Previous posts:
Christians are manifestly enjoined to treat the
stranger with straightforward honesty, hospitality, good will, love and
kindness. If the Christian individual’s treatment of immigrants and refugees
can be guided unequivocally from God’s commands, precepts and examples found in
the Bible, why are Christians in the U.S. so divided by the subject of
immigration? Part of it can be explained as just approaching the Bible differently.
I believe in large part we arrive at differences because of different
understandings of the purpose of government and different applications of the
Christian’s relationship to government.[i]
In other words, much of what we debate is not how the individual should treat
strangers, but how the government should treat them.
From whence cometh government, and what is its
purpose? Michael
Oh puts it succinctly: “Government...has been instituted by God not
only for the good of humanity but also for the glory of his own name.” Here are
some biblical principles.
Civil authority is instituted by God, both
generally and specifically.
- Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the
higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are
ordained of God.
- Daniel 2:21 and he changeth the times and the
seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings
Civil authority is an agent of justice, rewarding
good and punishing evil.
- 1 Peter 2:13-14 Submit yourselves to every
ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or
unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of
evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
- Romans 13:4 for he is the minister of God to thee
for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the
sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon
him that doeth evil.
Civil authority deserves prayerful consideration
and lawful obedience.
- 1 Timothy 2:1-3 I exhort therefore, that, first of
all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for
all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet
and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and
acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
- Mark 12:17 And Jesus answering said unto them,
Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and to God the things that are
God’s. And they marvelled at him. (Cf. also Romans
13:1-7, 1
Peter 2:13-17)
Civil authority is not absolute (only God’s
authority is).
- Acts 4:18-19 And they called them, and commanded
them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus. 19 But Peter and John
answered and said unto them, Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken
unto you more than unto God, judge ye.
- Acts 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles
answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
Broadly we can say that our government both generally
and specifically exists by the decree of God and at the delight of God. In
engaging its purpose, it should defend what is good and those who abide by it, while
punishing what is evil and those who practice it. Christian citizens should be
good citizens who obey the law, pray for & promote peace and seek justice.
Only as a last resort should they disobey the law, choosing obedience to God over
obedience to government.
Some people, once they have gone through this many
scriptures and this much thinking, will have all the right answers (or at least think
they do). As for me, I confess to not knowing how to put together every piece
of this puzzle. There is no direct command from God to governments how they
should or should not regulate immigration. I find nothing to indicate that government
regulating immigration is either inherently moral or immoral.[ii]
I believe any such laws should ideally correspond with the purpose of
government. As much as is possible, Christians should use their influence to
promote good. In conclusion, with hope for more light in the future, I say this. When unsure of which direction to turn, follow the course that
does less harm. “The
sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath.”
Finally, I leave you all with this thought that Chris
Johnson wrote in a comment at SBCVoices,
“Whatever the plight of the ‘Dreamer’ ends up with respect to whether they
remain in limbo (Obama’s directive), become legalized (neo-amnesty with perks
through Congress), or are systematically removed in order to follow the law of
the nation (existing laws on the books), the churches can be there to help,
love, and share the gospel. The great commission is something the church can do
in all three of those scenarios...that will never change.”
[i] In addition, we derive
much of our view on immigration and immigration law from the application of
principles we find (or think we find). I am unfamiliar with the history of
border controls and entry requirements (such as visas, passports). I am not
aware of anything like that in either the Old or the New Testaments. The
concept of territory and borders can be found in Scripture (e.g. Numbers
21:22), but not like we have refined it in modern “first-world”
countries.
[ii] Curiously, there are a
number of people who emphatically deny that the United States is a Christian
nation, and furiously clamor for complete separation of church and state – and yet
when it comes to immigration they argue for the government to found the immigration
laws in what they believe are Christian principles. This study has revealed another
odd inconsistency. A good number of Americans who support complete amnesty for
illegal immigrants also support same-sex marriage. When supporting the former
position (amnesty), they do so citing the Old Testament Law of Moses (i.e, what
it says about foreigners/strangers). When supporting the latter position
(same-sex marriage) they deny any weight to the Old Testament Law of Moses
passages against homosexuality (often comparing it to laws against sowing
different kinds of seeds). Consistency, thou art a jewel!
