Wallace G. Smith

[The text below represents an edited transcript of this Tomorrow’s World program.]

Why Moral Chaos?

Once-great nations are deteriorating right before our eyes. It seems half the people around us are enraged at the other half, and that other half is more than happy to return the anger and hatred. The voices shouting loudest for tolerance just so happen to be among the most intolerant of the bunch. But most significantly, social norms and fundamental understandings that have been in place for centuries—even thousands of years—are being overturned. What was once virtuous is now ridiculed and considered out of touch at best and downright evil at worst, while what was once thought perverse or morally wrong is now praised and promoted.

Our world is in chaos. And while it will surprise most, that chaos is rooted in civilization’s growing inability to answer one simple question: Who decides right and wrong?

Join us right now on Tomorrow’s World, where we will examine—and answer—this question together.

Is Objective Morality a Human Invention?

Greetings, and welcome to Tomorrow’s World, where we help you make sense of your world through the pages of the Bible. It’s a privilege to discuss today’s topic with you, for it really is the single question around which the entire world is turning today: Who decides right and wrong?

Today, we will look at three terrible but popular answers to this question, as well as the only true answer there could ever be.

Now surely you’ve noticed—we are living in a world of moral chaos.

Please understand—I’m not saying we are living in a world in which there are no “morals” of any sort. Quite the contrary—the world seems filled with “moral warriors,” ready to castigate you for your lack of morality and ready to pin a medal on their own jackets for their own upstanding behavior.

Actors accept awards and spend most of their time lecturing the television audience about the moral outrage of the moment. Politicians seek to convince us that any disagreement with the laws and regulations they seek to pass is the moral equivalent of siding with Adolph Hitler. And the stoic neutrality previous generations used to see in their news anchors is a relic of the past. Anchors today are some of the most passionate preachers you’ll find on television—more interested in passing judgment than passing on the news.

In all this moralizing, whose morals serve as the basis of all this virtue signaling and righteous lecturing? Well, that’s the problem. Everyone is busy determining his own moral code—his own collection of virtues and vices. In a way, Western civilization has come to mirror the ancient time of the judges described in the Bible. We find that description given very concisely in the book of Judges, chapter 21 and verse 25:

“In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”

Exactly. Everyone today is doing what is right in his own eyes.

But a world in which each man’s morality only depends on himself and his own, individual moral code is like having a world in which there is no moral code at all. And if you’ve ever read the book of Judges, you know what sort of world results from such a state: a brutal, chaotic world in which every man is out for himself.

Sure enough, a brutal, chaotic world is exactly what we see forming about us—corresponding more and more to the world of animals than it does to anything like a civilized society.

The world needs an answer to the question of who decides right and wrong.

So let’s spend our time today examining some contenders—some potential sources of morality that many would point to as the guide we need.

Now perhaps we should start by pointing out that many point to evolution as the source of humanity’s “morals”—but not in the way most of us think about “morals.” Evolution, as explained by those biologists who subscribe to the theory, only cares about the “survival of the fittest,” so those who say that human morality is simply a product of evolution are really saying that morality, good, and evil are all illusions. They’re saying that we only believe humans have morals because evolution has supposedly genetically programmed us to, say, be polite and civil to each other.

This is, of course, absolutely wrong for a whole host of reasons. For one, the theory of Evolution is a fairy tale, with little real evidence to show for itself. We have an abundance of material about that on our website at TomorrowsWorld.org.

But even putting that aside, take a moment to consider just how ridiculous it is to think that Darwin’s brutal, bloody theory of “survival of the fittest” could produce the noble qualities we consider to be moral behavior—such as honesty, humility, and protecting the weak.

One refreshingly honest atheist pointed this out in writing to popular apologist J. Warner Wallace, admitting that there is no real connection between morality and evolution. He noted, in part:

“We are Atheists…. While we acknowledge concepts like morality, politeness, civility seem to exist, we know they do not…. My only directive is to obey my genes. Eat, sleep, reproduce, die. That is our bible…. Outside of my greedy little gene’s need to reproduce, there is nothing in my world that stops me from killing you and reproducing with your wife.”

