Illegal Immigration

By Mark Swarbrick

Please Share My Article - Thanks!

The term often used for illegal immigration is “undocumented immigrant.” This terminology is a deliberately deceptive invention of the political left, designed to obscure the reality of illegal aliens who have violated U.S. law by trespassing into the country. Words are being manipulated to sanitize criminal behavior and to shame anyone who insists on calling lawlessness what it is. The Democratic Party, now openly hostile to national sovereignty and the rule of law, deliberately opened America’s borders and allowed virtually anyone in the world to enter unlawfully, offering welfare benefits, housing, medical care, and legal protection as incentives.

This reckless policy by the left has produced devastating consequences. Americans have been murdered and raped by individuals who never should have been in the country, while lawless chaos has spread as Democrat officials obstruct enforcement and undermine police and federal authorities. None of this is accidental. It is the predictable result of deliberately resisting law and order in order to seize and retain political power, which is insurrection by definition.

Liberal Leftism in the Church

Unfortunately, a number of liberal churches have encouraged this lawlessness under the guise of being “loving and kind.” This article addresses this, not from an emotional or partisan angle, but from a biblical one, examining what Scripture teaches about nations, borders, authority, rebellion, and the moral responsibility of the Church.

Illegal aliens who have entered the United States by violating federal law are not “immigrants.” They are lawbreakers and trespassers. This is not a semantic quibble. It is a moral distinction with real consequences. When political activists and sympathetic churches deliberately blur that distinction, they corrupt moral reasoning and conceal the harm caused by lawlessness. Language is being weaponized to excuse behavior that Scripture repeatedly condemns: rebellion against lawful authority.

This article was prompted by a common claim circulating in liberal church circles that Christians should “love and help the immigrants.” In practice, that phrase has become a euphemism for aiding individuals who are actively violating the law. Providing shelter to evade enforcement, obstructing deportation, encouraging illegal presence, or demonizing law enforcement agencies is not compassion. It is aiding and abetting criminal activity. Federal law recognizes this as such, and Scripture does as well.

As a Christian and an ordained minister, I find it offensive that open defiance of the law is being clothed in Christian language. Many liberal denominations have abandoned biblical categories in favor of emotional activism. They have replaced obedience with sentimentality, justice with pity, and righteousness with rebellion. This is not the Gospel. It is moral confusion.

Borders are Biblical

Scripture is explicit that nations, borders, and governing authorities are established by God. Acts 17:26 states that God “fixed the times appointed for them and the boundaries of their lands,” making clear that national boundaries are part of God’s deliberate design, not arbitrary human inventions. Deuteronomy 32:8 likewise teaches that when God divided humanity and apportioned the nations, “he fixed the boundaries of the peoples,” affirming that national distinction flows from God’s sovereign will. These passages alone dismantle the claim that borders are merely human constructs or that nationalism is inherently sinful. God is the author of national distinction.

Genesis 11 provides further clarity. At Babel, humanity attempted to unite under centralized power, language, and authority. God intervened deliberately, confusing their language and dispersing them across the earth. This was not an accident of history. It was a divine act. God Himself opposed global uniformity and centralized human control. The creation of distinct peoples and territories was God’s deliberate design, not a flaw to be undone or corrected by man. Modern open-border ideology stands in direct opposition to this biblical reality.

Proverbs 22:28 warns against moving ancient boundary markers. While the immediate context concerns land inheritance, the moral principle is unmistakable. God values established boundaries. He condemns those who erase them. Throughout Scripture, boundaries represent order, stewardship, and justice. Their removal represents chaos, theft, and rebellion.

Israel Commanded to Respect National Borders

Even during Israel’s Exodus, God did not permit His people to violate the national boundaries of other nations. As Israel approached Edom, Moses formally requested permission to pass through their land and pledged restraint, promising they would not seize food, water, or property, but would remain strictly on the main road. When Edom refused passage, Israel did not force entry or claim moral entitlement. Scripture records that Israel simply “turned away from them.” God Himself explained why, telling Israel that He had given Edom its land and commanded, “Do not provoke them to war, for I will not give you any of their land.” Even under divine promise and covenant, Israel was required to respect established borders.

Likewise, God explicitly forbade Israel from trespassing or taking the territory of Moab and Ammon, declaring that He had already assigned those lands to their respective peoples. In each case, national boundaries were treated as God-ordained realities, not obstacles to be ignored for humanitarian or religious reasons. This is decisive. If any people might claim a moral exception to borders, it would have been Israel during the Exodus. Yet Scripture shows the opposite. God required obedience to boundaries, not their violation. The Exodus narrative therefore dismantles the modern claim that compassion, necessity, or religious mission justifies illegal entry. God honors national boundaries, and He required His people to honor them as well.

Immigration in Old Testament Times

The law of Moses repeatedly addressed the presence of foreigners within Israel. Strangers were to be treated justly, but never permitted to disregard Israel’s law. They were required to submit to it. The same law applied to native and foreigner alike. Mercy was never divorced from obedience. Compassion never excused lawlessness. That biblical balance has been completely lost in modern church rhetoric.

