Biblical Border Policy
By Luke Dorman
Jesus exhorts us with every severity to love foreigners with cost. The Old Testament provides a model of immigration policy which (1) recognises immigrants’ inherent vulnerability, (2) ensures immigrants and natives are equal under the law, and (3) encourages immigrants to fully integrate into society. These building blocks should underpin modern immigration policy.
Introduction
Last week the UK government arrested and detained the first group of migrants who will be returned to France as part of the new ‘one in one out’ pilot scheme [1]. This pilot takes place as fifteen people are arrested for protesting outside hotels housing asylum seekers [2], and new polling from YouGov finds that 45 per cent of Britons support “admitting no more new migrants, and requiring large numbers of migrants who came to the UK in recent years to leave”[3]. Immigration continues to be a divisive public issue, and a policy headache for every recent UK government.
This would have been little different for Ancient Israel, sandwiched between great powers, and at the crossroads of international highways running along the coast and along the Jordan river. The nation was constantly in contact with other cultures, interacting with foreign actors, and had its own foreign population who had fled Egypt under Moses [4]. Looking to the Bible, therefore, is both spiritually and practically wise.
This article serves to outline some undeniably biblical principles concerning migration, which can serve as a firm foundation for further thinking. So what does the Bible have to say about migration and borders?
Personal action
It is an inescapable truth for all Christians that Jesus calls us to love foreigners we meet deeply, and with cost. Nowhere is this shown more clearly than Matthew 25 where, as Christ comes in judgement, he blesses those who invited him in as a stranger. The righteous ask him “When did we see you a stranger and invite you in?” [5], and he answers: “Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” [6] In a breathtaking move, Jesus, God incarnate in human form and the object of our worship, identifies himself with the plight of the foreigner. This itself gives migrants all the dignity we could imagine, and gives Christ’s followers all the reasons they need to love foreigners in practical ways: feeding, clothing and inviting them in.
In a world where ‘migrant’ and ‘foreigner’ have grown to represent illegality, invasion and insecurity, Christ commands us to humanise those who are alien, remember the divine image within them [7], and embrace them.
This should come, not as a surprise, but as an affirmation of the Old Testament law to “love [the foreigner] as yourself” [8]. Jesus fulfils the law, and Paul reaffirms it, commanding us to “show hospitality to strangers” [9]. The only limit to this hospitality is a respect for the “governing authorities”[10] to which we are subject. Wherever possible hospitality should not break the law [11].
God knows we will struggle to obey these commands. He knows we will seek excuses and exceptions. We would do well to remember Jesus’ answer to another expert in the law, who asked “and who is my neighbour?” [12]. Unphased, Jesus tells a story of “A man … going down from Jerusalem to Jericho” [13] who is beaten and ignored at the side of the road by a priest and a Levite. Finally, a Samaritan takes pity on him, bandages him, houses him and takes care of him.
Note that the man beaten is not identified by nationality, culture or class. Our pity for others should know no distinctions or exceptions. Note also that the Samaritan loves with financial cost and involved tenderness. He could have paid another to dirty their hands and bandage the man’s wounds, but instead he does this himself, and uses his own donkey to carry the bloodied man away.
Jesus ends this parable by ignoring the original question. He never addresses who our neighbour is but instead asks “[Who] was a neighbour to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?”. Jesus’ response amounts to a challenge: think less on who you can and cannot love, and think more about those who need love in front of you. In a diverse and multicultural Britain, foreigners and migrants will likely appear among those needing love from all of us. Pray we remember their humanity before we make our excuses.
Policy in practice
A simple ethic of loving the foreigner is personally compelling but cannot justify national border policy. We cannot take it for granted that personal morals translate into national morals. Would we say that Ukraine should simply ‘turn the other cheek’ [14] to Russian aggression? Instead, a study of Old Testament law, and the policies which governed God’s chosen people, reveals guiding principles which should be informing our current immigration policy [15].
For context, Old Testament law has a number of words for foreigners, with significantly different meanings.
