Monthly Archive for: "September, 2013"
Home / 2013 / September

Paul Louis Metzger: “Reforming Our Understanding of Romans 13 on Immigration Reform”

A student from Arizona once remarked in a class discussion on justice and immigration that it was against Arizona law to give a cup of water to an undocumented person. As a result of his understanding (or misunderstanding) of the Arizona law, he said he would not provide relief to someone he knew was undocumented. He was surprised when I asked, “What would Jesus do?” if our Lord faced the same situation. After all, Jesus often disobeyed the Sabbath laws of his day, for example, by healing people on the Sabbath (e.g., Mark 3:1-6). Regardless of the intricacies of the Arizona law and accuracy of the student’s claim, the discussion raised an important issue for Christians to discuss. Is civil disobedience ever warranted of Christians?

It is worth noting that, under current law—at least in most of the United States, most churches are not currently faced with this question of civil disobedience: nothing in federal law prohibits churches from ministering to undocumented immigrants in need, and there is no requirement that a church or an individual report someone whom they suspect of lacking legal status. Neither ministering to undocumented immigrants nor advocating for reforms to our immigration legal system puts a church or individual followers of Christ outside of submission to the governmental authorities. However, the political climate the past several years could put pressure on certain elements of a church’s ministry to the undocumented, making it appear unlawful, in view of ambiguously-worded immigration bills at both the state and federal levels. In this climate, the question of whether civil disobedience is ever warranted (or even required) of Christians in view of biblical texts on care for the stranger is worth considering (See for example Exodus 22:21, Leviticus 19:34, Matthew 25:43, and Luke 10:36-37).

The question of civil disobedience becomes more complicated when one considers such biblical texts as Romans 13. For many Christians like the student in my class, Romans 13 preclude the possibility of ever disobeying a government’s law in good conscience. Romans 13:1-7 reads,

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed (ESV).

From a surface reading of the text, it might appear that Christians are to offer blind obedience to the governing authorities. Such is not the case. We are to subject ourselves to the governing authorities as they do good, not evil, for God has authorized them to nurture and protect the good of all, not to do harm (Romans 13:4). Ultimately, Christians are to subject themselves to Christ in the sphere of the state. From the vantage point of Christ’s lordship over all spheres, the church and state are subject to Christ’s kingdom.[1] Thus, Christians and the church are to approach the subject of obedience to the state in view of their ultimate allegiance to Christ and his call on his people to care for the stranger and neighbor in need.

In this context, it is also worth noting that the text that immediately follows in Romans 13 (verses 8-10) focuses on what is essential to fulfilling God’s law as revealed in the Old Testament—love your neighbor as yourself:

Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

The church is to dedicate itself to fulfilling God’s law, which centers on love of neighbor, as well as the love of God (cf. Mark 12:30-31), even if that puts it at odds with the state from time to time.  Jesus redefines for us who our neighbor is. He is not the person like us or who likes us or whom we like. It is the person who stands or lies before us, including the person in need, as in the story of the Samaritan of exceptional mercy in Luke 10:25-37. It could very well be the case that the Jewish religious leaders who passed the beaten and robbed man lying on the road did so because they feared he was dead and to have touched him would have made them ceremonially unclean. Jesus calls them and us to a higher law—love of neighbor. Only the Samaritan cared for their neighbor that day. Only he proved to be a neighbor to the person in need. And, as Pastor Rick Warren says, “A good Samaritan doesn’t stop and ask the injured person, ‘Are you legal or illegal?’”

Martin Luther King, Jr. demonstrates for us how to apply Romans 13 in our current democratic context. The Apostle Paul had no way of influencing legislation of laws in his day, but Christians, just like King, do so in our society. Providentially for us, King did not offer blind obedience to the state. If he had, we might still be experiencing forms of Jim Crow legislation today. Or else, the overturning of these laws might have come through violent forms of disobedience, not civil disobedience as with the movement inspired by King and the African American church.

