If Jesus was a Refugee, Russell Moore is a Christian Nationalist

Levi Secord

A Lesson on How Not to Think About the Bible and Immigration

The story of Russell Moore is a cautionary tale of the damage one man with good communication skills and a dearth of thorough biblical knowledge can do. I had Moore for two classes in my first semester of seminary (2010), and even then, his trajectory was evident to many. Moore had a penchant for attracting mini-me fanboys who hung on his every word but rarely had the fortitude to measure his arguments by the standard of Scripture.

Now, as the editor-in-chief at Christianity Today (that bastion of progressive “Christian” resistance to conservatism, both theologically and politically), not much has changed for Moore and his followers. 

Last week, he published an article attacking recent immigration reforms by the Trump Administration. He set his sights on the freezing of federal grant funds to World Relief, a non-governmental organization that uses taxpayer dollars to resettle refugees into the United States. To make his case, Moore trots out the old trope that “Jesus was a refugee.” The argument is that since Jesus was a refugee, Christians cannot support Trump’s reforms.

Moore has appealed to Jesus being a “refugee” for years despite it being eviscerated by some of his former colleagues. Still, Moore hasn’t learned. Following the (il)logical conclusions of his article, it is asserted that Trump’s actions are clear examples of injustice. Does Jesus being a “refugee” really mean the government must fund organizations like World Relief? No.

Below are three problems with Moore’s argument about immigration, refugees, and Jesus.

Justice or Mercy?

The first problem with Moore’s argument is his confusion of justice and mercy. Justice, at its root, is giving someone their due—what they have earned.

Mercy is not justice. Rather, it is giving someone good when they have no right to it. Mercy is the dispensation of unmerited favor.

To be clear, both justice and mercy are objective goods, but they remain distinct. It is not an act of injustice to stop funding certain non-governmental organizations because charity is an act of mercy, not justice. 

The state, as God’s servant, has the ministry of justice, not charity (Rom. 13:1-7). The Trump administration has cut funding in numerous areas, including World Relief. While that ministry may do some good (and even that is debatable), the government is certainly not duty-bound to subsidize its work.

World Relief, or any other private ministry, has no just claim on taxpayer funds. Therefore, it is not unjust for the state to cease its funding. Conversely, it is unjust for the state to spend itself into a bottomless pit of national debt (Psa. 37:21; Pro. 22:7; Rom. 13:8).

If anything, the Trump administration’s attempts at right-sizing the government’s budget are profoundly overdue acts of justice and wisdom. Moore seems willfully oblivious to this reality. 

Again, the state’s primary job is the ministry of justice, not charity. To claim that the state must fund private charities is to fall into a statist philosophy that treats the state as a Messiah responsible for saving us from every problem. This view is idolatrous and unbiblical to its core. Christians must never look to the state as a Messiah figure. 

Who Counts as a Refugee? 

Second, Moore implies that since Jesus was a refugee, Christians must oppose the administration’s current course. He provides two definitions of a refugee to prove that Jesus was also one:

“[Someone who] has been forced to flee his or her country because of persecution, war or violence.”

“One that flees [especially] a person who flees to a foreign country or power to escape danger or persecution.”

Does Jesus really fit this definition? Yes and no. If a refugee is someone fleeing one country for another one, then Jesus does not really fit the definition. Jesus did flee from Israel to Egypt, yet these were not two different countries. At the time of Christ, both Israel and Egypt belonged to the Roman Empire. They existed under one nation, one ruler, and one governmental structure. Jesus fled from one jurisdiction (Israel) to another (Egypt), but both jurisdictions were united under the Roman government. 

Yet, for the sake of argument, let’s assume Moore is correct that Jesus fits the above definitions of a refugee. Furthermore, let’s assume that this means that Christians are duty-bound to support the funding of refugees through the state. If these premises are true, then how far should we apply them?

For example, if fleeing from one jurisdiction to another qualifies someone as a refugee, then we are awash with those who qualify for taxpayer-funded resettlement. What about all the conservatives (and Christians) who fled the persecution of life in blue states for the freedom and sanity of life in red states? To be sure, the persecution in blue states is not as bad as what many others have faced, but Moore’s definition does not specify how severe the persecution must be to qualify as a refugee. 

Additionally, many others have fled the violence that marks blue cities for the safety of other jurisdictions. Does that qualify them for funding as refugees? I know many people who have fled my state (Minnesota) to states like Tennessee, Florida, and Texas. Such fleeing is closer to Christ’s as these people are merely fleeing one local jurisdiction for another local jurisdiction, but they remain in the same nation.

By Moore’s logic, these conservatives are refugees who also have a “claim” on our financial support. After all, real estate in Florida can be very expensive. If we accept Moore’s “logic” and “biblical” reasoning at face value, we must also do this in the name of Jesus. 

(Progressive) Christian Nationalism?

Third, Moore has long been an opponent of supposed Christian Nationalism and theonomy. He warns that it is wrong for Christians to use the law of God to inform public policy. Yet for years, he has appealed to Scripture as the justification for his policy views on issues like immigration and racial “justice.”

The truth is that Moore is a Christian Nationalist and theonomist whenever it suits him. When he can distort and isolate passages to fit his left-leaning political philosophy, he will appeal to the authority of Scripture.

Yet, when anyone to his political right does the same thing, it appears they are doomed to be labeled as an imminent threat to the faith and democracy. This blatant hypocrisy is why anyone who is not either a Moore fanboy or a leftist abandoned him years ago. 

For too long, Moore has attacked his opponents while doing the very thing he accuses them of—using God’s law to inform public policy. To be clear, I believe Scripture is indispensable for righteous governing. My concern with Moore is his apparent hypocrisy and his continuous distortion of biblical texts and categories.

It is well past time for faithful Christians to stop listening to Russell Moore. His ethics are neither biblical nor consistent. At this point in his career trajectory, Moore’s faith bears a much closer resemblance to that of Episcopalian Priestess Bishop Budde than it does to the faith of the founder of his current employer, the evangelical titan Billy Graham.

As such, his approach to faith and politics is nothing more than the latest iteration of the failed project of Protestant Liberalism, which must be rejected with extreme prejudice—both for the sake of the Gospel and the good of the Church.

  • Levi is the founding pastor of Christ Bible Church in St. Paul, Minnesota. He graduated with both an M.Div. and a Doctorate of Educational Ministry from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Levi has numerous publications with the Southern Baptist Journal of Theology, Christ Over All, and WORLD Opinions. Levi and his wife Emily have four children who they love to spend time with while slaying dragons.