[...]Moore to the Point – Christian Ethics Final Exam, Fall 2011[...]…

[...]Moore to the Point – Christian Ethics Final Exam, Fall 2011[...]…

[...]Moore to the Point – Christian Ethics Final Exam, Fall 2011[...]…

Baptize the dude, apply for the waiver, and voila! Confront Tyler in love, and move on to the next crisis.

…In all seriousness though, that’s a tough issue. I think my solution would begin with several meetings with Pablo and Tyler (including some with both of them together). I’d explore all options, including moving Pablo’s family back to El Salvador with support from the church, applying for refugee status (he was beaten and sexually abused in his native country), and even looking for other countries that might accept Pablo and his family as a citizen. Hopefully, I’d be able to find someone in our church who has experience, or knows someone who has experience, in immigration (and international) law to help. Many, many, many conversations later, we might find a solution that enables Pablo to care well for his family and honors the laws of the ruling authority.

If our faith is based on a relationship with Jesus, on “my sheep hear my voice”, instead of on religion and rules and principles, then this man would best be served by leading him to Jesus and not a Christian ethics decision-making matrix. There is great value in knowing the word of God as revealed in scripture to confirm that our convictions and discernment is being shaped and prompted by the Spirit instead of self. But let us not make ethics the end of our Christian walk, else we become simple moralists with no distinction apart from the other religions of our world.

As for the matter itself, in creating our ethical guardrails, I would like to submit that Romans 13 tells us there are times to accept the judgement of punishment for breaking our civil government’s laws, just as Paul himself did when he was killed for breaking the laws of Rome. Paul says our rebellion in these situations is against what God has instituted - not God Himself. We happily rebel against communism’s law for our silence concerning Jesus. We happily rebel against institutionalized discrimination against the weak. We happily rebel knowing Jesus is our savior and not laws so that even if we rebel in error we do so dependent upon His Spirit to convict us of all sin.

As far as Tyler, you confront him about hireling illegal immigrants. Since he is the most Christ-centered person in the church, he should be able to accept correction. He would need to take action on this, keeping in line with the law.

The Word of God also states in Romans 13:1, “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.” If you follow this verse to the end of the chapter you will find Romans 13:11 which states, “Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.”

Though God commands us to respect the authority appointed above us He also makes it quite clear who appointed that authority. God’s authority therefore supersedes the authority of man.

God commands us to “Love our neighbors as ourselves.” Then He goes on to say, “Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.” We also know that Love is the greatest of the three; Faith, Hope, and Love.

All this being the foundation for the following statements:

Pablo does not belong to the government. However, proper respect for the government was not given and that respect is deserved and should be given to them. It is not the responsibility of me as the minister to turn him into the authorities. What he has spoken to me he has spoken in confidence. The law protects me as a minister in this situation. However, I have a responsibility from God to encourage others to uphold the law and I cannot knowingly let this deception continue. Out of love for Pablo I will not turn him immediately over to the government. For I know that it will most likely lead him to physical harm. I also do not want to separate his family. The family being established by God should be upheld with the authority of God.

In regards to Tyler and his business practices, I said before that I cannot knowingly let this deception continue. We have to be able to trust God to provide the things necessary for our business and lives to continue as we obey the law. By deceiving the law in this way we are dishonoring God. I would go to Tyler privately and discuss the matter. Not to condemn him but to show him that there are other options. I would encourage him to hire a lawyer and fight the law concerning the marriage of an immigrant to an American as well as the law concerning the process for becoming a legal citizen of the United States. Hopefully he will at least be able to get temporary working visas for those working in his business. I do not personally know the law of the United States so I do not know the extent of the possibilities. There used to be a law concerning immigrants that if there was an American family living in the United State willing to take responsibility for an immigrant that the immigrant would be allowed to stay with them and obtain a working visa of some sort. There is even the option of driving them all the way to Canada in hope that maybe they could become a citizen there.

All of this would be to show two things. The first thing it would show is that we respect the authorities put above us by God even though we are fighting it we are respecting it by going through the proper channels. The second thing it shows is a love for those illegally working under him and a personal love for Pablo. This is what is important. No matter what happens love will win.