From his Birmingham Jail cell, King responded to the white clergy who were troubled by his civil disobedience:

One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”

King understood the consequences for disobeying governing authorities—jail or worse. But King also understood the consequences of not obeying one’s own conscience and God himself, who calls us to promote just laws that favor the love of neighbor as ourselves regardless of the cost. King had the King of Kings as his exemplar: it is lawful to do good, not harm, to save life, not to kill, even if one gets killed in the end by the authorities for doing so, as happened with Jesus (See Mark 3:1-6).

The Evangelical Immigration Table offers a balanced approach to the subject of immigration reform in a democratic system. Rather than having to pursue blind obedience to unjust laws or dismissing the rightful rule of law, its principles include the following: respecting the God-given dignity of each and every person, whether documented or not, respecting the rule of law, and establishing a path toward legal status and/or citizenship for those who qualify and who wish to become permanent residents. Our current immigration laws are out-of-synch with the needs of our labor market and thus have been only selectively enforced for decades, sending mixed messages to immigrants desperate for work; a biblically-appropriate respect for the rule of law should guide us to reform a system that is not currently functioning well, restoring the rule of law while also respecting the human dignity of each person made in God’s image.

In the end, Christians have a responsibility in our democratic society to promote and live by laws that promote God’s law of love of neighbor—documented or not, as disclosed in Scripture and embodied in Jesus Christ.

Paul Louis Metzger is Professor of Christian Theology & Theology of Culture at Multnomah Biblical Seminary and Director of The Institute for the Theology of Culture: New Wine, New Wineskins at Multnomah University in Portland, Oregon. He earned his Ph.D. from King’s College, London and his Master’s Degrees from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He is the author of numerous books, including the award-winning Consuming Jesus: Beyond Race and Class Divisions in a Consumer Church (Eerdmans, 2007), and editor of Cultural Encounters: A Journal for the Theology of Culture.

This and other Evangelical Perspectives on Immigration represent one evangelical perspective on immigration—that of the author—and not necessarily the views of every member organization of the Evangelical Immigration Table or every signatory of the Evangelical Statement of Principles for Immigration Reform.  


[1] Karl Barth writes of Romans 13 that “the last thing this instruction implies is that the Christian community and the Christian should offer the blindest possible obedience to the civil community and its officials.” Karl Barth, “The Christian Community and the Civil Community,” in Against the Stream: Shorter Post-War Writings, 1946-1952, ed. R. G. Smith, trans. E.M. Delecour and S. Godman (London: SCM Press, Ltd., 1954), p. 24. According to Barth, the church is to submit to Christ in the sphere of the state (See p. 29). The church’s ultimate allegiance to Christ puts a check on its submission to the dictates of the state. The church and state are subject to Christ, who is Lord over all spheres.


This and other Evangelical Perspectives on Immigration represent one evangelical perspective on immigration—that of the author—and not necessarily the views of every member organization of the Evangelical Immigration Table or every signatory of the Evangelical Statement of Principles for Immigration Reform.  

Danny Carroll: “Immigration Reform: Can the Bible Help Us?”

As discussions in Congress about immigration reform heat up, Christians should step back and ask how the Bible might inform their own view on immigration. Could the Bible have something to contribute to the national debate about changing immigration law?

Where do we begin the discussion? For many people, the place to begin is Romans 13. This is a very important passage, but it will be dealt with in another study. Here we start with a fundamental question that should guide the evaluation of any law: What kind of values do we want to be reflected in the laws of our country?

To answer that question we turn to Genesis chapter one. There we are told that human beings are made in the image of God. This means that each person has infinite value in God’s sight and that each human being has tremendous potential. This truth reminds us that any discussion about immigration ultimately is about people.

We need to ask: Do our immigration laws honor the worth of immigrants as human beings? And, do our laws facilitate the realization of their great potential for this country? To look at legislation from this perspective gives the discussion a constructive direction. Laws will focus on respect and on facilitating their contribution to society (such as at the workplace and in education).

