With 2.47 million encounters at the U.S. southern border in Fiscal Year 2023, the issue of illegal immigration has become a frequently discussed topic in American public life. Though many of those crossing our border have the best intentions, Americans are waking up to the reality that not all who step foot onto U.S. soil have our best interests at heart. The recent (and violent) death of Augusta University student Laken Riley at the hand of an illegal migrant has only intensified this debate, and this issue has put many Christians into a dilemma regarding the ethical considerations of our current border policy.
In countless points throughout Scripture, the Bible makes it clear that God’s people are to care for the stranger and outsider. Whether it be the Old Testament exhortation in Deuteronomy 10:19 to, “love the sojourner,” or Hebrew’s reminder to, “not neglect … showing hospitality to strangers,” the Bible commands Christians to take care of those who are outside of the groups with whom they would normally associate (Heb. 23:2, New King James Version). Though few Christians would dispute this claim, many disagree on how this command should be implemented in the variety of complex circumstances we face today. One such problem is that of immigration, specifically the current flow of migrants entering the United States through our southern border. Though usually not stated explicitly, there is a growing sentiment that Christian belief and Biblical doctrine demands a looser method of immigration, even to the extent of an open-border system. Though this view arises from a good sentiment, their conclusions are invalid. When examined properly, one can see that orthodox Christian belief does not demand an open-border approach in our particular moment.
Christian belief holds that all humans are created, “in the image of God,” and are endowed with value, dignity, and worth (Gen. 1:27). Combining this with Hebrew’s statement to care for the stranger, many Christians see a conflict between strict border policy and the biblical commands to love and care for others. As Joseph Backholm of the Family Research Council states, “the assumption here seems to be that we must choose between fulfilling the Great Commission…,” and following laws that limit or restrict migration across our border. Combine this argument with the fact that many of these migrants show up claiming asylum from dictatorial tyrannies and threats from violent gangs, and this view becomes quite compelling. If Christians are called to care for the downtrodden, have the capacity to do so, and see this obvious need, are they not obligated to help these people by offering them a place in our prosperous society?
Though this argument is compelling and often comes from those with pure motivations, its seemingly-sound nature can be challenged on several fronts. Christians are not without biblical examples for dealing with the issue of immigration, the most influential of which being in Nehemiah. This book chronicles the task of the Israelites returning from exile to rebuild Jerusalem. After surveying the city in rubble, Nehemiah’s statement to the Israelites quite plainly reveals his first priority: “…let us build the wall of Jerusalem,” (Neh. 2:17). Despite this city containing a temple, marketplaces, and countless homes, Nehemiah’s first aim was to ensure the safety of the people that would eventually return to inhabit the city.
To be clear, this passage shouldn’t be interpreted as a direct prescription for an American border wall. However, it does show that the security of the people inside a nation is necessary before turning our eyes outward to help those of others. Modern America and ancient Israel are different in many respects, but both are alike in that people of both good and evil motivations approached their borders for entry. As Joshua Chatraw and Karen Swallow Prior graciously remind us in their work, Cultural Engagement: A Crash Course in Contemporary Issues, “Most [immigrants] are just normal people trying their best to care for their families.” However, it would be foolish to assume that all those arriving at our border have pure intentions.
Statistics from the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security show that, in Fiscal Year 2023, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol arrested over 35,000 aliens with criminal convictions and nearly 170 people listed on the terrorist watchlist. If Romans 13 is correct in stating that the purpose of government is to promote the good and punish the evil, and that protecting the citizens inside a country is good, then it certainly follows that implementing open-border policies in this moment would be in opposition to God’s design for our government (Rom. 13:3-4, ESV). Christians must be clear-eyed in recognizing the reality of living in a fallen world, and that ensuring the security of the people inside the borders of a prosperous nation is a necessary first step before turnout outward to help those outside of these borders.
In addition to this example, a Christian love of neighbor should also be a weighty reason to avoid the type of thinking that leads to more open-border policy. When asked about the greatest commandment in Scripture, Jesus immediately followed up the command to fully love God with the exhortation to, “love your neighbor as yourself,” (Matt. 22:39, ESV). With our complex responsibilities as citizens today, this task of love spans much greater lengths than it would in the time of the Old Testament. In Understanding the Times: A Survey of Competing Worldviews, Dr. Jeff Myers states that, as citizens, “we must … take an interest in helping others flourish,” through our participation in government. Since our neighborly obligations extend first to those within our nation before those without, one must evaluate whether or not the idea of more open-border policies are truly aiding in the flourishing of our neighbor. Dovetailing nicely with the last point, this question can be answered with a resounding “no.” Putting aside the question of the morality of those entering our nation, border states like Texas and Arizona are quickly becoming overwhelmed with the burden stemming from unchecked immigration. The office of the Texas Attorney General estimates that Texans are paying upwards of $600 million per year to pay for the medical costs of illegal migrants, and over $152 million for migrant housing. Though a percentage of taxpayer dollars will always go to support migrants (illegal or not), this money poses an undue and unjust burden on those who live in these states.
Although the point has been emphasized before, it should be made clear that many of the proponents of a more open immigration system have good intentions. Old Testament scholar M. Daniel Carroll, himself a son of immigrants, points out in his 2013 work Christians at the Border many of the benefits that migrants from the south have brought to the United States. Most notably, he writes that their religious conviction results in many thriving minority churches, stating that the, “Christian faith is most vibrant among the immigrant population.” In a nation with churches largely in decline, this boost from those outside our country is inspiring, and the sincere faith of these people shouldn’t be discounted. Carroll also hedges against the concern of large influxes of migrants leading to a fractured American identity, citing cases of adaptation among migrants and pointing out that the substance of such an identity has always been somewhat fluid. Though this argument certainly has merit, especially regarding the revitalization of the church, the benefits of this are not limited to accomplishment only through an open-border system.
Carroll’s arguments were for a different time, and though his points are valid, they must be applied in a nuanced way to the issues of today. Yes, migrants certainly could facilitate a renewal of the faith that initially drove this country’s movement toward independence, but that doesn’t require us to neglect prudence in distinguishing between those with good intentions and those with evil ones. This argument must not be twisted in favor of an unwise approach to immigration, and Christians should guard against such extremes.
The Christian should always be one to welcome and care for those on the outside. In countries where God-given political rights and responsibilities are honored, Christians should be sure to protect those who may be at risk, and welcome them with the same love that Jesus uses to welcome all into the faith. However, Christians must take into account the realities of governance: evil exists, and government must be a hedge against it. We have a duty to tend to and take care of our own first; our wives, children, and those within our borders who can’t stand up for themselves. Scriptural examples and common sense make it clear that stewarding our blessings involves guarding against those who might wish to take them away, and that living out the Christian faith demands a clear-eyed look at those seeking to enter the space which they’ve been given to govern. Though a more open view of immigration might be possible in a more perfect world, Christians must recognize that their faith does not require discarding their reason and safety to allow others to experience that blessing. In all of this, Christians must pray for proper discernment based upon biblical wisdom, asking God to guide them in the application of Scripture to the challenges of the current cultural and political time.