This atheist went on to say:

“Only the fear that I might be incarcerated and thus be deprived of the opportunity to do the same with the next guy’s wife stops me…. So be nice if you want. Be involved, have polite conversations, be a model citizen. Just be aware that while technically an Atheist, you are an inferior one. You’re just a little bit less evolved, that’s all. When you are ready to join me, let me know, I’ll be reproducing with your wife…. Maybe it’s time we Atheists were a little more truthful and let the chips fall where they may. At least that’s what my genes are telling me to say.”

Now, I know many atheists would not agree with this individual—yet on what basis can they disagree? Even if it were true, Evolution would be no guide to what is morally good and right. Survival of the fittest, the strongest, and the most devious is no source for morality, so we must look elsewhere.

No Moral Authority in Science and Evolution

We’ve already seen that, even if Evolution were true (and it’s not), there’s no reason to think that a system of moral virtue would arise in the brutal struggle for survival and reproduction.

But what about science? Could science help us discover moral laws of “right” and “wrong”?

Science has allowed mankind to discover many of the laws of nature itself, and much of what we enjoy in our modern world has been built on those discoveries. We’ve uncovered laws of physics and chemistry. Science has allowed us to peer into the deepest parts of our universe and into the inner world of the atom. But can science reveal for us more than the natural laws of our world—of what is and is not? Can science also reveal the moral laws of life—what should and should not be? Can science tell us what is morally good and evil—right and wrong?

This is the view of famous atheist and neuroscientist Sam Harris.

In his book The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, Harris argues that moral values can be discovered through science, with no need at all for God or religion:

“Meaning, values, morality, and the good life must relate to facts about the well-being of conscious creatures—and, in our case, must lawfully depend on events in the world and upon states of the human brain….”

[Harris continues…]

“I am arguing that science can, in principle, help us understand what we should do and should want—and, therefore, what other people should do and should want in order to live the best lives possible” (pp. 6, 28, 2010).

Harris notes that science can help us understand what can help conscious creatures to flourish and be healthy and productive—and to a certain extent, that’s true. Just like science can help us formulate the healthiest dog food and cat food for our pets, it can help us examine the effects of various choices on our lives and the lives of others.

But it can’t tell us why we should care, or why any of us should feel obligated to do anything. Science can explore and examine the impact of my choices on my neighbor, but it can’t tell me why I should care for my neighbor in the first place.

In fact, it can’t even tell me why I should care for my neighbor more than I care for my dog or my house cat. Why is the benefit of humanity a “moral good”? Why should I morally seek the benefit of humanity versus the benefit of any other species—chimpanzees, or zebras, or, for that matter, cockroaches? Many scientists, such as Harris’ atheist peer, Richard Dawkins, have argued that humans have no moral priority or value above other animals, such as the great apes.

But we know there is a difference, don’t we? A moral difference. Some chimpanzees kill and eat their young—yet we would all agree that it would be a moral outrage for any human being to do so. But why? What would make it a moral evil? Science cannot tell us. Because science is limited to telling us only the natural facts—what is and is not—and cannot access moral facts about what should and should not be.

History records the terrible scientific experiments the Nazi regime performed on captive Jews in the concentration camps. Yet science is powerless to tell you why such experiments are immoral abominations. After all, according to many scientists, we’re just one more kind of animal, and if those experiments were eventually going to benefit humanity at large, well then, hey, who’s to say they were wrong?

That’s the point: Science can’t tell us that. And yet, thankfully, most of us know those horrific experiments were, indeed, wrong—no matter what could have been learned from them.

No, “science” is not the answer to our question, “Who decides right and wrong?”

But we still need an answer. After all, if science cannot tell us why the experiments of the Nazi concentration camps were a moral evil, surely something else must, for we know that they were—just as we know that acts such as rape and murder are morally wrong. So, who decides they are immoral?

An increasingly popular answer to that question is society. That is, they say that we simply agree, as a civil society, that such things as rape, murder, and torturous experiments on imprisoned human beings are “wrong,” and it is society, as a collective whole, that determines what is right and wrong.

Is Right and Wrong Merely a Social Consensus?