Our authority comes from God and while we must respect mans authority we only must do so to the point where it clashes with the authority of God. At that point God’s authority interjects and supersedes. I would tell Pablo that this reservation he has about becoming a Christian and being baptized is very good. Because, it shows that he respects both God’s authority and man’s authority. I would encourage him to proceed with the baptism and then tell him that he should address the issue of him being illegal with the authority and power of God. He needs to then trust God through whatever happens. No man comes to Christ without a fight. And the battle doesn’t stop once we become a Christian it only rages on further.

As far as Tyler, you confront him about hireling illegal immigrants. Since he is the most Christ-centered person in the church, he should be able to accept correction. He would need to take action on this, keeping in line with the law.

Oh wow…and not sure how I missed your take on Sodom & Gomorrah but you have shown your theological hand here my friend. You have harkened to the rallying cry of liberal Christians (and secularists alike) who wish to defend homosexuality and claim the sin in those cities was really about lack of hospitality.

Have an original thought and try not to be so obvious in your post next time. If you’re going to criticize so strongly, at least be intellectually honest and not manipulate the biblical text into what you want it so say.

Just say that you think American immigration policy is wrong as a matter of your conscience, but do not appeal to the Bible as you authority when you are not respecting the plain language revealed therein.

I don’t find this pandering at all. If you have followed Dr. Moore’s writings for very long, you will see he has a knack for pushing the envelope and forcing readers to think critically. I am in another ethics class at SBTS and I am thoroughly enjoying being challenged in my preconceived notions about things. What i appreciate about Dr. Moore and the faculty at SBTS is that they unapologetically believe the Bible to be the final word concerning our life and relation to God. However, they are not content to allow studetns to be intellectually lazy in their pursuit of Truth. Sometimes ‘thus sayeth the Lord’ is just not good enough…especially if that’s not what the Lord actually said. But that’s a topic for hermeneutics class.

Lastly, I am not blindly following Dr. Moore, in fact I read with great interest his views on a subject I was dealing with a few months ago and I found myself disagreeing profoundly with him, and as such did not take his advice. But at no time did I accuse him of anything and I did not stop reading his material.

Not trying to pick a fight here, as some posters have clearly done, but I wonder why you feel the need to label Tyler as ‘not so honest?”

I happen to agree with you, but you take such a hard line in your defense for Pablo, yet you feel the need to hold Tyler accountable. I’m not sure your ethical reasoning is consistent.

Lastly, I agree there is much to glean from the Scriptures concerning the immigrant (both in the original context and modern settings) however, you must treat all Scripture with equal weight. There is much to be said about disobeying civil authorities & the consequences thereof. I don’t think Scripture offers a promise of protection (physically at least) from those who choose to disobey the law, even if they do feel it unjust.

And lastly, for the second time (see there is my inconsistency), you were very clever to tie your perceived oppression of illegal immigrants to infanticide. Nice try, but the two are not even on the same level and should not be brought to bear in this discussion.

Respectfully,
-Zach

Clarification: some people have addressed the church’s role. My mistake.

And also the tone in the above message is loving and not angry (always hard to tell when all you have to go by is text.)

Thanks!

If he is a believer and our only response is “sucks for him” and “there are consequences for sin”, but we don’t seek to help him support his family (including the extended family he supported) then perhaps the real ethics question is will the church remain selfish or will we be sacrificial in our giving for the sake of our brother?

I’m all for him taking responsibility and working hard. I more for him living faithfully and sharing the gospel. But the church is more than building, we are a body.

I would counter with Philippians 2:5-11 and the fact that Jesus submitted Himself to very unjust authority and calls us to do the same. And John tells us that whoever would call himself a disciple of Jesus must walk as He walked. We dare not become a law unto ourselves nor flout the law simply because it seems right in our own eyes to do so. Over and over again, under very oppressive and unjust rule, the early Christians in the NT are called to submit themselves to the authorities - the only time they refused was when the Gospel of the Kingdom was forbidden to be proclaimed. Other than that, they were called to conduct themselves under their ruling authorities and among the pagans in a way that would bring no reproach upon them but only praise and glory to God. We already see too many people raising their fists up against their rulers in opposition to Romans 13, and they do it in God’s name. This is a travesty and brings dishonor.

