(More Bible Studies Available @ www.marktabata.com)
It is written:
Matthew 23:23-Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.
One of the statements often made regarding the subject of undocumented immigrants goes something like this:
“Undocumented migrants are here illegally, and so they are already breaking the laws! Round them up, arrest them, and send them back where they came from or else just lock them up!”
I have heard this statement, and variations of it, for some time now from many well-meaning Christians. And let there be no mistake: statements like this often are made by sincere followers of Christ. After all, Christians are to uphold godly laws (Romans 13:1-7), and only are to disregard government when their dictates are against the law of God (Acts 5:29). Most Christians that I know are not heartless unfeeling brutes who are indifferent to the suffering of their fellow man.
What’s more, statements like this do have some hints of truth in them. After all, there are many people in our country who are here illegally from other countries around the world. We would also be negligent not to acknowledge there are some illegal immigrants in America who have committed very violent and terrible crimes.
With all of these factors, it would be very tempting for Christians to just say, “Well, let’s go ahead and arrest them all and throw them into prison or deport them!” Indeed, many Christians are doing just that. They believe that their cause is righteous: the undocumented immigrants are the enemies: and we must protect the American Republic!
Yet in the midst of all of this chaos, if we will quiet the noise of the world around us for just a moment, we can hear the Spirit speaking to us:
Leviticus 19:34-The stranger who dwells among you shall be to you as one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
Those of us who have lived long in this world know that things are seldom as “black and white” as some would like. The Word of God itself acknowledges this, as we shall see.
What are we to do as Christians regarding these important subjects? How would God have us to live and what choices should we make?
Let’s study.
In Jesus’ time, there was a controversy that Jesus had with the Pharisees of His time.
Matthew 12:1-8-At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. And His disciples were hungry, and began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. 2 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, “Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!” 3 But He said to them, “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: 4 how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? 5 Or have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? 6 Yet I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the temple. 7 But if you had known what this means, ‘I DESIRE MERCY AND NOT SACRIFICE,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”
The disciples of Christ were walking through the fields and were hungry. They ate some grain as they walked, and the Pharisees were offended by this. They said that the disciples were breaking God’s law by doing this “work” on the Sabbath (the seventh day of the week, or what we know as Saturday: see Exodus 20:9-11). Really, what the Apostles did was not against the Law of Moses: and Jesus used three proofs to prove this.
“Many commentators automatically assume that the charge leveled against Jesus’ disciples by the Pharisees was a scripturally valid charge. However, when the disciples picked and consumed a few heads of grain from a neighbor’s field, they were doing that which was perfectly lawful (Deuteronomy 23:25). Working would have been a violation of the Sabbath law. If, for instance, they had pulled out a sickle and begun harvesting the grain, they would have been violating the Sabbath law. However, they were picking strictly for the purpose of eating immediately—an action that was in complete harmony with Mosaic legislation (“but that which everyone must eat”—Exodus 12:16). A modern equivalent might be reaching for a box of cereal on the pantry shelf, pouring it in a bowl, retrieving the milk from the refrigerator, pouring it on the cereal, and eating it. The Pharisees’ charge that the disciples were doing something “not lawful” on the Sabbath was simply an erroneous charge (Matthew 15:2). Jesus countered their accusation with masterful, penetrating logic. Observe carefully Jesus’ strategy. First, using what logicians call argumentum ad hominem, He called attention to the case of David (vss. 3–4). When David was in exile, literally running for his life to escape the jealous, irrational rage of Saul, he and his companions arrived in Nob, tired and hungry (1 Samuel 21). He lied to the priest and conned him into giving to his traveling companions the showbread that