responsibility as parents to provide our children with ALL the information that they need to become responsible adults. They are the ones who ultimately make the choices about their own sexuality, just as they make choices about the values they are going to use to guide their lives. God is looking for our children to choose Him on their own terms and not as the result of a choices we or any other set of parents have already made.
We have the great privilege to guide. They have the responsibility to choose.
I’m not sure what Joseph and Mary have with this.
In fact I’d suggest they are COUNTER to your point.
Joseph was going to have Mary “put away” as her new
found status as being pregent would suggest to Joseph
he was not betrothed to a VIRGIN any longer. Jeff, why would
he do such a thing? Only after the “Angel of the Lord” let him
in on what was about to take place did he drop this idea. (Matt 1:20)
Joseph was doing what any other Jewesh boy at the time would have done. Why? because on his wedding night he would not have been able to produce the “soiled sheet,” if you will, confirming that he had wed
a virgin.
How you choose to use Joseph and Mary in defence of teaching the use of comdums, etc. is a mystery as the whole concept of Virginity is CONFIRMED in this story.
Now to your point. Why would I teach Mary to use condems when her future husband is expecting a Virgin? This simply defies logic to me. I have no understanding of why I would eve,r in any way, encourage anyone to have sex outside of marrage. The messege I would SHOUT from the roof top to anyone who asks me or I have responsiblity over it WAIT FOR YOU BELOVED. Do not give yourself to anyone who is not your husband or wife. I simply can not conceive of any other messege. To take that belief and the defame it with , “but if you can’t wait, here’s what you need to do so you will not get pregent or get an STD.” There is no logic in that Jeff.
Jesus told the women at the well who was found in adualtry “go and sin no more.” he didn’t say “and if you do make sure you are using protection.”
Jesus was obligated to say “go and sin no more.” we are obligated to say “go and sin no more.” This is diffucult because we DO SIN, it’s in our natural. For this reason we need a savior. But Jesus still says to you and I “Go and sin no more.” If he were to say anything less, He would not the the Christ. This is what we are to aspire to. The bible also says “make no provision for the flesh. (I am now very much talking to myself)
A man has a son and taught him life long lessons about work and education. Lessons about how he should go about making a way for himself in the world, to be a hard worker and be self sufficent in providing for himself and a family. Then at the end of his education the father pulls him aside and says, “All I’ve taught you I believe. However, should you have troubles and life becomes a struggle and you can’t provide for your wife and children, I know for a fact the security guard at the bank on main street is crooked. If you bribe him properly he will arrange for you five minuites in the vault during shift change and you can steel from the bank the amount you need to live.” Jeff are you also in favor of this?
The end does not and never will justify the means. If so I’m more then sure Jesus would have found a way to avoid the cross. This is usually called sin. Premaritial sex is and stealing is.
As to the word “hubris,” in the context I’ve just written I’m sure you would reconsider the use of this word. It is with humilty they we instruct in Godly principles not hubris. Your choice of words and context in which you say it is familiar to me as you regularly show contept for Christians actually trying their best to pratice it and teach Christianity.
As for abstence programs, I don’t know much about them. How many their ar, who teaches them, etc. Our relm of influence should be our families as “Instruct a child in the way that he should go and when he is old he will not depart from it.” This is from proverbs. Proverbs are proverbs and not to be confused with promise’s. However they are useful; ex, “plant your corn in the spring and in the fall you will have food to eat.” That is not a promise corn will grow. There could have a been circumstances araise out of your control which effect the out come. BUT YOU DID WHAT WAS CORRECT, PLANTING THE CORN.
We are to do what is correct and teaching our childern, and ourselves, to save themselves for their spouse. To give them any other message would be to confuse the truth. And no I am not concerned with any other outcome given this teaching. If a child gets pregent then they get pregent, it is the result of their action. Do you want to protect the achoholic from liver problems even though he is drinking like a fish?
