
Why Wait Till Marriage?
A Critique of Contemporary Arguments for Premarital Sex by Jimmy Williams, revised by Jerry Solomon
Crucial moral battles are being fought in our culture. Nowhere is
this seen more vividly than in the present sexual attitudes and
behaviors of Americans. The average young person experiences many
pressures in the formation of personal sexual standards and
behavior.
The fact that some standard must be chosen cannot be ignored. Sex
is here to stay, and it remains a very basic force in our lives. We
cannot ignore its presence any more than we can ignore other
ordinary human drives.
This essay explores contemporary sexual perspectives within a
biblical framework. Each of us needs to think through the
implications of sexual alternatives and choose a personal sexual
ethic based on intellectual and Christian factors, not merely
biological, emotional, or social ones.
Sex and Love
Before we begin our survey of various perspectives, we need to face
squarely the relationship of the physical act of sexual intercourse
to the more intangible aspects of a meaningful relationship between
two human beings.
Is having sex really making love? Modern case studies,
psychological insights, church teachings, and biblical premises all
seem to suggest not. As psychoanalyst Erich Fromm puts it, "To love
a person productively implies to care and to feel responsible for
his life, not only for his physical powers but for the growth and
development of all his human powers."(1)
If sex is merely a physical thing, then masturbation or other forms
of autoeroticism should provide true and complete sexual
satisfaction. Such is not the case. Alternatives to normal sexual
intercourse may satisfy physically, but not emotionally. Meaningful
sexual activity involves the physical union of a man and a woman in
a relationship of mutual caring and intimacy.
Every normal person has the physical desire for sexual activity
accompanied with a desire to know and be known, to love and be
loved. Both desires make up the real quest for intimacy in a
relationship; sexual intercourse represents only one ingredient
that allows us to experience true intimacy.
A maximum sexual relationship exists where mutual communication,
understanding, affection, and trust have formed, and two people
have lastingly committed themselves to each other in a permanent
relationship. The more of these qualities that are present, the
deeper the intimacy and the more meaningful the relationship. It
becomes more valuable as time passes because it is one of a kind--
unique. To spread the intimacy around through a variety of sexual
liaisons destroys the accumulated value of the previous
relationship(s) and dilutes and scatters (in little doses to a
number of people) what one has to give.
A real challenge faces young people today. Given the choice between
hamburger at five o'clock or filet mignon at seven-thirty, are
there any good reasons to forego the hamburger and wait for the
filet? Why not both? Why not take the hamburger now and the
filet later?
The latter attitude is precisely the rationale of those who
encourage sexual activity outside of marriage. But it is not
possible to have both without encountering problems later. Too many
hamburgers ruin one's taste and appreciation for filet and tend to
turn filet into hamburger as well!
Contemporary Arguments for Premarital Sex
Now we will begin to consider the arguments that are presented to
justify sexual activity before and outside of marriage. We will
analyze the arguments briefly and explore the general implications
of each rationale so that you can decide which will provide
the best path for your future.
Biological Argument
Perhaps the most common reason used to justify premarital sexual
activity is that the sex drive is a basic biological one. The
argument is as old as the Bible, where Paul states in 1 Corinthians
6:13, "Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food." The
Corinthians were using the biological argument to justify their
immorality, but Paul explained that the analogy to the sex appetite
was (and is) fallacious. Humans cannot live without food, air, or
water. But we can live without sex.
Nature says several things on this point. First, God has built into
the natural world a mechanism for sexual release: nocturnal
emissions, or orgasmic release during dreams. Second, nature
rejects human promiscuity, as the growing problem of sexually-
transmitted diseases makes abundantly clear.
Couples who confine sex to their marriage partners face no such
danger from disease. Further, we can safely conclude that
abstinence does not impair one's health. Sociologist Robert Bell
quips, "There appear to be no records of males hospitalized because
girls refused to provide sexual outlets." (2)
While recognizing that human beings share many common
characteristics with animals, we do not find comparable sexual
behavioral patterns in the animal world. Human sexuality is unique
in that it includes, but transcends, physical
reproductive elements. It reaches an intimacy unknown among
animals. Humans are different from animals.
Statistical Argument
A second popular argument reasons that everyone is doing it. First,
we must categorically emphasize that this is not a true statement.
A recent study (1991) of college freshmen shows that "about two-
thirds of men (66.3 percent) and slightly more than one-third of
the women (37.9 percent) support the idea of sex between people who
have known each other only for a short time."(3) As sobering as
such statistics may be, they obviously indicate that not everyone
is sexually active.
Further, statistics do not establish moral values. Is
something right because it happens frequently or because many
people believe it? A primitive tribe may have a 100 percent
majority consensus that cannibalism is right! Does that make it
right? A majority can be wrong. If a society sets the
standards, those standards are subject to change with the whim and
will of the majority. In one generation slavery may be right and
abortion wrong, as in early nineteenth-century America; but in
another generation, abortion is in and slavery is out, as today.