legally was reserved only for the priests (Leviticus 24:8–9). David clearly violated the law. Did the Pharisees condemn him? Absolutely not! They revered David. They held him in high regard. On the one hand, they condemned the disciples of Jesus, who were innocent, but they upheld and revered David, who was guilty. Their inconsistency betrayed both their insincerity as well as their ineligibility to bring a charge against the disciples. After exposing their hypocrisy and inconsistency, Jesus next turned to answer the charge pertaining to violating the Sabbath. He called their attention to the priests who worked in the Temple on the Sabbath (Numbers 28:9–10). The priests were “blameless”—not guilty—of violating the Sabbath law because their work was authorized to be performed on that day. The Sabbath law did not imply that everyone was to sit down and do nothing. The Law gave the right, even the obligation, to engage in several activities that did not constitute violation of the Sabbath regulation. Again, examples of such authorization included eating, Temple service, circumcision (John 7:22), tending to the basic care of animals (Exodus 23:4–5; Deuteronomy 22:1–4; Matthew 12:11; Luke 13:15), and extending kindness or assistance to the needy (Matthew 12:12). The divinely authorized Sabbath activity of the priests proved that the accusation of the Pharisees brought against Jesus’ disciples was false. After pointing out the obvious legality of priestly effort expended on the Sabbath, Jesus stated: “But I say to you that in this place there is One greater than the temple” (12:6). The underlying Greek text actually has “something” instead of “One.” If priests could carry on Tabernacle/Temple service on the Sabbath, surely Jesus’ own disciples were authorized to engage in service in the presence of the Son of God! After all, service directed to the person of Jesus certainly is greater than the pre-Christianity Temple service conducted by Old Testament priests.” (Apologetics Press, Defending the Faith Study Bible, 4074-4075 (Kindle Edition): Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).
The Apostles broke the manmade traditions of the Sabbath, not the Old Testament Law of the Sabbath.
“Their rule is (h). “he that reaps (on the sabbath day) ever so little, is guilty (of stoning), הוא קוצר תולדה ותולש, and “plucking of ears of corn is a derivative of reaping”;” and is all one as its primitive, and punishable with the same kind of death, if done presumptuously: so Philo the Jew observes (i), that the rest of the sabbath not only reached to men, bond and free, and to beasts, but even to trees, and plants; and that ου ερνος ου κλαδον, αλλ’ ουδε πεταλον εφειται τεμειν, “it was not lawful to cut a plant, or branch, or so much as a leaf”, on a sabbath day: and it may be what might make this offence of the disciples the more heinous was, that they plucked these ears, and ate them, and so broke their fast before morning prayer; for a man might not eat any thing on a sabbath day until morning prayers were ended in the synagogue, nor indeed on any other day; for they used not to eat bread till after they had offered the daily sacrifice, which was about the third hour of the day, or nine o’clock in the morning; nor did they eat till the fourth hour, or ten o’clock (k).” (John Gill, Gill’s Bible Commentary, 243608-243618 (Kindle Edition): OSNOVA)
However, what is fascinating is observing how Jesus argues. His quotation here of Hosea is especially relevant to our discussion:
Hosea 6:6-For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, And the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
This passage addressed some of the ways that the Jewish people in Hosea’s day were not truly sincere in their devotion to the Lord. This insincerity was showing up in the way that they were treating their fellow man. People can bellow praises to God all day long: and yet if they mistreat their fellow men who are made in God’s image, then their worship is vain! Indeed, the ancient Jewish commentary on this passage points this out:
“The relative rather than absolute contrast implied in Hos. 6: 6 is made clear in the Targum on Hosea, which here reads, “For those who do acts of kindness are more desirable before me than he that sacrifices, and those who carry out the law of the Lord more than those that offer up burnt offerings.”” (G. K. Beale, D. A. Carson, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 34 (Kindle Edition): Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic)
We remember here Jesus’ declaration that some parts of the Law are “weightier matters” than others (Matthew 23:23). This does not mean that the other parts of the Law are unimportant: it simply acknowledges that some Laws of God take higher priority than others, depending on circumstances.