Do we find migration in the Bible? The history of humanity is the history of migration. Not surprisingly, we find migration in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament. The reasons for the movements of these people are similar to the ones that drive people to migrate today, such as hunger (Abram, Gen. 12; Jacob, his sons and their families, Gen. 46-47) and displacement in war (Daniel, Ezekiel). The Bible also describes the lives and the positive impact of God’s people who had to live far from home (Joseph, Nehemiah, Esther). We find, too, the account of an immigrant woman and the process of her integration into a new community (Ruth).

Migration is so central to the Bible that it provides a picture of the Christian life! 1 Peter 2:11 tells us that all Christians are sojourners, strangers in a strange land (also note Phil. 3:20; Heb. 13:14; Eph. 2:11-22). In other words, Christians are migrants on this earth. We serve another king and are citizens of a greater kingdom, the kingdom of God. This suggests that the more we learn about immigration the more we will actually understand our faith. We will appreciate in new ways that Christians are vulnerable and dependent in a world that sees us as strangers.

Can Old Testament Law provide guidance? Some Christians may be surprised that we look to the Old Testament Law for guidance. We do not do so in order to imitate Israel’s laws dealing with immigrants. We do so in order to learn what set of values should be the moral foundations of the legislation that we seek to pass for our country. Those ancient laws are a testimony to the righteousness of God (Deut. 4:5-8).

In the ancient world, foreigners lived a precarious existence. On the one hand, they were far away from their extended family, which was the source of help in times of need at that time. There were no government social programs like we have now. On the other hand, in Israel it was difficult for foreigners to own land for farming. Land was handed down within Israel’s families through the male line. Therefore, foreigners would have to rely on the Israelites for protection, aid, and work.

Old Testament laws responded to these challenges in multiple ways. Foreigners were to have proper rest from their work like everyone else (Exod. 20:10; 23:12; Deut. 5:14) and receive a fair wage on time (Deut. 24:14-15). Law courts were to be fair to these outsiders and impartial (Deut. 1:16-17; 24:17-18; 27:19). There also were provisions for food in times of hunger (Lev. 19:9-10; Deut. 14:28-29; 24:19-22). Even more impressive was the command to allow foreigners to participate in Israel’s worship, the most precious part of their culture (Exod. 12:45-49; Lev. 16:29). The number and openness of Israel’s laws for foreigners is unique among all ancient law codes.

There were expectations for the outsiders, too. They would have had to learn Israel’s laws and speak the language to work and take part in the religious life of Israel (Deut. 31:8-13).

There is no indication that these laws were only for “legal” immigrants. Perhaps Israel monitored who entered the country, like some of other nations did, but we have no evidence of that. Distinctions were made, however, between those who integrated culturally into Israelite society (ger) and those that did not, for whom there was a different label. The issue was not legal status.

The Israelites were to love foreigners as themselves, just as they were to love their neighbors as themselves (Lev. 19:18, 33-34). Their history also was a motivation to treat them well (Exod. 22:21; 23:9; Deut. 24:17-18). Most importantly, they were to care for the foreigner, because God loves them (Deut. 10:17-19; 24:14-15).
Israel’s laws reached out to foreigners because of its history (the US is a nation of immigrants!) and the heart of God. How might our laws exhibit charity towards the needy from elsewhere?

What about borders? God establishes nations, which suggests that borders are important. To rethink immigration law is not to eliminate borders or the rule of law. It is to rethink what kind of laws to support in order to better reflect biblical values. What we have is inadequate and sometimes unjust. The Bible can set an agenda for change that will benefit immigrants and the entire nation.

M. Daniel Carroll R. (Rodas) is distinguished professor of Old Testament at Denver Seminary and the national spokesperson on immigration for the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference. He is the author of Christians at the Border: Immigration, the Church, and the Bible (Baker Academic, 2008). He has a ThM from Dallas Theological Seminary and his PhD from the University of Sheffield.


