The Use and Abuse of the Bible in the Immigration Debate

[Sam]

That would be a very dishonest misrepresentation of what I actually said, Sam. I'll emphasize the part you blew right past.



This is an excellent example of why I don't like interacting with you, Sam --- you're a slippery little weasel who doesn't have any problem misquoting others.

Oh, no — the "with you" was implied in the quote: I'm sure you're more than happy to jaw-jaw with the folks who agree with you or are also more interested in hurling rocks than analyzing the content of the OP.

You're not interested in an adversarial discussion on the subject matter, though — the OP was just grist for the mill.

-Sam

[Cow Poke]

Oh, no — the "with you" was implied in the quote: ...

Geeeesh, you're doubling down on deception... It wasn't implied, Sam - I flat out wrote it....

Sam, I really don't care to get into a big discussion with you about this -...

I fully expected you to respond like you did.

[Sam]

Geeeesh, you're doubling down on deception... It wasn't implied, Sam - I flat out wrote it....



I fully expected you to respond like you did.

Was implied in my quote, Cow Poke. You still haven't identified a single thing wrong with how I responded, in any case: I read the OP and, since you declined to provide any commentary to what you think it means, asked a relevant question on the assumption that the author's distinction holds true. Additionally, I've questioned the author's distinction between nekhar and ger, which is completely pertinent to the topic.

I've offered considerably more on-topic analysis and commentary than you, the OP, in other words and am, so far, the only person on the thread to actually demonstrate having read the article in question. So what was deficient about my response, other than it would actually compel you to do the work?

-Sam

[Cow Poke]

Was implied in my quote, Cow Poke...

Don't care, Sam - if others want to weigh in, they are certainly welcome, as you did.
I'm under no obligation whatsoever to put up with your crap.

[Sam]

Don't care, Sam - if others want to weigh in, they are certainly welcome, as you did.
I'm under no obligation whatsoever to put up with your crap.

That's entirely true. Also true is that my posts were civil and topical and you're just proving that you were much more interested in slinging rocks than actually demonstrating how others are "abusing the Bible" when talking about immigration.

-Sam

[Cow Poke]

That's entirely true.

It is, indeed.

[Sparko]

So basically not everyone was allowed to enter a country.
Countries protected their borders from unwanted immigrants/travelers.
Those who were allowed to enter legally were to be cared for as neighbors

Sounds like a good plan to me. I am all for keeping out those who are unwanted/do not have a valid reason to be here. In other words, stop immigrants from invading our border willy-nilly and make them go through approved ports and apply for entry. Build a wall.
Those that we do let in we should make sure they are welcome as legal immigrants. They can even become citizens if they wish and take the test and oath.

[Cow Poke]

So basically not everyone was allowed to enter a country.
Countries protected their borders from unwanted immigrants/travelers.
Those who were allowed to enter legally were to be cared for as neighbors

Sounds like a good plan to me. I am all for keeping out those who are unwanted/do not have a valid reason to be here. In other words, stop immigrants from invading our border willy-nilly and make them go through approved ports and apply for entry. Build a wall.
Those that we do let in we should make sure they are welcome as legal immigrants. They can even become citizens if they wish and take the test and oath.

WAY too reasonable, Sparko.

And our Church actually has an English as a Second Language program, and we support a ministry that very much cares for the people who have entered this country legally and are needing help assimilating.

[Sam]

So basically not everyone was allowed to enter a country.
Countries protected their borders from unwanted immigrants/travelers.
Those who were allowed to enter legally were to be cared for as neighbors

Sounds like a good plan to me. I am all for keeping out those who are unwanted/do not have a valid reason to be here. In other words, stop immigrants from invading our border willy-nilly and make them go through approved ports and apply for entry. Build a wall.
Those that we do let in we should make sure they are welcome as legal immigrants. They can even become citizens if they wish and take the test and oath.

What does Scripture say, however? How are we supposed to treat people seeking refuge in our lands, remembering that, in a time of desperate famine, that Israel asked for refuge and provision from Egypt?

-Sam

[Cow Poke]

What does Scripture say, however? How are we supposed to treat people seeking refuge in our lands, remembering that, in a time of desperate famine, that Israel asked for refuge and provision from Egypt?

-Sam

NOW, you're getting it!

[Sam]

NOW, you're getting it!

You're hoisting yourself with the petard again: if Scripture wants us to remember Israel's plight and salvation by Egypt in a time of famine, how should we respond to others who ask us, in their plight, for similar help? If someone wants to come and live in USA and work, in what way should we remember "being strangers in Egypt"?

It's obvious that the author is trying to create a permission structure to differentiate between how we can treat "legal" and "illegal" migrants — but, in forgetting the later references, he's exposed himself (and you) to a false confidence. You want to make a distinction between those who "legal residents" and the "illegal aliens" without realizing you're being asked how Scripture commands you to decide whether the aliens will be welcomed as residents in the first place. And when you advocate or defend restrictive immigration policies, you're not remembering the example of Israel being admitted into Egypt.

-Sam

[Sparko]

What does Scripture say, however? How are we supposed to treat people seeking refuge in our lands, remembering that, in a time of desperate famine, that Israel asked for refuge and provision from Egypt?

-Sam

Enslave them like Egypt did?

[Sam]

Enslave them like Egypt did?

When the thread is ostensibly over the abuse of Scripture, probably best not to provide such an apt example of the practice.

-Sam

[Sparko]

When the thread is ostensibly over the abuse of Scripture, probably best not to provide such an apt example of the practice.

-Sam

Sam you are not a serious debater so I can't respond to you in a serious way.

There is nothing in the bible that says you have to allow anyone who wants to to enter into your country. The verses you were using were about how to treat those who have entered your country legally, with permission. As the article in the OP shows.

Even you said that you only want to allow those in who have valid asylum claims. But above you are suggesting that we should allow anyone in no matter what. That would include enemies and those who wish to do harm to the host country. Not even Israel did that. In fact they were pretty good at wiping out their enemies and surrounding countries who were not friendly to them.

[Sam]

Sam you are not a serious debater so I can't respond to you in a serious way.

There is nothing in the bible that says you have to allow anyone who wants to to enter into your country. The verses you were using were about how to treat those who have entered your country legally, with permission. As the article in the OP shows.

Even you said that you only want to allow those in who have valid asylum claims. But above you are suggesting that we should allow anyone in no matter what. That would include enemies and those who wish to do harm to the host country. Not even Israel did that. In fact they were pretty good at wiping out their enemies and surrounding countries who were not friendly to them.

No, I'm not suggesting that. What I am asking is: if we want to assume Hoffmeier's conclusion, that there was a distinction in Scripture between a "lawful resident" and an "illegal" foreigner (again, this is highly contestable) then what next? How was Israel then told to respond to such foreigners seeking residence? Hoffmeier doesn't say (here at least) but the examples that he provides both point to a permissive and compassionate response.

You want there to be a way to say "Well, they're not here legally so scriptural commands as to their welcome and treatment don't apply". But that's got the cart before the horse: first, you need to address how these people's plea for admission should be considered, based on how Israel's plea was answered by Egypt. You don't get to imagine, as Hoffmeier appears to imagine, that scriptural application only need begin after someone else has figured out what the admissions criteria are going to be.

-Sam