Last year’s Super Bowl introduced a series of ad’s known as the “He Gets Us” campaign. Those behind the campaign felt the burden to carry out the unenviable task of making Jesus more relatable to unbelievers. One such example floated the message that Jesus was a refugee and thereby can connect with those escaping their home countries to find asylum specifically in America.

Those who have been following the story know that there has been a Mexican standoff at the southern border in Texas. A ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court came down on the side of the federal government which demanded that a stretch of razor wire must be taken down to allow refugees access to an area known as Eagle Pass. Tensions have mounted as the Governor, Greg Abbott, and Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxon have refused to comply. The ante was raised when Biden threatened to send federal troops to take down the contested fencing while at least half of the U.S. Governors have pledged to support Texas in standing firm. Similarly, a truck convoy dubbed the “Army of God” is also en route to secure the Texas border.

This begs the question: If Jesus was a refugee who needed to take sanctuary, isn’t it a betrayal of the Christian ethic to block out would-be refugees? Why are so many Christians standing diametrically opposed to the securing of our national borders? Which side, if any, is properly exegeting this issue through the biblical lens?

As usual, I want to start by defining the terms. Merriam-Webster defines a refugee as, “one that flees; especially: a person who flees to a foreign country or power to escape danger or persecution.” Since refugees are a subsect of a larger discussion, the term immigrant is defined as: “A person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence.”

With this context, let us consider whether Jesus meets the definition of a refugee. His family did flee from Bethlehem after an angelic warning regarding the coming slaughter of the innocents as ordered by King Herod in his attempt to eliminate the Messiah. Consequently, in the true meaning of the word, the case could clearly be made for Jesus and his family being refugees. As we dig deeper into this argument, things get a little stickier.

Imagine you own a business and you have several job openings that need to be filled by qualified candidates. You post the positions available and instead of poring over resumes to make your selections, you announce that jobs would be guaranteed based on a first come, first served basis. Unsurprisingly, we see two completely predictable outcomes. First, those who end up and the front of the line turn out to not be the best job prospects. Secondly, the number of applicants showing up far outstrips the number of positions available.

Being a compassionate progressive, the boss promises to help out everyone who showed up by paying them a salary and benefits regardless of whether or not they will get a job. Much to his chagrin, only a handful of serious workers show up to do the job and make a measurable contribution to the agency. The majority continue to pick up their paychecks, but don’t show up to work although they assure the boss they are working hard for him.

A couple of questions:

• Using this process, how many of those who applied for the positions do you believe would have met the qualifications for the job opening they applied for?
• How long would it be before the company goes bankrupt, thus causing devastation not only to the new workers, but the workforce whose loyalty built the business and made it lucrative?

The above is a perfect analogy to the current approach to “immigration” in the U.S., Canada, and most western nations. Whether based on ignorance or insincerity, this is not a model for either providing shelter for refugees or finding the best and brightest to occupy positions where there are voids that need to be filled.

The premise that open borders will serve to meet either of these objectives is faulty for so many reasons.

1. Without borders there is no way to vet who is crossing the border and thus their benefit to the country. Similarly there is no way to ensure they meet the criteria as being true refugees.
2. Unprotected borders means that the number of those entering the country cannot be ensured, thus not only are you likely importing few who meet the conditions for entry, but the influx worsens the conditions for all because their cost and lack of housing creates a financial and housing crisis.
3. By failing to vet those coming into the country, you are putting the lives of true refugees in danger because when you can’t guarantee the type of individual crossing into your country, you increase the likelihood of transforming your country into the hellscape that the refugees left. Note that this risk is also borne by the citizens that made the country great to begin with.
4. Uncontrolled illegal immigration creates hardship, dangers, food shortages, inflation, and other consequences that make the country less livable.
5. Unrestricted access from nations with different value systems threatens to erode cultural cohesion and the shared standards and principles that made your country desirable for citizens, legal immigrants and genuine refugees in the first place.
6. It invites the worst elements (drug cartels, child sex traffickers, terrorists, etc.) into the country because they see you as an easy target that won’t enforce laws and measures that impede their criminal and heinous crimes.
7. Illegals can easily be exploited because they will work for lower wages since they don’t have to be paid according to federal and state laws.
8. It shows a stunning disregard for true immigrants who followed the process to earn their way into the country legally and, in fact, entices malefactors over the desirable candidates.

