Bible Q&A: If There's No Flash of Lightning, Am I Born-Again?

Continued from page 2

My boyfriend and I have been together for about 3 years, and when we started the relationship I told him I wanted to wait until I was married to have sex, he said he was fine with that. But we put ourselves in the position where we were tempted and gave in to that. We now have a 16-month-old son. I told him that I am sticking to my guns this time and want to wait until I am married. He feels that I can't make that decision for him and should still give in to him. He says that we have already done it and it doesn't matter. Could you give me some scripture to back up my decision, also suggest some things that he could read to gain an understanding that just because you sin once doesn't mean you get to go on sinning. --DeAnn

Read carefully what Paul says in 1 Cor. 7. His advice is that one should get married if one wishes to avoid immoral sexual activities. Your boyfriend is letting his hormones do the talking, and yes it does matter to God. Sex is a gift from God. Indeed, sex is such a great and beautiful gift from God it should be reserved for the person one is prepared to give one's life and love to unconditionally in holy matrimony.

I enjoyed your Beliefnet column on apocalyptic literature. Are you saying that parts of Revelation are a blueprint for the End Times and parts are not? Was it because the early Christians were convinced the Parousia was imminent? --Carla B.

This is a long and complicated question. The short answer is that the earliest Christians believed they already lived in the End Times, ever since Jesus had been raised from the dead. The book of Revelation does not skip from their day to the end of time, but sees all future events as part of the End Times, including events in their own day.

I would urge you to read my little book Jesus, Paul, and the End of the World to help you sort this one out. I do not believe that the earliest Christians thought Jesus would definitely return in their lifetimes, as Jesus himself told them no one knows the timing of the second coming, not even Jesus in his own day (Mark 13.32). It's presumptuous for any of us to think we know better than Jesus did when he said no one knows the time of that event.

Did Jesus appoint Peter as the head of His church, or was the appointment made later by a Pope? --Jack M.

The issue about Peter being made the head of the church has to do with one specific New Testament passage, Matthew 16.18-19. If this saying goes back to the historical Jesus, then Jesus said this in Aramaic, which among other things means the word "church" was not involved, as that is a later Christian term.

There were no popes before or during the lifetime of Peter to appoint him. It is Jesus himself who commissions Peter. The phrase here could be rendered somewhat literally as follows "you are 'rock', and on this shelf of rocks I will build my community." The point would be that Jesus would build his community on Peter and those like him who make the solid confession about Jesus that we find Peter making on this occasion. In view of the fact that Matthew 16.19 recurs in Matthew 18.18-19, applied to all the disciples, it seems unlikely that Jesus is suggesting some unique role for Peter that could not also be played by other disciples.