According to this idea, acts such as rape, murder, human trafficking, or slavery are morally wrong because society rejects these acts and declares them “immoral.” They violate society’s sense of what should be right and moral, and so—according to this theory, anyway—it is society that declares them wrong and evil. In the eyes of those who believe this idea, society becomes, then, the ultimate moral authority.

They say that society collectively decides that rape is wrong and that we don’t want people murdering each other, so we pass laws to make those things illegal and imprison or execute those who do them.

It all sounds very democratic, doesn’t it? And, frankly, it has a certain appeal to our human, sinful nature. It implies that we’re not responsible to any sort of divine being, like God—that we are only responsible to ourselves. And from mankind’s very beginning, that is what humans have sought: the freedom to define for ourselves what is good and what is evil.

In Genesis chapter 2, we’re told that God created the first human being and placed him in the Garden of Eden with some very specific instructions;

“And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, ‘Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die’” (Genesis 2:16–17).

God told mankind what was right—not eating from that tree—and what was wrong—eating from the tree. But Adam and Eve decided to ignore God’s instruction and eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, choosing to decide for themselves what is right and what is wrong. And we have all been repeating Adam and Eve’s choice in our own, individual ways for the last several thousand years.

This idea of society as the decider of right and wrong reflects this thinking. We, “the People,” decide what is right and wrong, and we use our governments to enforce our collective morality.

Yet, such an approach is fraught with contradictions and produces truly horrific consequences. For instance, consider the horrors of slavery in the pre-Civil War American South. We now universally recognize that slavery was a moral stain on American history. But if society determines what is “right” and “wrong,” then slavery was supposedly moral in the 1700s and 1800s because society approved of it, but it is now immoral because society does not? That’s utter nonsense.

Consider, too, the Holocaust of World War II—one of history’s greatest immoral campaigns, in which millions of human beings were exterminated like animals. Was the Holocaust somehow a moral good in Nazi Germany but is now an abominable moral evil because the Nazis lost? Would it have remained a moral good if Germany had won the war? Does morality change based on who wins and gets to run society?

Of course not. The slavery of the U.S. South was immoral, and the Holocaust was a great evil, and it’s irrelevant whether their nations’ societies agreed at the time.

Even today, there are societies in the world that condone forcing women and children into sexual prostitution and servitude—that morally sanction rape and murder.

And yet we know that those societies are wrong. Rape is wrong. Murder is wrong. And protecting women and children from sexual abuse is good.

We know these things are so regardless of what those societies might approve of in their own nations.

The fact is that societies change over time, and even in a given moment, societies differ from location to location. What is considered “evil” and “immoral” by one society in one place or time may be considered “upright” and “virtuous” in another.

But does that mean what is truly morally good or evil varies across time or based on your geography? Is rape, murder, theft, or torturing the weak and defenseless ever a moral “good” in any society at any time? Should we ever accept the Holocaust, the Killing Fields of the Khmer Rouge, or the antebellum slavery in the U.S. as anything other than moral evils, regardless of the decisions of their governments or societies—and regardless of how our own society may change in the future?

Of course not. We do not determine standards of “right” and “wrong” based on the decisions of society. Rather, we judge societies by those standards. Societies and cultures change, but what is right and wrong never does.

For instance, that’s how chattel slavery was defeated in Western civilization. Men such as William Wilberforce, at the turn of the 19th century, compared the practices of society to the eternal moral principles of the Bible and saw chattel slavery as the terrible moral sin that it truly was.

No, society is not the final authority in what is right or wrong. We will reveal that ultimate and undeniable authority in just a moment.

But first, let’s take one more moment to give you an opportunity to request today’s free booklet. Most people have no idea how Jesus Christ focused on the Ten Commandments in His ministry and spent a great deal of effort telling us how to keep them. It was Christ, Himself, who said,

“If you want to enter into life, KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS” (Matthew 19:17).

God’s Laws Provide the Ultimate Standard—The Source of Moral Truth!

The only answer to the question “Who decides right and wrong?” is that the Eternal God of Creation decides. His very character is morally pure and good, and His commands reflect that perfect character!