Liberal leftists frequently appeal to Scripture to argue that Christians are obligated to be kind to illegal aliens, claiming the Bible mandates unconditional hospitality regardless of law, borders, or civil authority. Verses about loving the stranger are selectively quoted and weaponized to pressure churches into supporting lawlessness. A favorite text alluded to is, “The stranger who lives as a foreigner with you shall be to you as the native-born among you, and you shall love him as yourself.” Stripped of context, such verses are presented as blanket endorsements of illegal entry and defiance of national law.

What is deliberately ignored is that these passages address lawful sojourners living “with you” under the authority and laws of the land, not criminals who violated borders and rejected civil order. The Bible never commands kindness toward lawbreaking as a substitute for justice. Instead, leftist theology collapses biblical compassion into sentimental activism, treating obedience to God-ordained authority as optional. By divorcing mercy from law, these arguments turn Scripture into a tool for political rebellion rather than a guide for righteous living.

Indeed, ancient Israel did practice border protection. In Scripture, immigration was mostly handled locally, at the level of cities and gates, and certainly not as an uncontrolled free-for-all. The Bible repeatedly speaks of “the foreigner who lives within your gates,” a phrase that reflects how entry and residence were regulated in ancient Israel. Cities were walled, and access was funneled through gates overseen by elders, judges, and gatekeepers. To be “within the gates” meant a person had been admitted into the community under its authority. This is why God’s commands consistently address the sojourner as someone already living inside the city’s jurisdiction, not someone roaming unlawfully through the land.

The law required kindness and justice toward such lawful immigrants, but always within a legal framework. Scripture teaches that there was to be “one law for the native and for the foreigner who lives among you.” That principle assumes lawful presence and submission to Israel’s laws. A sojourner did not retain separate rules, nor did he claim exemption from Israel’s authority. Compassion was extended precisely because the sojourner lived under the same civil and moral order as everyone else. Biblical mercy never meant ignoring the law. It meant equal justice under the law.

This city-gate model shows that Israel did regulate individual entry. People were not simply welcomed anywhere at any time. Entry into a city meant passing through a gate where identity, purpose, and conduct could be observed. Later history reinforces this. After Jerusalem’s walls were rebuilt, Nehemiah appointed gatekeepers and ordered that the gates remain shut except during proper hours, with guards posted. That is border control at the municipal level. The biblical pattern is consistent. Israel welcomed lawful sojourners within its gates, required obedience to its laws, and protected its communities through controlled entry. That model bears no resemblance to modern open-border ideology, which rejects both boundaries and accountability.

Lawbreaking Condemned in New Testament

Civil authority is described as ordained by God for the punishment of evil and the praise of good. Submission to lawful authority is not optional for Christians. It is a matter of conscience before God. Encouraging people to defy immigration law is not an act of faith. It is resistance to what God has appointed. The Apostle Paul wrote:

“Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.” (Romans 13:1-7)

Scripture consistently condemns rebellion. It is likened to witchcraft. It is portrayed as hostility toward God. When churches encourage defiance of the law, they are not bearing witness to God’s truth, but are instead blessing lawlessness and rebellion. They are not standing with the oppressed. They are standing against God’s order.

Some attempt to invoke biblical commands to love one’s neighbor as justification for lawbreaking. This is a gross distortion of Scripture. Love does not negate justice. Mercy does not abolish law. Scripture never presents compassion as permission to sin. True love seeks repentance, restoration, and obedience, not concealment and defiance.

The Church’s responsibility is not to undermine the rule of law, but to call people to righteousness. That includes respect for civil authority. Praying for law enforcement is biblical. Supporting their lawful efforts is biblical. Demonizing them is not. In places like Minnesota, where disorder has escalated into open defiance of authority, churches should be praying for agencies like ICE to succeed in restoring order, not condemning them as villains.

Anyone who aids and abets illegal aliens is breaking federal law and resisting God-ordained authority. That is not a political statement. It is a biblical one. The appropriate response when encountering an illegal alien is not to shield them from the law, but to encourage lawful resolution. That includes contacting ICE or encouraging voluntary departure through legal programs such as the CBP Home app, which allows individuals to self-deport, including government-funded transportation and post-departure financial assistance.

Illegals as a Political Weapon

America is exhausted with the current lawlessness and it is shameful that some churches support it. Communities are strained. Public resources are overwhelmed. Victims of violent crime are ignored while criminals are defended. America voted for law and order and the majority want these illegals sent home. Make no mistake: this inversion of justice is not accidental. It is the fruit of rejecting God’s design for order.

That rejection has also been weaponized for political power. The Democratic Party has deliberately enabled mass illegal entry in order to secure illegal voters and entrench itself in power, undermining both immigration law and election integrity. Promoting the continued presence of illegal aliens in the country directly supports this scheme and amounts to aiding a violation of election laws. Churches that encourage or assist this behavior are not merely being naive or compassionate. They are lending moral cover to political corruption and helping sustain a system built on lawbreaking. Supporting illegal presence is not a neutral act. It is participation in a strategy designed to subvert lawful governance and perpetuate power through illegality.