“Jesus does not dispute the illegality of the violation. Indeed, Jesus compares the disciples’ actions with David’s in 1 Samuel 21: 1-6. Just as the disciples ate what was “unlawful” because they were “hungry,” David also ate what was “unlawful” because he was “hungry” (Matt. 12: 2-4). Jesus justifies his disciples on the same principle that justified David’s eating the bread that only priests should eat. 9 David violated a ritual technicality by eating the bread of presence in the tabernacle. Nevertheless, David was justified because he was hungry. Human need was more important than ritual technicality. Human life (and thus transformation) is more important than ritual. One cannot use the Sabbath to deny mercy or doing good (Matt. 12: 7, 12). Jesus’ fundamental justification is found in Matthew 12: 7. Quoting Hosea 6: 6, “I desire mercy not sacrifice,” Jesus appeals to the underlying principle by which to judge what is lawful and unlawful on the Sabbath. This hermeneutical principle should govern the use and misuse of ritual. Basically Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for even needing the example he offered them. If they had understood that God desires “mercy, and not sacrifice,” they never would have accused the disciples of doing anything unlawful. Several points reveal the significance of this quotation. First, Jesus has previously quoted Hosea 6: 6 in Matthew’s account (9: 13). Jesus justified eating with Matthew’s unclean friends by an appeal to Hosea 6: 6. Second, the word “mercy” also occurs in Matthew 23: 23 when Jesus identifies it as one of the “weightier matters” of the Law. “Mercy” is more important than Pharisaic strictures on tithing. Third, “mercy” is identified as more important than both “sacrifice” and Sabbath. Fourth, Jesus applies this principle to the Sabbath. He concludes that it is lawful “to do good” on the Sabbath as a function of mercy (Matt. 12: 12). “To do good” in Jewish literature is an act of benevolence or mercy (cf. Gal. 6: 10; James 4: 17). One may violate (desecrate) the Sabbath in order to show mercy; benevolence takes precedence over the rituals of the Sabbath. When the Pharisees objected that the disciples should not eat on the Sabbath, they exalted the Sabbath over mercy and thus turned the Sabbath into a legal technicality that denied mercy. Sacrifice and Sabbath were essential and necessary rituals in the faith of Israel. They were neither unimportant nor optional. But both are subordinate to the principle of mercy. The rituals serve the goal of transformation. They serve mercy rather than vice versa. The ritual is not the most important thing. The Sabbath was made for humanity, not humanity for the Sabbath (cf. Mark 2: 23-3: 6). Ritual is made for humanity, not humanity for ritual. Rituals serve the ends for which God has designed them. They were not designed to deny mercy to the heart that seeks God.” (John Mark Hicks, Greg Taylor, Down in the River to Pray, 2513-2533 (Kindle Edition): Abilene, Texas: Leafwood Publishers)
Consider that in the Old Testament, God often made provisions for His people depending on their circumstances. God decreed that all males be present at the Passover (Numbers 9:13). However, if there were Hebrews who were ceremonially unclean, or on a journey, God made allowances for them (Numbers 9:6-14).
Again, In the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 23:15-16), God decreed that runaway slaves not be returned to abusive households from which they had escaped (even though a slave was not allowed to just leave and flee his contract of employment).
As another example, in the Old Testament, women who were neglected or abused by their husbands were allowed to be granted divorce (Exodus 21:10-11).
All of these examples remind us that God takes the situations of individuals into account. There are times when higher laws take precedence. This is made especially clear in Jesus’ use of Hosea 6:6. With this in mind, is it just to force undocumented immigrants to return to countries where their lives were being threatened by hostile regimes or cartels? Is it morally right to insist that parents who brought their starving children to America be forced back to their countries to potentially die?
At what point does the higher law of “you shall love your neighbor as yourself” take precedent over “documented status?”
Of course, we have been told for years that most “illegal immigrants” are bloodthirsty murderers and rapists. While there are some immigrants who fit into that category, it certainly isn’t true of all of them! Consider some of the following.
