Hey Open-Borders Peeps: Are You SURE ‘That’ Scripture Means What You Think?

Written by Wes Walker on November 30, 2018

Open-borders folks love cherry-picking scripture so they can strongarm Americans with guilt to accept their left-leaning policies. But are they being honest?

The same people who often use Biblical mandates for voluntary charity and aid for the poor as a pretext for massive taxation and bloated, aimless social programs have been pounding the pulpit over what we should do about America’s Southern Border.

Their argument basically boils down to: “We are kind, you are mean, Jesus is kind and you worthless heathens need to be more like us.” They cite, for example, Matthew 25 ‘whatsoever you have done for the least of these, you do for me’.

Is a this legit WWJD reading of the verse?

No. It isn’t. For one thing, nations and people are very different moral entities, with very different responsibilities.

The moral obligations of one person to a neighbor — even the ‘stranger’ — is very different from a nation to its own population.

The same Triune God that said ‘the least of these’ also said many things the Left tries very hard to ignore.

For one thing, Scripture makes God’s attitude toward national boundaries very clear as he leads the Hebrew people to the promised land. Even as He is giving His people a land and an inheritance, He makes it known precisely what belongs to whom, and which borders shall not be transgressed.

Said differently, He makes a very clear distinction between “yours” and “not-yours”.

Here are a few often-ignored verses from Deuteronomy chapter 2:

4 Give the people these orders: ‘You are about to pass through the territory of your relatives the descendants of Esau, who live in Seir. They will be afraid of you, but be very careful. 5 Do not provoke them to war, for I will not give you any of their land, not even enough to put your foot on. I have given Esau the hill country of Seir as his own. 6 You are to pay them in silver for the food you eat and the water you drink.’

9 Then the Lord said to me, “Do not harass the Moabites or provoke them to war, for I will not give you any part of their land. I have given Ar to the descendants of Lot as a possession.”

16 Now when the last of these fighting men among the people had died, 17 the Lord said to me, 18 “Today you are to pass by the region of Moab at Ar. 19 When you come to the Ammonites, do not harass them or provoke them to war, for I will not give you possession of any land belonging to the Ammonites. I have given it as a possession to the descendants of Lot.”

24 “Set out now and cross the Arnon Gorge. See, I have given into your hand Sihon the Amorite, king of Heshbon, and his country. Begin to take possession of it and engage him in battle. 25 This very day I will begin to put the terror and fear of you on all the nations under heaven. They will hear reports of you and will tremble and be in anguish because of you.”

26 From the Desert of Kedemoth I sent messengers to Sihon king of Heshbon offering peace and saying, 27 “Let us pass through your country. We will stay on the main road; we will not turn aside to the right or to the left. 28 Sell us food to eat and water to drink for their price in silver. Only let us pass through on foot— 29 as the descendants of Esau, who live in Seir, and the Moabites, who live in Ar, did for us—until we cross the Jordan into the land the Lord our God is giving us.” 30 But Sihon king of Heshbon refused to let us pass through. For the Lord your God had made his spirit stubborn and his heart obstinate in order to give him into your hands, as he has now done.

Essentially saying, this land is my land, that land is your land.

Even within the boundaries of Promised Land, the territories were marked off by specific landmarks for the various family groups within the nation… something not unlike our concept of ‘States’.

If you don’t like this example, how about Jesus own words? While addressing another topic, he made a relevant point about legitimate entry and belonging, which is what this whole border situation boils down to.

After all, the objection is to ILLEGITIMATE forms or immigration like fence-jumping, not Immigration itself, right? From John 10

“Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. 2 The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. 5 But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger’s voice.” 6 Jesus used this figure of speech, but the Pharisees did not understand what he was telling them.

7 Therefore Jesus said again, “Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep. 8 All who have come before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep have not listened to them. 9 I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.[a] They will come in and go out, and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.

In both of these ‘written in red’ examples, Jesus makes the point of there being a proper, lawful way to enter, whether as a leader or as a member of the broader community. Obviously, he was speaking of the Kingdom of God, not national boundaries, but it’s important that he is drawing from a very everyday and understandable example of breaking-and-entering.

If the GREATER point is true, than it must also mean that the lesser example he uses to PROVE it is true.

Although, it’s doubtful that these arguements will actually be heard by the same people invoking Matthew 25. They are weaponizing scripture to demand specific behavior out of others, not submitting their own lives to the same. After all, the Democrats are Zero-for-Ten in the Ten Commandments. If you doubt me, you can read the breakdown here: Democrats v. The Decalogue

As for the Matthew 25 imperatives? They still hold true. In fact, that’s why excessive taxation is such an immoral thing… it leaves that much less in the hands of ordinary people to share with their neighbors in need.

As I once mentioned in ‘A Blueprint for Government That Doesn’t Suck‘ the individual, not the government should be the primary engine of charity. It is far more effective. Government should be the ‘charity of last resort’ only after all other, better, charities have been approached.

Get Doug Giles’ new book:

Rules For Radical Christians is not a survival devotional designed to help the young Christian adult limp through life. Rather, it is a road-tested, dominion blueprint that will equip the young adult with leadership skills and sufficient motivation to rise to a place of influence in an overtly non-Christian culture. Rules For Radical Christians gives the reader the keys to become strategically equipped to move into an anti-theistic environment and effectively influence it for the glory of God.

Get yours today!

You can choose either the classic Paperback to trigger your college professors and quasi-communist classmates, or the Kindle edition to always have it on hand.

What makes America so different from other nations? Other nations are built around regimes or systems. But America was built from on ideas. From a blank slate.

Built on ideas that are DANGEROUS to tyrants.

That we have God-Given Rights, like Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Dangerous ideas. Like this one: the people, when threatened, have a God-Given right to stand up in defiance of any government that dares threaten any of those rights.

There’s a men’s version

And a women’s version, too

Because in America, the bros AND the ladies BOTH have a rich history of badass rowdiness.