In some, yes. The Ross quote comes from a Christianity Today “roundtable” of sorts where leaders were addressing the growing reality that abstinence programs *even targeted in church communities* don’t seem to be making much difference. His point — and my point in the post — is that simply teaching behavior modification doesn’t provide motivation to change. In Christian communities, the desire to remain sexually pure is primarily seen as a means of obeying and honoring God. My point is that the heart to obey and honor God comes not from “law” but gospel. So it is awe of Jesus that helps us change, not simply being reminded of what’s right and wrong.

And could you clarify what you meant by your last sentence? Other goals with other means?

I just meant that in non-Christian (or generally irreligious) programs, the ultimate goal is not to honor and obey God but to avoid disease, prevent pregnancy, curtail abortion, or the like. Those are all great goals, of course. In the Christian worldview, they are ways to honor God. In the nonChristian worldview, they are ways to have a better society or value ourselves or some other thing — that’s what I mean by “other goals.” Not bad goals. And not even anti-Christian goals. Just not specifically Christian goals. And so if the goal is not to honor God but primarily to avoid disease, certainly means other than becoming Christian will be employed b/c you don’t have to be a Christian to simply avoid sexually transmitted diseases or teenage pregnancy.

And could you clarify what you meant by your last sentence? Other goals with other means?