The Apostle Paul, speaking of the commandments and law of God, says in Romans 7 and verse 12 that…

“… the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.”

The commands of God flow from His perfect moral character, and out of His goodness, He shows us what is right and good. As King David wrote in Psalm 25,

“Good and upright is the LORD; therefore He teaches sinners in the way” (v. 8).

That’s why we have a certain, limited, natural sense of right and wrong that you find in cultures all over the world—not because of Evolution, but because of our common Creator. Paul says in Romans 2 and verses 14 and 15 that to a certain extent, all humans created by God have a sense of what is right and wrong, but it’s not the whole.

Understanding the whole of right and wrong requires a relationship with our Creator—allowing Him to instruct us and Jesus Christ to lead us.

The Bible prophesies a time when the whole world will seek the knowledge of God, to understand what is good and what is evil. In Micah chapter 4 and verse 2, we read of one such prophecy:

“Many nations shall come and say, ‘Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; He will teach us His ways, and we shall walk in His paths.’ For out of Zion the law shall go forth, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.”

That time will come with the return of Jesus Christ. But you and I don’t have to wait until then. We can begin learning the divine difference between right and wrong and putting it to work in our lives right now if we’ll only let God teach us that difference.

Thanks so much for watching today! [We] really do appreciate you coming by. We here at Tomorrow’s World strive very hard to try to make sense of your world through the pages of the Bible. We hope this has been beneficial. If you’d like today’s free offer, there’s a link in the description. If you enjoyed this video and would like to see more, then please do hit the subscribe button, and if you want to be notified, then just click on that bell. Thanks again!

[The text below represents an edited transcript of this Tomorrow’s World program.]

A Most Unusual Question

More than two billion people—approximately one-third of all humanity—claim to be Christian, a religion that takes its name from Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ and Son of God, according to the Bible. But here’s a strange question that almost seems silly until you take the time to really think about it: Is Jesus Himself a Christian? Today, we’re going to tackle that question together, and we’ll discover that the answer is far more revealing that you might think. Join us here on Tomorrow’s World as we answer the question “Is Jesus a Christian?”

What Did Jesus Really Do and Practice?

Greetings, and welcome to Tomorrow’s World, where we help you make sense of your world through the pages of the Bible.

Now I know our title seems unusual today. After all, if anyone can be described as a Christian, surely it is Jesus Christ, the very founder of Christianity! The answer seems obvious! However, I am certain that you will find that that simple question leads to other intriguing questions—and to intriguing answers—that reveal far more about Jesus, the Bible, and Christianity than you might have guessed.

Today, we’re asking the question, “Is Jesus a Christian?” And I hope you don’t think I’m asking the question to either make light of Christianity or Jesus Christ. I’m not. Here at Tomorrow’s World, all of us believe that Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of God, who died for our sins, rose again three days and three nights later, and lives now, guiding His Church from Heaven—the Savior whose return and reign is getting closer day by day.

In fact, it is because we take Jesus Christ and His teachings seriously that we ask this question today: “Is Jesus Christ a Christian?”

Most of us know Christians in our lives—many of us believe we ARE Christians. In fact, as we mentioned at the very beginning of our program today, more than TWO BILLION people claim to be Christians today—literally almost one-third of humanity. The influence of the religion going by the name of “Christianity” touches every continent on the globe, and its principles and precepts have impacted governments, cultures, and traditions all over the world.

Of course, the details about what “Christianity” means vary from place to place, culture to culture—and, in some towns, even street to street, as the church on one block may teach a very different set of doctrines than the church just one block down.

Still, most of us have personal experience that gives us a sense of what the word “Christian” means in real life, based on the beliefs, practices, and lives of those we know—or even own.

So, with that in mind, is Jesus a Christian? That is, if Jesus were walking among us today—as He did in the flesh 2,000 years ago—but you did not know ahead of time that He WAS Jesus Christ, would you conclude that He was a Christian? If you compared HIS beliefs, practices, and life with the beliefs, practices, and lives of those who make up “Christianity” today, what would you conclude? How would Jesus “measure up”? Would you believe He was a Christian, or would you conclude that He belonged to some other faith—a different religion entirely?