One would hope that there is a good church in El Salvador who will take this man and his family in and help support them as they transition. One would hope that the church in the US would make contact with them and seek the best way to help him stop breaking the law as soon as possible so that he can then live a Christ-honoring life in accordance with the laws of whatever land he lives in, though that discipleship comes with great cost, and that in the process he will come to know something more of our great living Savior who provides daily bread and Living Water for His people.

When it comes to losing one’s livelihood as a cost of discipleship (either in the case of Pablo and family or Tyler and his family) I’m reminded of the folks in Ephesus in Acts 19. They burned 50,000 pieces of silver worth of their sorcery books. They lost their livelihoods and had to start over with nothing materially, but they had Jesus. They counted the cost and found Jesus to be worthy. It seems that this question puts rubber to the road when it comes to the question of what price is too high a price to pay to follow Jesus, and when do His requirements become unreasonable to us? And when we recognize this in ourselves, that we do have a price, what do we do about it then?

the question becomes whether or not we are called to submit to unjust authority, especially in concerning the extenuating circumstances which surround this scenario.

Jesus did.

While we must all strive to think biblically, not all of us are called to make the weighty decisions that church leaders often face in ministry. Julie was merely expressing gratitude that the burden of making a decision in regard to such a grave matter is not on her shoulders, but on those of godly men whom God has equipped for ministry leadership. A little grace goes a long way, especially when interacting with others online.

Obviously, Julie is concerned about deep spiritual matters, or she probably wouldn’t be reading Dr. Moore’s blog, now would she? =)

I think a series of discussions with Pablo and his family, the elders/ deacons (session) of the church, Tyler Roghers, and possibly local authorities (represenatives to try and find options) would be helpful. Possibly as some say that Pablo and his family would desire to become missionaries and the church can help support him. Maybe there are other avenues that other people can help illuminate. Maybe the government can actually help Pablo and his family. Maybe with Tyler’s help something could be done. I think there is still much that we do not know about what could be.

I think after these discussions then one has to find the right balance between obeying the law and protecting the helpless (widows and orphans). I think if obeying the law means that a child or baby goes hungry then there can be at the very least discussion about how one can feed the helpless baby and still be okay with the law. The OT is full of statements that the Isrealites were being condemned becasue they were not on the side of the widows and orphans. They did not protected and were champions of the helpless. I think the church has the same mandate to protect and servce the helpless. God is the same God. So again I think that given this huge Biblical mandate in the OT (almost every prophet speaks aobut it) and the NT that one can discuss options instead of just saying that one has to leave the country . . . .

Possibly in the end Pablo does go back to his home country but I think he deserves more from the church.

As far as Tyler I think it is more clear cut. He needs to obey the laws of the land. He can work to try and change them but to disregard them so blantantly is not an option. I still think one sohuld speak to him and let him give his reasons for hiring illegal immigrants but I do not see what reasons he might have that woudl persuade me that he is not in the wrong for disregarding the law. I do however think that He and the church should speak about how to treat the illegal workers since he has hired them. I do not think he should jsut fire the illegals without helping them.

Anyways those are my further ramblings.

What I find intersting is that some are so sure of what the Bible says about this issue and almost flippant (if that is the right word) in their answers. I remember one stated that “The Bible has already dealt with this issue.” Or something like that. And another stated that one shoudl not get emotional when looking at this issue. I think such answers in the end are unhelpful. I know this is a hypothetcial issue but if it were real then I do not see how those types of statements help or show Godly wisdom.

Maybe I am just a very intuitive soul or maybe as I grow older I see the need of speaking the truth to one another in love much more. Maybe it is my training as a chaplain that makes mewant to really listen to Pablo and his family. I do not know for sure. But I think that if one has not gone through real poverty and suffering then quick and easy answers are easy.