Ger/Gerim (plural): These were foreigners who lived alongside, and sometimes with native Israelites. They lived in Israel permanently, and it’s repeatedly implied that they were often dependent and vulnerable members of society [16]. Our most common example of a ger is Ruth, the Moabite woman who settles in Israel17.
Toshav: These were immigrants similar to Gerim, who were less integrated into Israelite society [18]. They are sometimes translated as “temporary residents” and are mentioned less frequently than Gerim.
Nokrim and Zarim: These are foreigners living outside Israel, often viewed with suspicion, or as a threat [19].
Immigrants are vulnerable, and deserve special care and attention.
The core motif of Old Testament law is that immigrants (Gerim) are especially vulnerable and deserve special attention accordingly. Israelites were told not to oppress foreigners [20], not to mistreat them [21], not to deprive them of justice [22], and not to take advantage of them as workers [23]. In their harvests Israelites were called to leave the edges of their fields and the crop that dropped on the ground unharvested, so that foreigners could survive on these ‘gleanings’ [24]. The call to “love [the foreigner] as yourself” [25] was concrete and legal. These systems of support were conditional on nothing but residence in Israel.
The Israelite mandate to protect the foreigner extended even beyond legislation and private charity. Every three years the annual tithes were collected and given “to the Levite, the foreigner, the fatherless and the widow” [26]. As far as was possible in the limited state of Israel, the government directly supported migrants. In a discourse scored by accusations of welfare tourism, imagine Sir Kier Starmer announcing a tax explicitly paid to immigrants!
This recognised vulnerability did not extend to foreigners not resident in Israel (Nokrim and Zarim). Native Israelites and Gerim had their debts cancelled every 50 years [27], and could not be charged interest on loans [28]. These measured were not applied to Nokrim and Zarim.
Drawing direct lessons on border policy from a set of tribes in the ancient, pre-industrial Near East would be unwise. However, the vulnerability of migrant populations, and the duty of law, society, and the government to safeguard these populations is an unavoidable reality of Old Testament law. In brief, applying this principle in the UK today might mean investing in integration measures such as ESOL training [29], ensuring easy migrant access to healthcare [30], and cultivating a public dialogue which acknowledges the immigrant vulnerability and does not degrade them. ‘Hostile environment’ policies, which seek to deter migration by making life difficult for immigrants already in the UK, are not an option [31].
2. Immigrants and natives are equal under the law in rights and responsibilities.
Old Testament law makes clear that “the same law applies both to the native-born and to the foreigner” [32]. This is true for both rights and responsibilities and applies to all immigrants resident in Israel (Gerim). Israelites are called not to deprive foreigners of justice [33], but foreigners are explicitly included in commands against unintentional sin [34], defiant sin [35], blasphemy [36], murder and killing another’s animal [37]. We see this relationship most potently demonstrated by the Sabbath laws. The command to do no work on the Sabbath is applied to “any foreigner residing in your towns” [38]. Foreigners are responsible for treating any workers they have with dignity, or are entitled to a liberating day of rest if they are hired workers themselves. The social support measures listed above also fall under this equality before the law.
Equality under the law as stated above [39] had complexities. Ancient Israel’s Jubilee legislation meant that only native Israelites could own rural land permanently until the exile [40]. This legislation was deeply embedded in God’s promise to provide Israel with a land [41], but did not entail widespread subjugation of foreigners. Immigrants could still own land permanently in cities, temporarily own rural land, and after the exile, foreigners residing among the Israelites were allotted a land inheritance along with native Israelites [42].
Ensuring that immigrants are equal under the law could involve letting asylum seekers with pending applications work and pay taxes. It would also involve fully prosecuting those who overstay visas. In this respect, the new ‘one in one out’ pilot scheme is commendable in its emphasis on opening legal routes to the UK, while punishing illegal migration [43].