This and other Evangelical Perspectives on Immigration represent one evangelical perspective on immigration—that of the author—and not necessarily the views of every member organization of the Evangelical Immigration Table or every signatory of the Evangelical Statement of Principles for Immigration Reform.  


Peter Crabb: “Faith and Economics: Why Christians Should Support Immigration Reform”

 In Luke Chapter 10 Jesus confirms the Law—we must love the Lord with all our heart, soul, and strength and love our neighbors as ourselves.  He goes on to show that even strangers are our neighbors.  We learn here and in other parts of the Bible that we must show love to immigrants whether or not they serve our economic interests. Fortunately, immigration reform is not a situation where our Christian faith must trump our economic incentives. Immigration, both authorized and unauthorized, has economic benefits for all. Economists often disagree, but on the subject of immigration reform there is a strong consensus over both the theory and evidence.  Reform of the United States’ current immigration policy can be done in a way that respects the God-given dignity of every person, protects families, and ensures no loss to taxpayers.
In Deuteronomy chapter 10 God gives specific instructions for how we are to treat foreigners living among us. We are to not only love them, but provide food and clothing. Why did he make such a demand of the Israelites? Because they too were once strangers in a land. In Matthew chapter 25 Jesus commands us to invite strangers in, feeding them and ministering to their physical needs.  Immigration is a policy debate where both our faith and economic knowledge line up. The U.S. has a strong heritage of welcoming immigrants, and much of our economic success can be attributed the skills, creative ideas, and work ethic immigrants brought with them.

There is a strong case that immigration helps the U.S. economy grow faster than it would otherwise.  Even undocumented workers improve our economy. A 2006 survey of economists by The Wall Street Journal found that 59 percent of economists believe undocumented workers have only a slight impact on wages in low-skill jobs, but 96 percent said undocumented workers are beneficial to the economy because these workers fill jobs many American workers won’t accept and hold down the rate of inflation.[i] Writing earlier this year in The New York Times, Harvard economist N. Gregory Mankiw said “… economists are receptive to the concept of immigration, partly because they tend to have a libertarian streak.”[ii]  Economic analysis shows that free markets lead to the best outcomes for society, and the question of immigration’s impact on labor market is no different. When markets are open to trade prices are lower and the quantity produced rises. This increases the rate at which an economy can grow and provides more choices for consumers.

Economy theory also supports greater immigration because of its association with entrepreneurism. New business formation is a key to economic growth and immigrants start small businesses at higher rates than native-born US citizens. Economist Robert Fairlie from UC-Santa Cruz showed that immigrants play an important role in economy by starting new businesses, creating jobs, and increasing exports.[iii] In 2011 immigrant owned businesses added more than $775 billion dollars of revenue to the U.S. gross domestic product. Further, Professor Fairlie showed that this was true even when the overall economy was weak.

Other economic research shows that immigration is good for U.S. worker productivity.  Anyone willing to move to a new country is generally ambitious, that is, a good worker. Whenever output per worker rises the economy grows at a faster rate. In a 2010 study, Professor Giovanni Peri of the UC- Davis and researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco found evidence that immigrants expand the economy’s productive capacity, stimulate new investment, and boost productivity.[iv] Their local-level data shows that states with higher immigrant worker populations have higher rates of output per worker. Immigrants raise the overall output. Higher economic output brings in more tax revenue, helping reduce the federal budget deficit and stretched state budgets.

By increasing the avenues for legal immigration and reducing the number of undocumented workers in the U.S. we can also address one of the key factors of poverty – the breakdown of the family unit. Census data shows that poverty in the U.S. is strongly correlated with family composition. Families headed by a female adult without a spouse present are more likely to live in poverty than a family headed by a married couple.[v] This can be thought of as another productivity issue. A tight family unit is more likely to be productive and have a higher standard of living. With immigration reform fewer workers will leave behind their spouses and children, the entire family will have more support, and poverty around the world is likely to be lower.

