A recent abstinence pledge study has produced competing interpretations of pledge effectiveness. What the media seems to miss is that the study—conducted by Janet Elise Rosenbaum, published in the journal Pediatrics, and titled “Patient Teenagers? A Comparison of the Sexual Behavior of Virginity Pledgers and Matched Nonpledgers”—is about sexual behavior in young people after high school. The latest findings reveal that five years after abstinence pledges are made, pledgers and non-pledgers alike are equally promiscuous. The sexual behavior of young adults five years after taking abstinence pledges should not surprise us, regardless of their constrained sexual activity during their high school years.

The study also demonstrates that teens from supportive religious communities are much less likely to engage in premarital sex in high school. But is being less bad necessarily good? Here’s an idea: Let’s stop teens from making pledges altogether. The problem in our divorce culture is that marriage has been devalued to the point that abstinence until marriage makes less and less sense to many people.

I have never been a fan of abstinence pledge programs and generally see them as pharisaical and utilitarian when churches adopt them. In general, these programs are designed for teens to get through high school without losing their virginity, as if losing one’s virginity at 16-years-old is morally inferior to losing it at 21-years-old outside of marriage. Deep spirituality, however, should not be confused with participation in extra-biblical church programs. Many parents seem more concerned about their children’s sexuality than their children’s love for Jesus and dependence on the Holy Spirit. If teens are not in love with Jesus, what’s an abstinence program on a Sunday night, with pledge cards, purity rings, workbooks, and an annual conference going to accomplish in the long run?

True love pursues and seeks the Kingdom priorities of the Triune God no matter what those priorities are at any age. I would rather my teen publicly confess dependence on the Holy Spirit in all areas of life than make abstinence pledges with purity rings, bracelets, and car decals. Moreover, many well-intentioned parents believe that when their children make a public pledge to abstinence it is a cause for celebration. Would you like the blue pill or the red pill?

Over the past 15 years, I’ve worked in too many churches and in too many college ministries all over America to know that an adolescent abstinence pledge, outside of a passionate pursuit of the Triune God, is about as trustworthy in the long-run as pledges to call home every Sunday, to drive under the speed limit, to never abuse alcohol, to never lie, and so on.

If five years after their pledges, those who pledge and those who do not are no different in their rates of premarital sex, sexually transmitted infections, or participating in certain sexual acts, then what’s the point of these programs? Why do churches use them? Outside of a commitment to Christ (John 14:15-31) these programs can be reduced to nothing more than rhetorical exercises.

Perhaps this why Jesus recommends that men and women seek first God’s Kingdom and His righteousness (Matthew 6:33). What if teens were encouraged to devote their lives to the Kingdom in all areas of life, including their sexuality? Jesus-loving baptized teens, living out the implications of frequent partaking of the Lord’s Supper, carried by the Holy Spirit, is the 2,000-year-old practice that never needed an extra-biblical religious ceremony.

It may be the case that the best way to settle the confusion over the effectiveness of abstinence pledges is to admit that they are well-intentioned but do not produce the intended long-term results and should be terminated.