We don’t have to guess the answer to this question. Jesus answers it for us! The Bible is, in a very real way, His book! From its first page to its last, He inspired its writing through the Holy Spirit, and His teachings are perfectly recorded within its pages. We can know what He believed and practiced, because the record of His life on earth has been preserved for us faithfully for almost 2,000 years, as have the teachings and practices of His very first disciples—personally trained by Him to represent Him to the world.

For the remainder of today’s program, we will examine the beliefs and practices of Jesus Christ and compare them to the beliefs and practices most common among Christians today—and in answering the question “Is Jesus a Christian?” we will let Jesus speak for Himself.

How Does First Century Christianity Compare to Today?

Since we have the perfect record of His beliefs, teachings, and practices. So let’s ask some questions and compare what Jesus Christ did and thought to what we see in the beliefs and practices of modern Christianity, today.

First, let’s look at holidays.

Christians around the world vary in the days they keep sacred, but there is a large consensus around some days, such as Christmas in the winter and Easter in the Spring. While these days are often described as a celebration of Jesus’ birth and resurrection, respectively, it is also a fact of history that both days derive from and are adorned with pagan practices and traditions—trappings associated with heathen gods and goddesses and pagan cultures, some of which predate Christianity by many centuries.

You don’t need to take my word for it, and even the laziest of Internet searches will dig up any number of resources for you—for instance, showing how Christmas traces itself back to customs such as the Roman worship of the Sun on the day of Sol Invictus, around the time of the winter solstice, and how many of the trappings of Easter trace back to heathen fertility rituals and the worship of gods and goddesses, such as Eostre, from which the English word “Easter” is believed to be derived.

Now, this may be news to some of you, but many Christians KNOW about the pagan origins of their favorite holidays. They simply believe that God doesn’t mind—as if, perhaps, those days have been “baptized” now, and can be celebrated by Christians with new meaning. After all, Christians don’t believe they are worshiping heathen gods on those days—they are trying to worship the God of the Bible.

Now, compare this to Jesus’ own stand.

Just as it is beyond dispute that these days and many of their traditions originate in paganism, it is also beyond dispute that, in the Bible, God commands us NOT to keep days with such origins. For instance, consider Deuteronomy chapter 12 and verse 31, where God speaks to ancient Israel of the pagan practices of other cultures and commands very clearly: “You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way.” Now notice, He does NOT just say, “Don’t worship those gods.” God plainly says not to worship HIM in THOSE WAYS. We could read of other places, as well, where God’s command is clear—for instance, in Jeremiah 10, where God describes the pagan worship practices of the Gentiles and says with absolute clarity…

“DO NOT learn the way of the Gentiles…” (Jeremiah 10:2).

Of course, these commands are given in the OLD TESTAMENT, yet, what was Jesus’ position on the traditions of men when they conflicted with the commands of God? Jesus Himself tells us in Mark chapter 7, where He is accusing the Jewish leaders of His day of IGNORING God’s clear commands so that they could keep their own traditions, instead:

“He answered and said to them, ‘Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. And in vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men”… All too well you REJECT the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition’” (Mark 7:6–7, 9).

It seems like Jesus’ position is pretty clear, and it is NOT in favor of keeping ANY days of pagan origin or tradition.

Still, this does not mean that Jesus observed no holy days or festivals at all, In fact, quite the opposite! While He refused to compromise and accept the traditions of men when they conflicted with God’s own commands, He DID keep the Holy Days listed in the Bible—specifically, those listed in Leviticus 23—Passover, the Days of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, The Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, the Feast of Tabernacles, and the Last Great Day.

For instance, in John chapter 7, we see Jesus keeping the Feast of Tabernacles, which is listed in Leviticus 23:33–43.

Of course, some will say, “Well, that’s different—Jesus HAD to keep them, because He was Jewish! All those days were done away with when He died!”

Except they’d be wrong. The New Testament describes the followers He trained keeping those very same days. For instance, Acts 20:16 mentions Paul’s intention to keep the Day of Pentecost, and in 1 Corinthians chapter 5—written decades after Jesus’ death and resurrection—the Apostle clearly instructs not just Jews but non-Jewish GENTILE Christians to keep the seven-day long Feast of Unleavened Bread.