Juan Romagoza, a boy from Uslutan in El Salvador, struggled between wanting to become a priest or a doctor. He finally chose to become a doctor. In February of 1980, he was working at the San Rafael National Hospital, when an injured high school student was brought to him with serious injuries. The young man was a member of an organization that protested the local government. With Juan’s assistance and four hours of surgery, the boy was brought from back front the clutches of death! Then, a group of a half dozen masked men entered the hospital room and forced him to the ground. They opened fire, and riddled the boy’s body with bullets, ending the life that had been previously saved. Juan fled the country in the midst of a hostile government.
Efrain Banos was am ambulance driver with two teenaged sons, Rene and Edwin. Efrain was a criminal in El Salvador and was in the United States illegally! His crime? He had transported some victims to the hospital who had been the target of a military attack. They had survived, and the military had retaliated by murdering his wife and abducting his two boys and forcing them into the military. He had rescued his boys, and fled as illegal immigrants to the United States.
We could discuss “The Devil’s Highway,” which is a path that many illegal immigrants travel to find refugee from foreign countries. These passages are fraught with danger and peril, and yet they pale in comparison to the hope of the life that could be theirs if the immigrants can make it to America.
Someone may ask, “Why don’t these immigrants just come here legally?” There are many answers to this question. Perhaps they would have if they had the money to, but they simply cannot afford it. Maybe they are facing hostile regimes and cartels, and do not have the time necessary to do the proper paperwork. Possibly, they were here legally and have had their citizenship revoked because of new and changing laws. As an example, consider the famous CBP One app that was used by thousands of people under the Biden administration.
“In October 2020, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) launched a mobile device app called CBP One to provide travelers with access to certain CBP functions prior to their arrival in the United States. Former President Joe Biden’s administration later expanded CBP One so that migrants without entry documents could schedule appointments at designated ports of entry on the southern border. During these appointments, CBP personnel inspected migrants, and allowed them to access the U.S. asylum process. Starting in May 2023, CBP One became the primary method by which asylum seekers could enter the United States at ports of entry through the end of the Biden administration. However, upon taking office, the Trump administration immediately ended the use of CBP One for purposes of processing asylum seekers. The use of CBP One effectively limited the number of people able to access the U.S. asylum system. The Biden administration capped the number of CBP One appointments available for processing asylum seekers at ports of entry. The Biden administration also issued a rule making migrants who crossed into the United States without going through CBP One—whether at a port of entry or elsewhere—ineligible for asylum, with very limited exceptions. Additionally, the app became the only way that Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans seeking to secure travel authorization to obtain parole through special programs for those nationalities (“CHNV parole”) could submit their information to CBP prior to their travel into U.S. airports…. Available information suggests that CBP continued to use CBP One in this manner until January 2025, when the Trump administration ended the use of the app to schedule appointments. The functions migrants once used to schedule appointments are no longer available.22 The administration also cancelled all pending CBP appointments.23”. (American Immigration Council, CBP One: An Overview (Kindle Edition))
Isn’t it sad that so many who were here in our country, trying to obey the laws of the land and gain citizenship, had the rug pulled out from under them and are now being deported back to the very countries from which had fled due to persecution?
Someone might object, “Illegal immigrants have committed heinous crimes.” This is, of course, partially accurate. Some illegal immigrants have indeed done terrible things. Yet I would argue that for every illegal immigrant who has committed a terrible crime, there are thousands who are law abiding and respectable citizens. Shall we penalize an entire demographic because of the reprehensible actions of a few? In my ministry, I have often dealt with corrupt police officers. Yet for every corrupt police officer, I know that there are thousands of good law abiding ones. We cannot allow stereotypes to guide our compassion (or lack thereof).
One thing that has become clear in wrestling with the subject of illegal immigration is that things are not as “black and white” as some Christians would like them to be. God’s Word takes individual circumstances into account, and so must we. To ignore the spirit of the law in an effort to obey the letter of the law is to rob the law of its’ power. Let us not shut our ears and eyes to the plight of those who are suffering amongst us. May the Lord help us to be the voice for the innocent who are suffering.
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all. Amen.