Finally, to your last use of scripture, again it is not relevent to this discussion, except for your purpose of generalizing all Christians as being
ouff’s, or in this case lacking in humility. The same person who teaches abstense until marrige should do so humbly because they are teaching Gods word. For you to leap to the conclusion that some who teach that we should wait for sex is prideful or full of “hubris” is really not speaking to me, or any Christians I know.
A true Christian knows his standing is only in Jesus. We are not acceptable and our wrong doing, or sin, is the cause. There is no lecturing of others or pointing to ourselves as examples. The example we point to is Jesus and this is through the bible. However we are accountable to teach others. Their are many scriptures which point out our need to instruct one another.
Jeff, I never get the sense you have to give anyone a definitive answer on anything. Merely present all the options and let them choose. How does this square with “Teach a child in the way they should go and when they are old they will not depart from it.” Jeff, my understanding of your belief would be this; “raise a child in every concieveable way in which they could possibly go, and when they are old, they may choose the way that is best for them but may change their mind if it no longer suits them or their circumstances.” After all there is no truth except that which we accept for oursleves and their is many, many ways to God, biblical or not. If your belief is diffent then this is is not evident by your writings in the blog.
Jeff this is silly. Did you teach your children that 2 +2 = 3 or how about 2 + 2 = 5? I know you didn’t.
True Chrsitainty is a humble existance. Jesus is the one we follow and He said, “for I have come not to be served but to serve.” No hubris there. I’d ask to show me examples of this. Again I haven’t seen this hubris, not in the church I attended in Monroe, not in the 28,000 member church I attend in Memphis, not in the 3,000 menber church I attended in Tulsa (though one person boardered on this) and not in the 1,500 memebr church I attend in Baltimore. I haven’t seen this hubris on display, quite the contrary.
On a side note, are you impressed with Harry Reid over the past few days?
Keith,
You are WAY to literal in reading my post.
Why was Joseph, though a righteous Jewish man, willing to give up virtually everything he had been taught about how to deal with this situation?
Because he had better information than everyone else. He knew Mary and he trusted God. In fact he felt so strongly about it that he was willing to break from tradition and he was willing to deal with the public ridicule he knew he and his family were going to receive.
In a similar way, depriving our children of good information about contraceptives and STD’s doesn’t preserve their virginity. Their relationship with God ultimately determines what sorts of decisions they are going to make. We parents can’t make those decisions for them, anymore than God could compell either Mary or Joseph to do what He wanted. They had to make those decisions themselves and we all are indebted to them for their receptivity and courage.
To come at it from a different direction, what these studies also prove is that making this information available to kids does NOT encourage them to become more sexually active. Further, what DOES appear to have some affect on WHEN kids choose to become sexually active is the sort of FAMILY they come from.
I agree that Marriage is sacred. I also believe that the relationships of those to treat Marriage as sacred receive a special blessing. That doesn’t mean that all other relationships are cursed (that’s an Old Testament way of looking at things). What it does mean is, like so many other things, if you listen to God and trust Him to direct your path, that path will be blessed in ways that you could never imagine. I have personal experience of both approaches (listening and not listening) and I can tell you that listening works much better.
My wife and I have also done our best to share this with our children, but it is up to them to embrace these ideas and make them their own. That doesn’t mean that they could do anything that they wanted when they were younger, but my youngest will legally be an adult in a few months, so both my wife and I have to consciously adjust our thought to see him as an adult. As a result when I humbly pray to seek God’s direction every day, I also pray for the same wisdom and receptivity that Joseph and Mary had to trust that God is active in the lives of all His creation.
The hubris I was referring to is the suggestion that parents can affect change by IMPOSING their values on other people’s children. At the end of the day, that was the clear failure of abstinence-only education.
As far as Harry Reid is concerned, I thought the whole Rolland Burris episode was facinating. President Obama may be young, but he is a clearly a talented politician. He played Harry like a fine violin.
Hey Jeff,
First, you’ll be glad to know I stood outside in the sub-artic weather for 1 1/2 hours to see Obama Saturday Morning in Wilmington, DE. Just to view a little bit of history and to wish him well. (I actually said “I wish you well” even though he couldn’t hear me.)