There are enough young people in any school or community who prefer
to wait until marriage that the young person who wants to wait has
plenty of company.(4) Each person must decide where he or she wants
to be in a given statistical analysis of current sexual mores and
behavior.
Proof of Love
A third argument suggests that sexual activity tests or provides
proof of love. Supposedly, it symbolizes how much the other cares.
One therefore exerts pressure on the more reluctant partner to
demonstrate a certain level of care. Reluctant partners succumbing
to this pressure often do so with an underlying hope that it will
somehow cement the relationship and discourage the other partner
from searching elsewhere for a less hesitant friend.
Any person who insists on making sex the ultimate proof of a
genuine relationship isn't saying "I love you," but rather "I love
it." True love concerns itself with the well-being of the other
person and would not interpret sexual hesitation in such a selfish
way. Furthermore, the person adopting this practice develops a
pattern of demonstrating love by purely sexual responsiveness.
Ultimately he or she enters marriage with something of a distortion
as to what real intimacy means, to say nothing of having to deal
with the memories of previous loves. Some behaviors are
irreversible, and this process is like trying to unscramble an egg.
Once it's done, it's done.
The broader perspective sees sex as an integral and important part
of a meaningful relationship but not the totality of it.
Remembering this will help any individual to make the right
decision to refrain from sexual involvement if a potential partner
puts on the pressure to make sex the test of a meaningful
relationship.
Psychological Argument
The psychological argument is also a popular one and is closely
tied to the biological argument previously discussed. Here's the
question: Is sexual restraint bad for you?
Sublimating one's sex drive is not unhealthy. In sublimation the
processes of sexual and aggressive energy are displaced by
nonsexual and nondestructive goals.
But guilt, unlike sublimation, can produce devastating results in
human behavior. It is anger turned inward, producing depression, a
lowered self-esteem, and fatigue. Further, chastity and virginity
contribute very little to sexual problems. Unsatisfying
relationships, guilt, hostility toward the opposite sex, and low
self-esteem do. In short, there are no scars where there have been
no wounds.
In this hedonistic society, some persons need no further
justification for sexual activity beyond the fact that it's fun.
"If it feels good, do it!" says the bumper sticker. But the fun
syndrome forces us to sacrifice the permanent on the altar of the
immediate.
The sex act itself is no guarantee of fun. Initial sex experiences
outside of marriage are often disappointing because of high anxiety
and guilt levels. Fear of discovery, haste, and lack of commitment
and communication all combine to spoil some of the fun. Further,
there is no way to avoid the exploitation of someone in the
relationship if it's just for fun. Sometimes one person's pleasure
is another's pain. No one likes to be or feel used.
Marilyn Monroe was a sex symbol for millions. She said, "People
took a lot for granted; not only could they be friendly, but they
could suddenly get overly friendly and expect an awful lot for a
very little."(5) She felt used. She died naked and alone, with an
empty bottle of sleeping pills beside a silent telephone. Was the
fame and fun worth it? Evidently she thought not.
Experiential Argument
This perspective emphasizes a desire on the part of an individual
not to appear like a sexual novice on the wedding night. One answer
to this is to have enough sexual experience prior to marriage so
that one brings practice, not theory to the initial sexual
encounter in marriage. But the body was designed to perform
sexually and will do so given the opportunity.
This is not to say that sexual skill cannot be gained through
experience. It is to say that every skill acquired by humans must
have a beginning point. If the idea of two virgins on their wedding
night brings amusement to our minds instead of admiration, it is
actually a sad commentary on how far we have slipped as individuals
and as a culture.
It must be emphasized again that healthy sexual adjustment depends
much more on communication than technique. World-famous sex
therapists Masters and Johnson found:
Nothing good is going to happen in bed between a
husband and wife unless good things have been happening between
them before they go into bed. There is no way for a good sexual
technique to remedy a poor emotional relationship.(5)
In other words, a deeply-committed couple with no sexual
experience is far ahead of a sexually-experienced couple with
shallow and tentative commitment, as far as the marriage's future
sexual success is concerned.
Compatibility Argument
A corollary to the experiential argument is the one of
compatibility. The idea is, How will I know if the shoe fits unless
first I try it on? A foot stays about the same size, but the human
sex organs are wonderfully stretchable and adaptable. A woman's
vagina can enlarge to accommodate the birth of a baby or to fit a
male organ of any size. Physical compatibility is 99 percent
guaranteed, and the other 1 percent can become so with medical
consultation and assistance.
Of greater importance is to test person-to-person compatibility.