3. Immigrants are encouraged to fully integrate into society.
All the principles covered so far applied to immigrants resident in Israel, no matter their cultural integration. There was, however, the option of full and meaningful participation in Israelite society for all Gerim who wished. Perhaps most importantly, any resident foreigner could take Passover “like one born in the land” [44], provided all males in their household were circumcised [45]. Immigrants were also encouraged to participate in the feasts and festivals which marked the Israelite calendar [46], and could offer freewill burnt offerings to God [47]. We should not forget how radical this is. Participation in Israelite society was not simply entry into a culture, but entry into a covenant with God. That this was open to all, regardless of their birth, is incredible.
On the flip side, foreigners residing outside Israel (Nokrim and Zarim), were barred from certain core aspects of the country’s culture. They could not celebrate Passover [48], and had limited access to the Assembly of the Lord [49]. Old Testament law represents the fine balance between preserving native culture and values, and an open welcome for all to participate in these values.
The extent to which we can generalise this wisdom is debatable. Israel is unique in its role as God’s chosen people, both as a political entity, and now as the church [50]. No nation on earth can lay claim to such a unique or significant national culture [51], and so no nation can justify preserving its national values with the same strictness [52]. There is, however, something to be said about ensuring that immigrants are encouraged to engage with key parts of national culture.
Note that the Israelites did not preserve their national culture by barring foreigners from entering their lands. In the Old Testament immigration is not seen as automatically diluting or weakening national culture. In fact, much of subsequent criticism of Israelites and their loss of culture centres around their lack of hospitality to foreigners. Jeremiah castigates the Israelites as follows:
“Do no wrong or violence to the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow, and do not shed innocent blood in this place … if you do not obey these commands, declares the Lord, I swear by myself that this palace will become a ruin” [53].
So we should seek to render British culture and values accessible to immigrants, seek high standards for the maintenance of these key values, and remember that hospitality was a core and important part of Ancient Israel’s own culture.
4. The Bible has little to advise us on border policy
I have written much on the key lessons we can draw from the Old Testament about our own immigration policy. But I also want to draw attention to a gaping hole this work. As you may have noticed, the Bible tells us nothing about how Gerim come to live in Israel in the first place. This is because Ancient Israel, and most nations throughout history, did not have meaningful control over its borders [54]. Limited control could be exerted over those who entered city gates [55], but the notion of monitoring and regulating the entry of every individual into a territory would have been laughable. Israel did not have to face questions of who, or how many people should be granted entry into their nation. Old Testament law is not equipped to guide the processing of asylum claims. ‘Illegal entry’ into Israel simply didn’t exist.
This is not to say borders are wrong or unbiblical. Paul comments in Acts that God marked out the nations’ “appointed times in history, and the boundaries of their lands … so that they would seek him” [56]. Particular people occupying particular territories is clearly part of God’s plan for the world. However this, again, was written in a situation where modern border control, and even the modern nation state, did not exist. Political entities controlling territory is clearly divinely sanctioned, but questions of who should be granted entry, how asylum systems should function, and what duties countries owe to those outside their lands remain unresolved. While the Bible provides us with invaluable principles to inform and test our border policies today, it would be misguided to treat these as a comprehensive or directly applicable blueprint.
Conclusion
Christ calls us to love the foreigner, and this was reflected in the laws of Israel. By emphasising the vulnerability of migrants, their equality before the law, and encouraging their integration, the Bible gives us a vision of a welcoming nation which makes the most of the foreigners in its territory. With policies which were both pragmatic and protective, ancient Israel fully lived out its identity as those who were foreigners themselves in Egypt [57].
Ultimately, our nations will never look as beautiful as this, because Israel is uniquely God’s chosen people, and Old Testament Israel itself tragically fell short of the promises of its own law. However, from God’s good work we may still gain some wisdom. As the Canaanite woman said: “even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.” [58]
Further reading:
Guy Brandon, A Christian response to immigration
Julian Rivers’, Multiculturalism
Emily Ho, Relational Rights
Sean Oliver-Dee, Integration, Assimilation and British Values
Jonothan Tame, Immigration and Justice: How Local Churches can Change the Debate on Immigration in Britain.