You asked;
“Why was Joseph, though a righteous Jewish man, willing to give up virtually everything he had been taught about how to deal with this situation?”
Answer, because he had been put at easy by GOD Himself.
Now to my point and my point all along. Your column is interging to me though, as you know, you are wrong about most everything. However in light of that minor point, you are the ONLY person I’ve ever had conversation with that actually engauges, and responds with a defense, as wrong it might also be, that are reasoned and have thought.
I was first drawn to your blog by the “SPRITUAL” part of the title. You’ve explained this a couple of times why that’s there. My first interest was always the scripural side. This use of Joseph and Mary is the perfect illistration of how you use scripture in a way that is so misdirected that you probably ought to stop doing so.
Make this a political blog from a pregressives perspective. Leave the “spiritual part out. You rarely touch on spiritual wickness in high places other then to bash G.W. or some other republican anyway. And then you mostly confuss it with Scripural wrongs when they are really just matters of differents of opinion, policey or just plain old they were wrong. I might inject here that I’ve seen no articules leading with scripture about deception or lying then followed up by a comentery of how Nancy P. and Harry R. told the entire world that if given the house and senate they would “bring the troops home.” (This was a dishonest statement from the start as only the Pres could do that. In fact the surge is what happened next not “bring the troops home.” Poor Harry “the war is lost” Reid.)
There is nothing that can be said about God, Mary or Joseph, that can be used to defend your position. Joseph had God telling him it was ok to continue with Mary. I have no clue how you go from there to ………and we need to give kids all the information about condems etc so when they choose to no longer be a virgin it will prevent unwanted pregnecies, std’s, etc. This is simply not a scriptural agruement from this passage or any other…..
Now your arguement for giving kids all the information out there is a resonable one, I just don’t agree with it. But in no way does GOD, Joseph or Mary have any part of that discussion. There’s my disagreement. Your use of scripture to defend “humanly reasoned” beliefs. Simply out of bounds.
Now, I most certianly agree we can’t compell kids to “do as we say.” I’m 100% with you there. However, our disagreement here is that I will provide no other alturnitive. I simply will not do it, study or no study.
I don’t consider this arrogent either, as you have suggested. If I were to point to another way other then keeping ones virginity, which I believe to be the Godly thing to do, then I am adding to what I believe God has instructed. This Jeff would be the ultimate hubrus…knowing more then God. I’m still at “instruct a child in the way they should go and when they are old they will not depart from it.” It doesn’t say anywhere in there, “unless a study is done by the human developement department at UM that says they mostly will not listen as it pertains to virginity.”
God works in all manners of ways and differently for everyone. I am currently studing the book of Easter. (Now that’s working in ways we don’t understand.) God can use any situation for his good. (see roms 8:28) This does not dismiss us from holding up His truths.
Hope all is well.
Keith,
I enjoy our conversations too.
I am not bothered by the fact that you think I’m wrong.
You are welcome to your point of view and I appreciate thetime that you take defending it. But I never write with the expectation that anyone is going to change their mind. It’s just an opportunity for me to think out loud.
Your response though, do give me a better understanding of how you think.
You would have had to know my HS religion teacher to fully understand my perspective and approach. But it took me about ten years to understand it myself, and I had the pleasure of his company. Perhaps ten years from now, some of what we’ve discussed will resonate with you too.
Happy to hear that you had a chance to see President Obama.
It is an exciting new day.
Unfortunately for us, we will remain to some degree constrained by our beliefs and passions.
This new generation of leaders which President Obama will inspire will craft a new social order. It will be one of shared purpose which will trump difference. The sorts of debates that we take pleasure in will become increasingly inappropriate. They will criticize us for holding on to old wounds and chewing on the same bones, just as we criticized our parents for their comfortable conformity. These kids are going to build a new middle class dream that they will all share and we just won’t get. But that’s what we get for becoming old.
Jeff
I have been searching Google and Yahoo and kept seeing coming across your posts so I thought I would drop by and check your site out. Thanks for the useful and informative stuff you have here… I’ll be back!