God’s word makes it plain that Jesus not only condemned elements found in today’s modern Christian holidays, but it also makes plain that He AND HIS DISCIPLES would have observed Holy Days completely foreign to those who call themselves Christian today.

We see a similar discrepancy when we look at the weekly day of worship Jesus kept.

While the vast majority of those today who consider themselves Christian keep Sunday, the first day of the week, as their weekly day of worship, Jesus plainly kept the SEVENTH DAY holy, as the Sabbath. Luke 4 and verse 16 plainly says that it was Jesus’ custom to observe the seventh-day Sabbath.

Now again, some might protest that this was before Jesus’ death and resurrection—that Jesus, as a Jew, HAD to keep the Sabbath, but that after His resurrection, Christians began keeping Sunday because it was the day of the week He was resurrected.

Well, the confusion of the day of the week Jesus was resurrected will be a topic for another program. But, again, we must highlight that the BIBLE shows Jesus’ own followers disagreeing with modern Christianity and keeping the VERY SAME DAY JESUS DID, even when they were Gentiles and not Jews, at all.

For instance, in Acts 13 we read of Paul preaching to both Jews and Gentiles on the seventh-day Sabbath. The non-Jewish Gentiles among them were so excited by what they heard that they begged for more. As we read in Acts 13 and verse 42:

“So when the Jews went out of the synagogue, the Gentiles begged that these words might be preached to them the next Sabbath” (Acts 13:42).

Now, did Paul say to them, “Well, hey, Gentiles, you guys aren’t Jews. Let’s just meet tomorrow on Sunday when my fellow Christians and I are going to have services”? NO, HE DID NOT! Verse 44 says,

“On the next SABBATH almost the whole city came together to hear the word of God” (Acts 13:44).

He did not invite them to meet for a Christian service on Sunday because there WAS NONE! The Apostle Paul continued, even among the GENTILES, to follow the practice and teaching of Jesus Christ and set apart the seventh-day Sabbath as God’s day for instruction and worship! Even many modern, Sunday-keeping Christian scholars agree on this point: The Bible endorses the seventh-day Sabbath as the day of worship, including the record of Jesus’ teachings and practice and those of His personally trained disciples.

So, what have we seen so far? We’ve seen that, if Jesus were alive among us today IN THE FLESH, as He was 2,000 years ago, He’d find that people who call themselves His followers, all over the world, go to their worship services on completely different days than He does and keep traditions that violate God’s commands in exactly the ways He taught them not to do.

It seems that, concerning the question “Is Jesus a Christian?,” we are beginning to see a very interesting answer ahead.

Jesus Preached the Coming Kingdom of God, and Kept the Ten Commandments!

Now, let’s continue our exploration of the question “Is Jesus a Christian?” by looking at His teachings and attitudes about the law of God and the Ten Commandments.

For most modern Christians, if they are familiar with the law of God and the Ten Commandments at all, there is a sense that the law has been effectively done away by Christ’s sacrifice—the idea that He kept God’s laws perfectly so that we don’t HAVE to keep them. Many modern Christian churches teach that Christ removed the “burden” of God’s laws from us so that we aren’t “weighed down” by such concerns.

That might explain why many Evangelical, Protestant, and Catholic Christians are beginning to live together, or cohabit, before marriage—after all, if God’s prohibitions against fornication are essentially done away with in Christ, then why not?

As Christianity Today reported in March of 2021, “Evangelicals, especially those under 40, increasingly see cohabitation as morally acceptable. Most young evangelicals have engaged in it or expect to” (“The Cohabitation Dilemma Comes for America’s Pastors,” March 16, 2021).

As I’ve said before on Tomorrow’s World, modern Christianity considers the Ten Commandments to be the Seven, Eight, or Nine Good but Not Necessary Suggestions.

But what is JESUS’ take on the Ten Commandments and the Law of God?