This is not a complete list, but certainly addresses several of the very real threats and concerns related to open borders.

So, to address the premise of the “He Gets Us” commercial and all who peddle this premise, the issue is not even whether or not Jesus could be deemed a refugee since it has no bearing on the issue at hand. If you really want to offer sanctuary for genuine refugees, you fully secure the borders and invest energies in helping to get people out of hot spots where they are facing provable persecution and genocide. In other words, you do the opposite.

For example, we know that the most vulnerable are women and children, but reports suggest that most of those crossing the border are young (fighting aged) males. Far worse than this, there are countless reports of child sex trafficking, as well as rape and exploitation of women and children by coyotes who claim they will ensure they get safe passage over the border. This is an invitation to abuse and the failure to guarantee guardianship for children crossing the border has turned the U.S. into the epicenter for child sex trafficking.

Similarly, Christians are the most persecuted demographic across the globe, yet there is not only no interest in aiding or protecting this population. They are also far less likely to be able to escape and are far less likely to exploit the open borders system to achieve freedom for the very reasons that make them valuable as citizens. This is not coincidental as Christian persecution is surging in North America. While it has not yet risen to the kind seen in nations like North Korea, China, and Iraq, that is the trajectory we are on.

The simplistic thinking that somehow deceives sincere believers into not making these obvious connections is deeply disturbing. It reminds me of the messaging under Covid that got so much traction whereby wearing a mask, getting the experimental jab, and keeping away from church and each other was promoted as a loving act. I can say from first-hand experience that I found the most dogmatic, inflexible, fearful and angry Branch Covidians were church-goers. At the same time, the strongest opposition to the mandates, the most fearless, and greatest risk-takers advocating for freedom were committed, Bible-believing Christians.

One final point that must not be glossed over is that the rationale for defending open borders and Covid mandates was the same – virtue signaling. Lest we forget what this really means, is that it derives from smug pride about one seeing themselves as having an elevated level of compassion. This is the hallmark of the oxymoronic “progressive church” that demonstrates their aversion to scriptural teachings on sin is that they believe themselves to be more moral than God.

With regards to this new trucker convoy, I do have some sage advise I’d like them to consider:

• There is a very real danger that this will be a set up since very malevolent actors have refined their efforts to malign even the most sincere efforts to stand up for righteous principles. The risk skyrockets when your intention is to take offensive action since this by definition invites conflict.
• It is always unwise to promote oneself as agents of God as this sets an extremely high bar and threatens bringing ill-repute on God as his representatives. You should allow your example to be enough and, keeping in mind all I’ve said, I have doubts about whether this is the hill God wants you to die on.

The dispute over open borders is not the exception, but is yet another case in point that we can no longer have dialogue based on reality. What disturbs me is how many people, especially professing believers can fall for such an obvious fraud, we are tasked with seeking out truth as followers of the embodiment of truth. Instead, we have become an instrument in the hands of those who want to play footsie with Satan as he keeps falling back to his favourite lie: Did God really say?

If you hope to even have a rational discussion about an issue, you first have to ask the right question. The matter we need to adjudicate is not why Christians and conservatives hate immigrants, but why the progressive left – including within the church – want to remove all the safeguards to prevent the exploitation and trafficking of children and women, create porous borders for the drug cartels, and guarantee we will not be able to prevent criminals, terrorists, and other national threats from flooding the borders, wreaking economic devastation, and changing the founding principles of the nation.

This is the question I want answered.