The Logical Fallacy in Comparing Jesus to Refugees
Was Jesus a refugee? According to Merriam-Webster, a refugee is defined as “one who flees, especially to a foreign country or power to escape danger or persecution.” By this definition, it may seem plausible to argue that Jesus fits the description. Indeed, Mary and Joseph fled to Egypt with Jesus because it was too dangerous to remain in Bethlehem, aligning with the essence of refuge-seeking.
However, drawing a direct parallel between Jesus’ journey into Egypt and the immigration situation at the US Southern Border from Central America last year is a stretch. While both involve movement in search of safety, the contexts, motivations, and socio-political dynamics vastly differ. Attempting to equate them oversimplifies complex historical and contemporary realities.
Was Jesus a refugee? According to the biblical account in Matthew 2:13 (KJV), an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, instructing him, “Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him.” This divine directive indicates that Joseph was tasked with taking his family to Egypt to escape the imminent threat posed by King Herod.
In this context, it becomes evident that Jesus’ journey to Egypt was not merely a flight from danger but a pivotal part of God’s plan for his protection and eventual fulfillment of prophecy. While the term “refugee” may apply in a broad sense, it is essential to recognize the spiritual significance and divine guidance inherent in this journey.
However, it is crucial to avoid oversimplifying or directly equating this biblical narrative with contemporary immigration issues, such as the situation at the US Southern Border from Central America. While both involve movement in search of safety, they exist within distinct historical, cultural, and geopolitical contexts. Drawing parallels must be done with care and sensitivity to the complexities of each situation.
Secondly, it’s important to consider the motivations behind contemporary migration patterns. While the biblical narrative of Jesus’ journey to Egypt was guided by divine intervention, today’s migrants often seek refuge for various reasons, including economic opportunities and safety concerns.
However, it’s crucial to acknowledge that not all migrants share the same intentions. Some may indeed seek access to government benefits upon arrival in their host countries. For instance, undocumented immigrants in the United States may have access to certain social welfare programs like Medicaid and WIC, as outlined by The National Immigration Forum. Additionally, the Supreme Court ruling in Plyler v. Doe guarantees access to public education for children of undocumented immigrants, further complicating the decision to return to their country of origin.
Critics argue that these benefits may incentivize migrants to remain in their host countries permanently, especially considering the potential for future citizenship and political implications. This perspective often aligns with political agendas, particularly within the Democratic Party, where the issue of immigration reform and citizenship rights is highly contested.
While these concerns merit discussion, it’s essential to approach the topic with nuance and avoid oversimplification. Migration is a multifaceted issue influenced by economic, social, and political factors, and any proposed solutions must consider the complexities involved.
Breitbart.com
Furthermore, concerns about migration extend beyond issues of access to government benefits. There are legitimate worries regarding criminal activities associated with illegal immigration, including drug smuggling, human trafficking, the presence of violent gangs such as MS-13, and the potential infiltration of terrorist organizations.
Recent developments highlight ongoing challenges at the US-Mexico border. A second caravan, consisting of over 12,000 individuals, has been organized in Honduras and is currently heading towards the US border. Despite the significant financial burden posed by illegal immigration, estimated at $116 billion annually across local, state, and federal levels, it appears that the Democratic Party remains indifferent to the potential consequences of increased migrant influx.
The continuation of such large-scale migration poses not only economic strains but also raises security concerns and challenges the capacity of border enforcement agencies. It’s imperative for policymakers to address these complex issues comprehensively and ensure the safety and well-being of US citizens.
Now, let’s examine the situation from a Biblical standpoint. If Jesus were present at the border, would he condone illegal entry into the US? It’s unlikely. However, it’s evident from his teachings and actions that Jesus would demonstrate compassion and a humanitarian spirit toward migrants.
While Jesus might not endorse illegal entry outright, he would likely advocate for understanding and empathy toward those fleeing danger and seeking refuge. His teachings emphasize the importance of loving one’s neighbor and caring for the marginalized and vulnerable members of society.
In this context, Jesus would likely extend a compassionate response to migrants, acknowledging their humanity and addressing their needs while also advocating for adherence to laws and regulations. This nuanced approach reflects the balance between justice and mercy inherent in Jesus’ teachings and underscores the importance of empathy and compassion in addressing complex social issues.
The biblical passage from Matthew 25:35 (KJV) reminds us of Jesus’s profound compassion and care for those in need: “For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in.”
This verse encapsulates Jesus’s ethos of compassion and hospitality. He demonstrated this not only through feeding the hungry and providing drink but also by extending care to strangers and those in distress. Moreover, his ministry was marked by miraculous healings and acts of kindness.
However, it’s crucial to recognize that Jesus’s compassion did not equate to endorsing lawlessness. While he showed immense love and care for all, he also respected the laws of the land. Jesus emphasized the importance of righteousness and obedience to authority.
Therefore, while Jesus would undoubtedly extend aid and support to migrants, he would also encourage them to respect the laws of the land they seek refuge in. His teachings emphasize a balance between compassion and obedience to authority, reflecting a holistic approach to addressing the needs of society.
In Romans 13:1-2, it is written: “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers (government). For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.”
These verses underscore the importance of respecting and obeying governmental authority, as it is established by divine will. They emphasize the significance of adherence to the laws and regulations set forth by the governing authorities.
When considering the criteria for obtaining asylum and refugee status in the US, clarity exists. Applicants must demonstrate credible fear of persecution in their home country based on factors such as race, religion, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.
Despite these clear guidelines, some argue for leniency in the face of migrant caravans seeking entry into the US. However, the majority of those in these caravans are not fleeing direct persecution but are rather driven by a desire to access the benefits available in America.
This raises questions about the integrity of the asylum and refugee processes and the broader issue of immigration policy. While compassion for those in need is crucial, it’s also essential to uphold the rule of law and maintain the integrity of the asylum system to ensure fairness and justice for all involved.