Some analysts have argued that undocumented workers place a strain on the many government-provided benefits in the United States. These researchers have tried to show that US taxpayer is providing unwarranted income and services to millions of workers. But assumptions in this body of research give rise to inflated costs and ignore benefits. The Heritage Foundation has produced many reports suggesting that any revisions to current law providing undocumented workers some permanent status are bad for this country.[vi] However, the Heritage studies falsely assume immigrants use many services they don’t pay for and fail to make any assumption about the potential economic gains that arise when undocumented workers gain legal status.

The most recent Heritage report uses what economists call static analysis. The reports states that undocumented immigrants increase GDP by approximately 2 percent, but goes on to say that these same workers will capture most of the gain from expanded production in their own wages. The authors write, “…while unlawful immigrants make the American economic pie larger, they themselves consume most of the slice that their labor adds.”  This statement contradicts the economic theory outlined above and the findings of other studies. For example, Professor Leighton Ku and lecturer Brian Bruen of George Washington University studied data from welfare programs like Medicaid, food stamps and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. [vii]  They found that the families of low wage immigrant workers consistently use such programs less than their native-born counterparts. They also showed that when these poor immigrants did accept assistance it was at a lower cost than that of native families. Immigrants come here to work; the US taxpayer is not at risk. In the unlikely event an immigrant family does seek government benefits the cost is low and the long-term benefits outweigh them.

Our faith and our economics are aligned. Immigration reform is not just the right thing for Christians to do, it is good economic policy. There is widespread consensus among economists that all forms of immigration improve the country’s standard of living. Immigrant workers keep prices lower by accepting many unwanted jobs, starting new businesses, and increasing overall worker productivity.  With reduced barriers to legal immigration families are more likely to remain together and poverty rates will decline. Finally, the data don’t support any suggestion immigrants are a burden to U.S. taxpayers.  The United States’ immigration policies should be reformed so that we better respect the God-given dignity of every person, reduce the risk of poverty by keeping families together, and grow the economy faster for the benefit of all.

Peter R. Crabb is Professor of Finance and Economics at Northwest Nazarene University in Nampa, Idaho.  He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Oregon and an MBA in Finance from the University of Colorado.  His research in economics and finance is published in the Journal of Business, the Journal of Microfinance, and the International Review of Economics and Finance, among others.

This and other Evangelical Perspectives on Immigration represent one evangelical perspective on immigration—that of the author—and not necessarily the views of every member organization of the Evangelical Immigration Table or every signatory of the Evangelical Statement of Principles for Immigration Reform.  





[v] See chapter 20 in Principles of Economics, N. Gregory Mankiw, South-Western Cengage Learning 2012.



Colorado evangelicals cite Bible as they embrace immigration reform

14 February 2013

Citing a new focus on biblical passages that call for Christians to treat foreigners and strangers well, Colorado evangelicals are turning into a potent force in the push for immigration reform.

Focus on the Family and some of the 200-plus lesser-known evangelical groups and congregations in Colorado have become surprise lobbyers for controversial reforms that include allowing immigrants to remain in the country.

Read more at >>

Conservative evangelical Christians sign on for immigration overhaul pitch

20 February 2013

AUSTIN — After years of silence and even hostility to modifying immigration laws, conservative evangelical Christians have become unlikely allies in pressing for a path to citizenship for those here illegally because, they say, the Bible told them so.

A coalition of religious leaders in Texas and elsewhere, many with strong credentials as social conservatives, is engaging congregations in a coordinated call for Congress and the White House to deal with 11 million illegal immigrants.

Read more at >>

Contact Us

We're not around right now. But you can send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Not readable? Change text. captcha txt

Start typing and press Enter to search