I'm a little bewildered by this, too.. more by the responses than anything else.

I don't understand the purpose of the "Sexperiment", but then I don't understand the point of camping out in Zucatti park, or of protesting outside an abortion clinic, or walking for cancer research, or any other kind of showy public sit-in, parade, etc.
But so what? It may not be my thing, but that doesn't mean it's wrong.

From the link, I don't see that this would differ much from a camping trip with friends, other than that they're also going to be discussing relationships. Are you guys reading something into this that I'm missing? I see: a bed (outdoors), two married pastors, and some interviews and discussion. But being in bed together doesn't imply intimacy, or immodest clothing, or immodest behavior.

So, how is it inappropriate? Why do you think that they're going to be sharing "what should be private moments"?

But if you will pardon my curiosity, what ARE they doing in the video if they are not engaging in specifically matrimonial activities, as Kim says they are not?

Reed, I invite you to read (or re-read, as the case may be) the article at the link in Kim's post, and compare it to your experience.

LeeQuod, I simply disagree with your analysis and your characterizing the broadcast as exhibitionism. Did you actually watch any of the broadcast as I did? Have you ever read or watched any of Ed Young Jr's teaching on sexuality as I have taken the time to do? I believe that my doing so allows me to share an informed opinion about this.

As I said and will repeat, this was NOT a 24 hour webcast of two people in bed staring into a camera and talking about sex with their PJ's on as I think some are misunderstanding it to have been. If that's what it was, I would tend to agree that this method of delivery showed lack of discernment, but it was not.

Calling it a "bed in" was hook to get people's attention, and it worked in that regard. I truly believe that anyone who viewed any of the broadcast with an open mind, and exercised discernment, should have been able to sense that the motives behind the broadcast were not about garnering shameless publicity, but about trying to reach out in a very creative way to get the biblical views of sex and the beauty and wisdom of those views out there to a broad audience. In a previous post I already described some of the content of the broadcast. Again, I can't see what issues believers would have with the content I described.

Usually, I tend to agree with much of what is written by the writers on the Colson center, but in this instance, I simply think the critics are being too judgemental and unnecessarily harsh.

Rooftops and sex... rooftops and sex... Hey, wasn't there a king of Israel who got in trouble via rooftops and sex?

The problem, Reed, is that it's difficult to change both a congregation and society, simultaneously. If this pastor is sincere, rather than merely garnering publicity, then he's going to have difficulty telling his congregation to do as he says and not as he did. The culture at large is already tolerating exhibitionism, so they're likely to ignore him.

And this method of drawing attention to the topic is very insensitive toward singles, widows, and others.

As Kim said, this act shows remarkable lack of discernment.

Ellen M, you wrote, "Having benefited from just such discussions within a regular evening worship service, I find the idea of this "24hr bed-in" a bit nauseating. Do believers really need to resort to such publicity stunts?"

That is good to hear that you personally have benefitted from such discussions in a regular evening service setting. I would say that many, if not most, have not, and if there is another method to get this message out in a way that could benefit others, while still staying grounded in scripture, then I see no reason for being judgemental, other than one's personal discomfort with the medium.

I don't think it was intended as a "publicity stunt" in the sense that I think you suggest. If calling it a "bed-in" got anyone to tune in for any reason, and then that person got to hear a little about God's design for sexuality, well, then the "bed-in" achieved its purpose.

Again, I actually watched a good portion of it. It was NOT a broadcast of Ed Young Jr. and his wife in bed for literally 24 hours being web-cammed. It was called a "bed-In" but alot of it was actually other footage, for example, replays of past Ed Young Jr. sermons abount sexuality from his pulpit, and live interviews with various other believers, including pastors of other churches across the country. There was even a segment where people sent in questions via facebook. All the questions taken were taseful and led to insightful discussions. The topic of preserving romance within marriage with the demands of parenthood was also discussed in a tasteful manner with some couples who attend Fellowship chuch. There was a even a segment where Ed Young Jr. and his wife had their young adult children on and the kids discussed how Ed Young Jr. and his wife had taught them a compelling biblical vision for sexuality, one that makes them want to pursue virtue and remain chaste. Ed's yound adult kids appealed to any young adults watching to seriously consider and embrace God's design for sexuality.

It's hard for me to understand how some can take issue with that type of honest, relevant discussions.

Oh yeah, I remember the article on that book.

Jason, "Sexperiment" refers to a book challenging married couples to have sex for seven days straight: http://thesexperiment.com/challenge. The website even has the opportunity to "Tell us about what God has shown you throughout the week of the Sexperiment.": http://thesexperiment.com/stories_share. The 24 hour broadcasting event is called "24hr Bed-in with Ed and Lisa." So, the rooftop bedroom isn't the "Sexperiment."

