The article argues that support for immigration enforcement aligns with biblical teachings. It addresses claims made by those who oppose such measures, particularly from a liberal perspective, suggesting that these stances contradict the moral imperatives laid out in scripture.
The author begins by referencing Leviticus 19:33–34, which emphasizes kindness to foreigners. However, many critics overlook that illegal immigrants are breaking the law by their very presence. The Trump administration’s option for illegal aliens to “self-deport” is framed as a lawful opportunity. By choosing not to take it, these individuals remain in defiance of legal standards, a point the author argues carries significant moral weight.
Throughout scripture, there is an assertion that foreign guests must respect the laws of their host nation. Jeremiah 29:7 reinforces this idea, advocating for peace and prosperity in foreign lands as a shared benefit for both the hosts and the newcomers. The author emphasizes that being a welcomed guest comes with a responsibility to abide by local laws, benefiting the wider community.
The article also discusses depictions of illegal aliens and their treatment in relation to biblical precepts in the New Testament. It cites First Peter 2:11-13, which urges believers to submit to earthly laws. This framework presents a clear distinction: while one navigates a foreign land as a “stranger” or “pilgrim,” compliance with authority is expected unless it explicitly demands one to act against God’s laws. These interpretations create a compelling argument against the notion that supporting deportation is inherently sinful.
Furthermore, the article contrasts with other topics often deemed contentious, such as abortion and gender identity. These issues highlight what the author sees as inconsistencies in liberal engagement with scripture. If advocates cite biblical teachings to support immigration while ignoring those that address law and order, it raises questions about the sincerity of their interpretations.
The conclusion reinforces the notion that deportation and respect for immigration laws do not conflict with biblical principles. It underscores the argument that adherence to the law is a foundational aspect of moral conduct, one that should be embraced by all, including those living in the country unlawfully.
Overall, the analysis presented is structured around the premise that biblical teachings provide a consistent framework supporting lawful behavior that must be respected, regardless of personal circumstances. This challenges the narrative that immigration enforcement contradicts moral and ethical imperatives in scripture.
"*" indicates required fields
