Monday, November 17, 2014

Immigration: the President, the Religious Left, the GOP and the Bible

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF
The Washington Post said yesterday President Obama is about to give "5 million illegals" a pass.

The Republicans call his action amnesty and say, according to the Post, "If Obama goes forward, it would be the equivalent of giving the middle finger to their incoming majority."

Their words, not mine.

Many in the so-called religious left and the "sanctuary" movement are demanding action by the president. Generally those in the religious left want amnesty and open borders, although they generally are more nuanced in the way they present it.

They are urging the president, whom they support, to take that first "courageous" step. The Post says it may come this week.

The political ambitions that drive much of the amnesty movement are often masked in religious, "biblical" terms, suggesting that amnesty, open borders, etc. are beliefs rooted in biblical compassion and virtue.

What does the Bible actually say about immigration? Is it anti-Christian, or anti-biblical to oppose the immigration ideology of the president and his far left support?

Let's take a look at what the Bible says about immigration.

Genesis describes the division of mankind into nations and God's judgement of the act of rebellion at Babel when man tried to unify to usurp the role of God in human experience.

In Deuteronomy 32:8 God explicitly affirms His plan to divide "the sons of Adam" into nations. Acts 17:26-27 further affirms this concept that God created nations and He set boundaries among them so "they would seek after God."

There is a direct link between robust nationhood and godliness.

Isaiah 14:12 reveals that it is Lucifer (Satan) who weakens nations.

Our Founding Fathers clearly understood that Truth and devised a government structure around that Truth.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a Christian prophetic writer, wrote, "The disappearance of nations would impoverish us no less than if people were all made alike, with one character, one face. Nations are the wealth of mankind, they are its generalized personalities..."

Israel was God's prototype for nationhood.

History is clear that when Israel experimented with multiculturalism---God did not bless them.

I am not suggesting races should be pure.

I am pointing out what Scripture actually reveals about nationhood and border policies. And it is a very different path than the president and the religious left are calling for.

Proponents of open borders and amnesty often cite Scripture they claim supports their ideology.

Often quoted is Leviticus 19:34 which commands Israelites to treat "strangers" (foreigners) as natives and to love them as you love yourselves.

Israel had an immigration policy. They most often referred to alien visitors as "sojourners," foreigners who came for a time, then left. A kind of Green Card policy.

While in the country, they were required to obey the laws---Numbers 9:14 and 15:16 and Leviticus 18:26 and 24: 22.

There was a legal structure to facilitate and accommodate this policy. And it was enforced.

Today illegals are flooding across our borders using false identification, demanding public services, and all the rights of American citizens.

And the president and the religious left somehow equate their obsession with accommodating these demands to the biblical model of compassion.

It is not related.

To advocate that we owe benefits as the basis of the Old Testament is to ignore the balance of obligation in the Old Testament law.

The biblical model creates national cohesion through the rule of law, not someone's politically motivated whim using compassion as the front.

The New Testament (Romans 13:1-7) justifies government on the grounds of maintaining order against lawlessness.

Amnesty promotes law-breaking by rewarding it.

The Old Testament offers no suggestion that a nation must open its borders, regardless of consequences, in order to be a compassionate nation.

Rather it calls on a nation to be a godly, responsible nation.

Neither does the New Testament teach such policies.

When the biblical model for immigration is breached, so-called compassion becomes permissiveness which ends in chaos and national destruction.

No nation can sustain an open border policy.

The religious left often quote Matthew 25 as a basis for amnesty, where Christ states, "I was a stranger and you invited me in" as a mark of righteousness and justification for open borders.

The description "stranger" does not denote an influx of foreigners, it is one person showing compassion for another person.

There is a clear difference between the actions of the state and the individual. Example: The state may take vengeance against evil doers (Romans 13:4). An individual may not (Romans 12:19).

While verse 32 mentions "nations" at the judgement, the focus of the chapter is on personal ethics and personal salvation. Eternal judgement in the Bible is an individual matter.

Also Christ says that the recipients are His "brothers," the New Testament's term for Christians. Thus the passage deals with generosity among individual Christians, rather than a prescription for a nation's immigration policy.

In regard to amnesty. It is not compassionate to undermine the rule of law, which is exactly what the president has in mind and what the religious left is demanding.

There is a choice that is much more compassionate than this form of legislated, enforced "compassion" that considers no consequences and takes no responsibility.

Biblical compassion humbly considers the limits of what it can accomplish, then asks God for the miracles.

The religious left's form is at least arrogance (Matthew 4: 6,7), and at worst the cruelest form of opportunism.

There are those who advocate open borders simply for political gain---yet they wrap it in compassion. The actual objective seems to be to dilute the American electorate with unassimilated, easily manipulated voters.

Biblical Christians should not aid and abet this kind of scheme.

Amnesty advocates claim they are motivated by compassion. Why then do they always attempt to include some short cut to full voting citizenship, rather than viewing it as the privilege it is and requiring them to earn it through the proper channels?

Any inclusion of citizenship in the president's scheme will suggest political motives rather than pure charity.

Aside from compassion, another key Christian virtue is wisdom (Proverbs 1-3).

Rewarding a behavior is the best way of encouraging it. We are seeing the consequences of that folly in most all the moral issues of our day. Amnesty and the idea of open borders is no exception.

Voters are beginning to react to the left's constant attempts to weaken our nation for political advantage.

Nowhere is America more far left than Washington and Oregon. Specifically Seattle and King County and Portland and Multnomah County.

An attempt was made in this past election in Oregon to get voters to approve a driver's license for illegals so they "could drive to church and school."

The people strongly rejected the attempt, because they recognized it for what it was. This is a link to the AP story. It's informative.

God has blessed and prospered America, because our laws and policies have reflected His Truth.

The far left continues to put in place---or attempt to do so---policies that will ultimately destroy America as we have known it---and its heritage for generations to come.

That too is not biblical.

Proverbs 13:22 says, "A righteous man leaves an inheritance for his children's children."

In 24 months, America will again choose a president. The process of choosing has already begun. The time for people of faith and conservatives to engage is now---not after the primary elections.

Much hangs in the balance.

Be Informed. Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Pro-Active. Be Blessed.