When Christians make comments on public policy, they should be shaped and informed by the truth of Scripture. But even when referring to the Bible when speaking up on issues, our statements must be coherent, well-thought-through arguments. This second blog post analyzing the 2009 Immigration Statement by the National Association of Evangelicals will focus on the biblical foundations this document presents – specifically the historical examples from Scripture.
Frankly, this argument in the statement is so confusing, I’m asking the help of any reader to post a comment to explain it to me. This statement condones the illegal presence of millions of immigrants in America right now, blaming the government for laws that apparently aren’t worth following. Here is the appeal made to biblical history:
“The Bible contains many accounts of God’s people who were forced to migrate due to hunger, war, or personal circumstances. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the families of his sons turned to Egypt in search of food. Joseph, Naomi, Ruth, Daniel and his friends, Ezekiel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther all lived in foreign lands. In the New Testament, Joseph and Mary fled with Jesus to escape Herod’s anger and became refugees in Egypt. . . These examples from the Old and New Testaments reveal God’s hand in the movement of people and are illustrations of faith in God in difficult circumstances.”
What this paragraph is saying is that each illustration presented here were people “forced to migrate due to hunger, war, or personal circumstances.” Third graders from Mrs. Jones’ Sunday School class could refute the error in this paragraph. Did Joseph end up in Egypt by his own decision? (Or maybe a better question is: Is migration the result of a personal decision, or is one forced?) If he was just “forced to migrate” because his brothers sold him into slavery to some Ishmaelites, does that even have relevance to the current immigration debate?
How about Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah and other Israelites who lived in exile? How did they get to foreign nations? As I recall, the people of Israel were removed from the land God promised them because they rejected their God and suffered the consequences. They weren’t just moved because of war. They were exiled by the judgment of God. And was their intent to stay and become naturalized citizens? I’m glad Jesus’ family didn’t make plans to live life in Egypt – many prophecies would never had been fulfilled and God’s entire plan of salvation for mankind wouldn’t have happened.
I’d love to know how this applies to illegal immigration as a foundation for how we should look at the law in America. Seriously, I need help seeing the correlation.
This argument seems to be based on the premise that, if it happened in the Bible it is normal and should be acceptable under any circumstance today. The only problem with that is a lot of things happened in the Bible that we wouldn’t think about allowing today at all. Some in the nation of Israel burned their children as sacrifices to Molech, a historical fact. I don’t hear anyone, thankfully, demanding the right to do that.
So, “These examples from the Old and New Testaments reveal God’s hand in the movement of people and are illustrations of faith in God in difficult circumstances.” True. They just don’t have anything to do with people coming to America deciding not to obey the law with every intent on staying. 1) Just because people move doesn’t mean it is right or beneficial. As an example, terrorists, drug cartels and murderers aren’t coming here because God’s hand is leading them and any attempt by American law to defend itself against them is justified. 2) Is the document saying that every act of migration is motivated by “faith in God in difficult circumstances”? Come on.
If a person or organization makes such sweeping arguments from Scripture, then they must also be prepared to apply its veracity across the board. This paragraph of examples is just too weak to bolster the NAE’s position. Speak for right from the Bible, but connect the biblical illustration with the contemporary issue so there is clarity, not confusion.
And boy, am I confused by this.
Next installment: “What was that, Peter?”
May 19, 2010 at 10:43 am
Brent,
Your analysis of this article is very thought provoking and gives me some clarity to a few of the many questions I have on this topic. I would appreciate your view on another aspect of this issue (maybe you were going to get to this in a future post). What is the local church’s responsibility when they are faced with illegal immigrants in their church body? I have asked several people whose opinions I respect, including pastors and missionaries and they seem to be split on whether the church should address the problem head on or turn a blind eye so as to not mix church and government. For example, my sister and brother in law are missionaries in Honduras and have seen this problem from the side we don’t get to see, which is the families that are left behind when a father decides to cross the border for what he thinks is a better life and run the risk of never seeing his family again. They both feel that the individuals are wrong in trying to enter America illegally but they have different views on what role the church should play. I would love to read your opinion. Thanks for all that you and Tracy do.
God Bless,
Tony
May 19, 2010 at 12:44 pm
It’s good to hear from you, Tony. I’m sure Fred and Cindy see much of this in their ministry. But you know, our church has had to deal with the same issue when we started a Hispanic ministry. Having our views shaped by the Bible can sometimes lead Christians to come to differing political opinions. That creates a whole level of problems when the church tries to come up with a unified approach. I mean, when has the church (local or universal) come to full agreement on anything?
The point of this series of posts is focused more on how to make a biblical argument when speaking on issues – any issue. Specifically on immigration, I have had my thinking stimulated by some good Bible teachers and cultural commentators like Albert Mohler and John Piper. They both admit there is no one clear answer, but for justice to take place, we have to admit that laws are being broken and it is unhealthy for a society to sweep that under the rug. Here are some audio links when you have time to listen:
This is a list of some of Mohler’s radio archives – you’ll find a couple on immigration at the bottom of the page. The beginning of the broadcast is about current topics, but he gets to the theme of the show right after that.
http://www.albertmohler.com/category/topics/politics-topics/page/12/
This a short answer from Piper’s “Ask Pastor John” series:
http://www.desiringgod.org/Search/?search=immigration&submit.x=11&submit.y=6
The Piper link is interesting because he tries his best to acknowledges the church should show mercy but that broken laws should be punished by the government.
Again, I’ll be spending more time trying to get us to think through the effectiveness of using Scripture to shape our political views rather than taking the Bible out of context to make flimsy arguments about our world. Rightly dividing the Word of truth has to happen whether we’re teaching it in the church or making comments to those outside the church.
Thanks for thinking it through with me and for your encouraging words!