Lee, I suppose that when a child gets dirt smeared on me they are simply reminding me from where I've come and to whence I shall return? Sometimes it's my job to remind a child of this principal. We once had a city boy visiting. When we went to spend some time at "the crick," he was walking all gingerly in the cold water and on the small stones. "Don't be a wus," I admonished him.

Reed, good points when you state, "There is much sexual sin in the church. The subject of sex needs to be discussed in a way that is frank, practical and relevant while remaining biblically rooted." Having benefited from just such discussions within a regular evening worship service, I find the idea of this "24hr bed-in" a bit nauseating. Do believers really need to resort to such publicity stunts?

I am disappointed at the amount of judgement in some of the comments. I do not attend Ed Young Jr.'s Church, but I do have several of his DVD teaching resources, and what I can tell you is that while his method of communicating the message may seem over the top and not be everyone's cup of tea, I can honestly say that his messages are faithfully rooted in scripture. Ed young Jr. is right, the secular world seems to be controlling the conversation when it comes to sexuality, and the subject of sex is one that I think the churches have elected not to talk about in a meaningful way that really helps believers. There is much sexual sin in the church. The subject of sex needs to be discussed in a way that is frank, practical and relevant while remaining biblically rooted. I actually watched the internet feed for a while and there was nothing offensive about the conversation. Ed Young Jr. and his wife were wanting to discuss a Godly vision for sexuality. If they chose to do it in way that is a little unorthodox and creative, why is that such a bad thing? I think the criticisms are not rooted in anything other than discomfort with the medium, and that is unfortunate.

Uh, perhaps I am overly curious. But how is it a "sexperiment" if they are not in fact planning to do so?

I suppose it had its advantages, Rolley; at the end of the service you probably had to sing "Just As I Am, Without One Plea" only a dozen times or so. ;-)

Ellen, if you find dirt behind the ears of a child, you may well think they're still terraforming, while dirt behind the ears of a senior citizen indicates they're making a slow return. :-)

Alan, your comments about "dirt to dirt," recalls to mind a discussion in my college biology class about the molecules making up our physical bodies. Perhaps we're not older than dirt, but as old as dirt.

Amazing that these dirt bodies are infused with life by our creator. And that these life-infused dirt clods can join to make more of the same. Which brings us back to the topic of this post....

Growning up watching episodes of "The Brady Bunch" and reruns of "I Love Lucy," I always thought Ricky and Lucy's bedroom looked pretty weird.

Ellen - the way I read it, Adam was sort of a transition element in the "from dirt to dirt" process. (Paraphrase from Hebrew is my own.) -- The glory of it all is that God planted His own image within that dirt!

.
…so the television filming was “webbed footage”.

An interesting (?) sidelight to that cavernous service: It was the only time I didn’t have to peek to find out who was being referred to when during the recommitment call Ed murmured into the microphone, “yes, I see that hand.”

Come now, Rolley - with no organist and no pianist, you'd have to sing the hymns a cappella. In a ***Baptist*** church? Yeah, right. ;-)

I'd love to see the footage from that cameraman panning the congregation.

(Unlike, say, "panning" this similar-in-name-only pastor - and his wife.)

Alan, you're not older than dirt. Even Adam wasn't older than dirt. ;)

Maybe they'll be like Mary Tyler Moore and Dick Van Dyke in the old sit-com (playing a married couple) and lie there talking to each other across the room from two twin beds? (Man, I am older than dirt!)

.
Ed Young of Houston used to pastor the First Baptist Church here in Columbia, SC back in my college days. It was (and is) a congregation of several thousand. http://www.baptistcourier.com/3102.article

And, of course, I have a story.

It was the Sunday of the Great Snowfall of ’73. We got 21 inches here that weekend; not very common down this way you understand. Because the city was virtually shut down my roommate and I walked the 8 blocks from our dorm at the University of South Carolina to the church in the heart of town.

Old faithful Ed was there to preach, but he and the cameraman (the service was televised) and my roommate and I were the only ones in the sanctuary.

I heard the sermon twice. Because it echoed.

I can’t remember the text, but I distinctly recall it had nothing to do with encouraging exhibitionism, even though that *was* the big streaking year at USC.

(Kim would say: “yuck”, and I would agree and second with, “yuk, yuk”).

We've just had a Facebook comment about that, too, so I put the information into the post. I didn't even know there WERE two Pastor Ed Youngs. *blush*

Sorry about the momentary upset, Lee. However, since reading this story this morning, I've had a sour stomach.