Does the Bible have anything to say about the concept of vetting an immigrant? Does it address extreme vetting?
“To vet” means “to appraise, verify, or check for accuracy, authenticity, validity.” We can assume that to add the term “extreme” would mean to do a very thorough job of vetting someone. So, if someone was entering our country and represented themselves as “ABC” then we should be able to verify that they actually are “ABC.” This is the idea of vetting a person whether for political office, a job or as an immigrant. There seems to be nothing inherently wrong about simply asking someone to prove that their statements about themselves are accurate.
Of course, those who oppose “borders” also oppose the act of vetting someone. Vetting for immigrants implies that there is a requirement to enter a country. Progressive socialists are generally opposed to having borders and believe anyone should be able to freely enter regardless of motive – those who seek asylum, those who seek a better life, those who seek welfare, or those who seek to subvert, overthrow or change the political landscape. They therefore reject vetting of anyone who wants entrance into another land.
Let’s Examine Scripture.
I often hear, “What would Jesus do? He would love everyone and let them come in (implying without vetting).” While that sounds really “feel-goody” it just doesn’t jive with the facts of Scripture.
The Lord Jesus said, “I am the door of the sheep. All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly. (John 10:7-10).
Let’s Apply This Insight to America
I grew up in a time when nobody locked a door. A locked door was for secrets and privacy not for safety. But society changed. There became less respect for property and lives. To best protect our families, we have not only learned to lock our doors but we now install security devices. It testifies of our time that Biblical values have decreased and secular values have risen.
To those who oppose borders and deplore vetting of visitors I say: leave your house and car unlocked at all times and allow “visitors” come in, regardless of motive and intent. Let them eat your food, sleep in your bed, wear your close, use your utilities and watch whatever channels on your cable they want while you pay the bill. Lose your bodyguard and sell your weapons. Simply put, live out your creed. When you have proven that you can trust all who come your way, after years of demonstration, then let’s talk about open borders and vetting.
Until then, I choose to follow the Lord’s example and work through channels that vet our visitors and enable them to enter and enjoy our prosperity.
A bomb goes off and several innocent people are dead. The world is shocked and the news media begins an endless cycle of reporting. Soon, a terrorist group claims responsibility. Sound familiar?
What goes next is a cacophony of explanations. Liberals try to understand the pain that the terrorist must be going through to do such a thing, the oppression they must feel or the mistreatment they must have suffered. Conservatives points to the ideology that drives it and seek to discover how to halt its march through humanity.
This kind of news sells papers and increases ratings for TV and radio. It sets commentators on an adventure of blame, hyperbole and buzz. Sometimes truth is proclaimed, sometimes it is suppressed and sometimes it is sacrificed on the altar of political correctness and ideological agenda.
THE DRIVING FORCE
We do not call an arsonist a terrorist. We do not call an angry boyfriend who kills his fiancé a terrorist. No, these are crimes perpetrated by criminals, whether by planned action or by unrestrained passion. Terrorism is so much more. It is driven by a belief system that has settled into the heart of the terrorist. It might be religious belief, or political belief, or even a mixture of both.
That leads to two key and important kinds of questions:
APPLIED TO RADICAL ISLAM
Islam means “submission”. Death to non-Muslims is not only tolerated but desired and inevitable for the will of Allah to be done.
So, even though a group of co-workers showed kindness to a Muslim couple in San Bernadino, CA, their deaths by the hands of the “loved on” Muslim couple is to be championed and celebrated as following the will of Allah.
Radical Islam has very little value for life. Killing innocent victims in the name of Allah serves the greater purpose to force all to submit. By striking terror, they hope many will lay down their resistance and surrender their resolve.
But there is a world crying out. They listen for the voice of God-ordained authorities to answer how such terroristic action will be confronted, condemned and constrained; how justice will be meted out. There is a cry for the lives of the innocent victims and their families to be avenged.
Radical Islam must not be allowed to succeed. The strong must stand against the terrorist.