The Harm of Illegal Immigration

America is also being financially strained by the massive expansion of welfare benefits flowing to illegal aliens. In just the past few years, the number of people who have entered the country unlawfully is commonly estimated at roughly six million, the population equivalent of three states the size of Nebraska. This surge has occurred while millions of American citizens are already struggling with rising costs, housing shortages, and reduced access to public services.

A large percentage of households headed by illegal aliens receive at least one form of taxpayer-funded assistance, including food programs, medical care, housing support, or cash-related benefits administered through state and federal systems. While benefits are often routed through children or mixed-status households, the result is the same: public resources are being diverted to those who entered the country unlawfully, while law-abiding citizens are told there is not enough to go around.

This is not generosity. It is redistribution enforced by lawlessness. Welfare systems funded by American taxpayers are being overwhelmed, and citizens who have paid into those systems for decades are increasingly pushed aside. Hospitals are strained, schools are overcrowded, housing markets are distorted, and local budgets are breaking under the weight.

Calling this compassion does not change the moral reality. Taking from citizens who are already going without in order to subsidize illegal entry is a form of institutionalized theft. Churches that defend or excuse this system are not standing with the poor. They are endorsing a policy that robs their own neighbors to reward those who violated the law, further entrenching injustice under the false banner of mercy.

Hostile foreign governments and transnational criminal networks have long understood that mass illegal immigration can be used as a tool to weaken the United States from within. By exploiting porous borders, adversaries can strain public resources, overwhelm local infrastructure, fuel crime, and divert law-enforcement attention away from genuine national security threats. Cartels, traffickers, and hostile intelligence services all benefit from chaos at the border, which provides cover for criminal movement, drug distribution, and espionage. What is sold to the public as humanitarian openness has, in practice, created vulnerabilities that America’s enemies are more than willing to exploit to diminish stability, security, and national cohesion.

When immigration laws are treated as suggestions instead of obligations, tragedies that never had to happen become horrifyingly common. When someone enters the country illegally, piles up arrests or serious citations, and is repeatedly released instead of being detained or removed, the system is not neutral—it is gambling with the safety of ordinary Americans. Each time an illegal alien goes on to rape, murder, or cause a deadly crash after prior encounters with law enforcement, it exposes a chain of deliberate policy choices: weak border controls, catch‑and‑release practices, refusal to honor detainers, and political sanctuaries that shield offenders from deportation. These are not random “accidents”; they are the predictable, human cost of a government that refuses to enforce the laws it already has on the books.

One need only look at recent headlines to see the human cost of our refusal to enforce immigration law. The brutal killing of college student Laken Riley by an illegal alien who had already entered and been released inside the United States is only one example in a growing list. There have been multiple cases of previously deported drunk drivers coming back across the border, getting behind the wheel of a truck or car, and plowing into innocent Americans on the highway, killing mothers, fathers, and children who had no idea their lives depended on some bureaucrat actually doing his job. In other cities, illegal entrants with prior arrests have gone on to rape young girls, murder girlfriends or roommates, or cause deadly hit‑and‑run crashes after being waved through the system again and again instead of being detained and removed.

Each of these stories is unique, but the pattern is the same: a person with no legal right to be here, often with a record that should have triggered detention or deportation, is allowed to stay—and an American family is left to bury a loved one. Whether it is a young woman assaulted on a jogging trail, a teenager kidnapped and raped, or a family wiped out by a drunk or reckless truck driver who never should have been on our roads, the common thread is a government that treats immigration violations as a paperwork issue instead of a life‑and‑death security issue. These victims are not statistics; they are the avoidable casualties caused by leaders who chose open borders and political talking points over the basic duty to protect their own citizens.

Stories like the brutal killing of Laken Riley and the families shattered by illegal‑alien drunk drivers and truckers who should never have been on our roads at all are warnings that our leaders deliberately ignore. Again and again, the pattern is the same: an individual with no legal right to be in the United States, often with a history of prior arrests or immigration violations, is allowed to remain—and an innocent American pays with his or her life. These cases do not prove that every immigrant is dangerous, but they do prove something just as important: when a nation abandons its borders and shrugs at its own laws, it is its most vulnerable citizens, not the political class, who bleed for that negligence. Any honest discussion of immigration policy must start by admitting that these deaths were avoidable, and that justice means not only punishing the perpetrators, but also changing the policies that put them in a position to destroy lives in the first place.

Conclusion

Any person who claims the name of Christ while encouraging this lawlessness is acting contrary to both Scripture and conscience. Such behavior is un-Christian, un-American, and is cruelty to the citizen’s of this country. It is not love. It is rebellion. And rebellion against God’s established order is not mercy. It is sin. The Church must choose. It can stand with Scripture, law, and truth, or it can continue to baptize lawlessness in the language of false compassion and distorted Christianity. But it cannot do both.

 



Please Share My Article - Thanks!