Sexual dysfunction in young people is usually psychologically
based. Building bridges of love and mutual care in the non-physical
facets of the relationship are the sure roads to a honeymoon that
can last a lifetime.
Contraceptive Argument
The contraceptive argument supposedly takes the fear of pregnancy
out of sexual activity and gives moderns a virtual green light.
Actually, the light is at most pale green and perhaps only yellow.
The simple fact is that pregnancy (along with sexually-transmitted
diseases) remains a possibility.
Beyond the question of contraceptive use is the entire area of
unwanted children. There are no good alternatives for children born
out of wedlock. Do we have the right to deprive children of life or
a secure family setting and loving parents to supply their basic
needs? Ironically, even severely battered children choose to be
with their parents over other alternatives. Parental love and
security are highly prized.
Sexual intimacy between a man and a woman is not exclusively their
private affair. Sexual intercourse must take place with a view
toward facing the consequences. The time of moral decision in
sexual matters comes before one decides to have sex with someone,
not later when unforeseen circumstances take things the wrong way.
Marital Argument
Perhaps the most prominent argument for premarital sex among
Christians is the marital argument, which says, "We are in love and
plan to marry soon. Why should we wait?"
Dr. Howard Hendricks, an authority on the family, comments that the
best way to mortgage your marriage is to play around at the door of
marriage.(7) Loss of respect and intensity of feelings may occur,
as well as guilt and dissatisfaction. Restraint for a time adds
excitement to the relationship and makes the honeymoon something
very special, not a continuation of already-established patterns.
Some couples also see little value in a public declaration of
marital intent. Or they may think the formality of a wedding is the
equivalent of dogma. Those who prefer no public declaration but
rather seek anonymity may be saying something about the depth (or
lack thereof) of their commitment to one another. Do they have
their fingers crossed?
Contemporary studies indicate that the marital argument is not
sound. Of 100 couples who cohabit, 40 break up before they marry.
Of the 60 who marry, 45 divorce--leaving only 15 of 100 with a
lasting marriage. Thus, cohabitation has two negative effects: it
sharply reduces the number who marry, and dramatically increases
the divorce rate of those who do.(8)
Engaged couples, according to Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:36-37, should
either control their sexual drives or marry. Intercourse, then, is
not proper for engaged couples. They should either keep their
emotions in check or marry.
Conclusion
We have examined some of the major arguments used to justify
premarital sex. If these are the strongest defenses of sex outside
of marriage, the case is weak. Our brief trek through the
wilderness of contemporary sexual ideas has led to some virtual
dead ends.
There are good reasons to make a commitment to limit our sexual
experience to a time when the sex act can be reinforced in a
context of permanent love and care. From this perspective,
virginity is not viewed as something that must be eliminated as
soon as possible, but as a gift to treasure and save for a special
and unique person.
The biblical standard that puts sex within the fidelity and
security of marriage is the most responsible code that has ever
been developed. You are justified in following it without apology
as the best standard for protecting human, moral, and Christian
values that has been devised.
Some reading this may have already had sexual experience outside of
marriage. The data we have discussed is not intended to condemn or
produce guilt.
The good news is that Jesus Christ came for the expressed purpose
of forgiving our sins, sexual and all other. Jesus, who is the same
yesterday, today, and forever, will forgive us. The real question
now is, What shall we do with the future? Christ can cleanse the
past, but He expects us to respond to the light He gives us.
Hopefully this discussion will help you strengthen your convictions
with regard to sexual decisions and behavior in the days ahead. As
the adage says, today is the first day of the rest of your life.
Copyright 1994 Jimmy Williams and Jerry Solomon
© 1996 Probe Ministries
James F. Williams is the founder and president of Probe
Ministries International. He holds degrees from Southern Methodist
University (B.A.) and Dallas Theological Seminary (Th.M.). He also
has pursued inter-disciplinary doctoral studies (a.b.d.) in the
humanities at the University of Texas at Dallas.
During the past thirty years, he has visited, lectured, and
counseled on more than 140 university campuses in the United
States, Canada, and Europe. He has also served on the faculties of the American, Latin
American, and European Institutes of Biblical Studies.
Jerry Solomon is the field ministries manager and "Mind
Games" College Prep coordinator of Probe Ministries. He received
the B.A. summa cum laude in Bible and the M.A. cum
laude in history and theology from Criswell College. He has
also attended the University of North Texas, Canal Zone College,
and Lebanon Valley College, Pennsylvania.

Back to Abstinence Page
Be a TLC Lifeguard
Before You Leave...
We hope you enjoy our web site and find it useful as a resource center.
Please take a moment to rate our site.
Will you help?
Will you help us continue to make this resource
available to thousands of monthly visitors from around the world?
Yes
Texans for Life Coalition
P.O. Box 177727
Irving, TX 75017-7727
(972) 790-9044
webservant@texlife.org
|