Nick Spencer, Assimilation and Immigration: A Christian perspective on a polarised debate.
Nick Spencer, Asylum and Immigration: A Christian Perspective
Jonathan Burnside, God Justice and Society
The views and opinions expressed above are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of the Jubilee Centre or its trustees.
References:
[1] Euro News, UK border force makes first arrests under new 'one in, one out' migrant deal with France.
[2] BBC, Arrests after asylum hotel protests in England.
[3] YouGov, Is there public support for large-scale removals of migrants?
[4] Nick Spencer, Asylum and Immigration: A Christian Perspective
[5] Matthew 25:37
[6] Matthew 25:40
[7] Genesis 1:27
[8] Leviticus 19:33
[9] Hebrews 13:2, Romans 12:13
[10] Romans 13:1
[11] This, obviously, becomes complex quickly. The contested legality of sanctuary churches in the United States ‘harbouring’ unauthorised migrants is one contemporary example about which I will not pretend to be an expert. This article provides a deeper dive.
[12] Luke 10:29
[13] Luke 10:30
[14] Matthew 5:39
[15] For a deeper dive into the relevance of Israelite law to our modern immigration systems, Nick Spencer, Asylum and Immigration: A Christian Perspective
[16] Nick Spencer, Asylum and Immigration: A Christian Perspective
[17] Ruth 1:4
[18] Nick Spencer, Asylum and Immigration: A Christian Perspective
[19] Nick Spencer, Asylum and Immigration: A Christian Perspective
[20] Exodus 22:21, Exodus 23:9
[21] Leviticus 19:33
[22] Deuteronomy 24:17
[23] Deuteronomy 24:14
[24] Leviticus 19:10, Leviticus 23:22, Deuteronomy 24:21
[25] Leviticus 19:33
[26] Deuteronomy 26:12
[27] Deuteronomy 15:3
[28] Deuteronomy 23:20
[29] Refugee action, New research: English language provision ‘not fit for purpose’ as refugees wait up to three years to start lessons
[30] Asif and Kienzler, Barriers to healthcare for refugees, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants
[31] Asif and Kienzler, Barriers to healthcare for refugees, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants
[32] Exodus 12:49
[33] Deuteronomy 24:17
[34] Numbers 15:29
[35] Numbers 15:30
[36] Leviticus 24:16
[37] Leviticus 24:17-22
[38] Exodus 20:10
[39] Exodus 12:49
[40] See Leviticus 25
[41] Genesis 12:1-3
[42] Ezekiel 47:21-23
[43] The ‘illegality’ of migration is a complex issue in itself. For asylum seekers who do not have a specific refugee resettlement scheme for their country, the only feasible way to claim asylum in the UK is to arrive irregularly/illegally. This is because asylum claims can only be made when the claimant is on British soil.
[44] Exodus 12:43-49
[45] Exodus 12:43-49
[46] Deuteronomy 26:11, Deuteronomy 16:11, Deuteronomy 16:14, Leviticus 16:29, Deuteronomy 29:10, Deuteronomy 31:12
[47] Leviticus 17:8-9, Leviticus 22:18, Numbers 15:14
[48] Exodus 12:43-49
[49] Deuteronomy 23:3
[50] For more detail, see my article: Christian Nationalism: In God we trust?
[51] For more detail, see my article: Christian Nationalism: In God we trust?
[52] Israelites were commanded not to intermarry with other nations (Deuteronomy 7:3) because they were a “holy people to the Lord” (Deuteronomy 7:6). It would be incorrect and idolatrous for any current nation to claim this same status, and ridiculous for them to seek to preserve their national culture in such a way.
[53] Jeremiah 22:3-5
[54] Nick Spencer, Asylum and Immigration: A Christian Perspective
[55] Nick Spencer, Asylum and Immigration: A Christian Perspective
[56] Acts 17:26
[57] Leviticus 19:33
[58] Matthew 15:27