Not only does He reaffirm the Ten Commandments, He explains that those who follow Him should consider them even MORE binding. For instance, Jesus taught that you violate the Sixth Commandment against murder, even if you only hate someone in your heart—and if you lust after someone, then He says you are breaking the Seventh Commandment against adultery. Far from “doing away” with the Law of God, Jesus taught OBEDIENCE to them, even telling a young man in Matthew 19:17,

“[I]f you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Again, this was NOT just because He had not been crucified yet. In fact, John, the Apostle who wrote more about love than any other biblical author, explains in his first epistle, speaking of Jesus Christ:

“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (1 John 2:3–4).

So, clearly Jesus and His disciples don’t exactly “line up” behind modern Christianity’s attitudes and beliefs about God’s Laws. But what about this: What is the MESSAGE of Jesus Christ? What is the actual GOSPEL MESSAGE that He came to preach?

Most modern Christians, if they’ve thought about it at all or have listened in Church, might believe that the Gospel Jesus brought was about His life, death, and resurrection, and that through believing in Him, your sins can be forgiven through His death.

Now, I am not here to disagree that forgiveness of sins comes through repenting and believing in Jesus Christ—I am grateful for that fact! But is THAT the message Jesus came to preach? Is that the Gospel? Do Jesus and most modern Christians agree on this?

No, they don’t. Passage after passage after passage after passage in the Bible makes plain that Jesus Christ came to preach about the coming Kingdom of God! Yes, salvation through Him is a part of that message—without that, we could become no part of that Kingdom! Yet, when one actually looks at the accounts of His teachings and of His disciples’ teachings, the idea that the message was merely one about His life, death, and resurrection begins to be seen as nonsense.

For instance, at the very beginning of Jesus’ ministry, what do we see? Mark chapter 1 and verses 14 and 15 make it plain;

“Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.’”

But the more carefully you look, it becomes even clearer. For instance, in Luke chapter 9 we read that during His ministry Jesus called His disciples together to instruct them on teaching others. Verse 2 plainly says,

“He sent them to preach the kingdom of God [there it is again] and to heal the sick.”

But ask yourself: If the Gospel is centered on the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, then how did the disciples preach those things when none of those things had happened, yet? In fact, events LATER in the gospels show that they didn’t even understand yet that Jesus would DIE, let alone be RESURRECTED! And they sure didn’t understand forgiveness of sins through His shed blood! No, they preached about the coming Kingdom of God, in which the Messiah would reign over the world. THAT was their message, just as it was Jesus’ message.

We see this time and again in the biblical account. In fact, many times when Jesus heals someone in the accounts, He instructs them NOT to tell others who He is—the exact opposite of what you would expect if the very center of Christ’s message was about His person.

Finally, more than a month after His resurrection, just as Jesus is about to ascend to heaven where He would reside until His Second Coming, what does the Bible say He emphasized to His disciples in preparation for their commission to the world? Look at it in Acts chapter 1 and verse 3, where the resurrected Jesus’ instruction to His disciples is described, saying that

“He also presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.”

Yet, again, if we compare Jesus to modern Christians and their beliefs and practices and teachings, we see a stark and important difference.

We are coming to the point where our question “Is Jesus a Christian?” is pressing us to draw an important conclusion.

We’ll come to that conclusion in a moment.

Are YOU a Christian?

But regardless of what anyone else may think, the only definition of “Christian” that makes any sense is “someone who truly follows the teachings of Jesus Christ.” So if the beliefs and practices of modern Christians are out of step with Jesus Christ, it isn’t Jesus who needs to change.

Faced with these facts, those who truly long to be followers of Jesus Christ are the ones who have some thinking to do.

Thanks so much for watching! If you want the free literature that we offer on today’s program, there’s a link in the description. And people often ask us, “How do you do this for free? Why do you do this for free?” Honestly, because Jesus commands us to do it for free; “Freely you’ve received, freely give,” so as always, everything that we offer is absolutely free, and this is no different. We work hard at producing these programs; we put one out every week here at Tomorrow’s World, where we work hard to explain to you your world through the pages of the Bible. We hope that you will join us again. We hope that if it’s been interesting at all, you’ll click on the subscribe button, and if you want to be notified when we do put another one up, just click on that bell. Thanks again!