Okay enough rambling and ranting. I wil lget off my soapbox.

Yes I was just wondering where all the confront Tyler posts were.

His family couldn’t go with him?

And the taxes to Caesar decree isn’t solely limited to literal taxes, but rather what is owed to the state give it to the state. What is owed to God give it to God. (The whole “Image” aspect of this passage blew me away the first time I saw it.)

The Church should take on the responsibility to do the right thing in the situation and help the family through this time and as someone above posted even funding Pablo as a missionary during his time away (or with the family if that were possible.)

Really what you are advocating here is to subvert the law because we don’t believe God to be a promise keeper. God is our provider, so to honor the gov’t’s over us is what we should do. The other things are just fears of what might happen. Or what we think would happen. And yet God is bigger than all of it.

While I have formed views on the basic issues here, I would just like to point out (for the sake of readers who might believe this is an entirely plausible situation) that keeping immediate families together is a major underlying value in U.S. immigration law. I can assure you that as long as marriage exists in this country, the United States will never eliminate lawful permanent residency provisions for spouses of U.S. citizens. The family separation factor is significant to your prompt, but probably unrealistic. Where it could come into play would be a situation with an undocumented couple where one spouse trusts Christ and one does not.

Nevertheless, you’ve succeeded in creating a thorny hypothetical scenario for your students!

Then the question becomes whether or not we are called to submit to unjust authority, especially in concerning the extenuating circumstances which surround this scenario.

We all need counsel and on some issues where we may not have the depth of insight, consulting others is commendable. Most of us will not have thought through a lot of these issues until we are faced with them. At that point seeking out others who have thought through these things for a long time (and for a living?) is good thinking.
I do agree that we need to think for ourselves, and if we have an issue we are wrestling with in our own hearts and minds we can’t shirk that responsibility, and run from those questions and doubts. (I doubt we would get away, anyway). I think Julie is not abdicating thought at all, just saying she doesn’t think she has the Biblical theological acumen to discern the right way forward in this case. Fortunately God has given the church those with the gift of discernment to the benefit of the rest of the church.

While the Bible instructs us not to kill, few would condemn the man who shot a home invader attacking his wife or children.

Given the fact that we agree that there are exceptions to almost every Biblical mandated action, what is the litmus test used to make an ethical decision? I would suggest that it is simply this; which course of action results in the most good?

Some might twist this to say “the end justifies the means.” That is not at all what I am saying. The previous examples are consider acceptable exceptions because the lives of the people saved are better (more good) than the violation of the respective Scriptural mandates.

In the case of Pablo, I would suggest that it is possible that the violation of American immigration law is not as bad as letting abandoning his God-given responsibly to provide for his family. In other words, 1 Timothy 5:8 trumps Matthew 22:21.

It is not hard to read the Bible and know, by the grace and will of God, the heart of God towards the immigrant, the stranger, the foreigner.

Leviticus 19:33-34 When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.

For centuries past, American laws lined up with this idea about accepting immigrants and it is easy to abide by God’s law when you are abiding by the law of land. Likewise, the reverse is true. No conflict, nothing more to discuss.

But somewhere along the way, some of the sons and daughters of America have taken this stance against the very idea that made America great. We no longer need foreigners in our lands because we need turn inwards and focus on ourselves.

I shudder and fear such outcries because this was the very root of the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah. They, too, became inwardly focus, shunned and diminished the foreigner, and thus, became in complete opposition to the very heart of God. What do we expect when we oppose God head-on?

As far as what to do with Pablo, my only response would be that of Peter and the Apostles in Acts 5:29 “We must obey God rather than men.” especially in this case since the laws of man opposes the heart of God. Therefore, I would have to consider any and every action, including going as far as Shiphrah and Puah, the Hebrew housewives in Exodus 1, in order to pray, work, help and assist Pablo while he gets his citizenship.

To that end, I have to consider this is a very sensitive moment when approaching Tyler. If I call attention to Tyler’s not-so-honest business dealings, this could create a bad situation for Pablo. However, I would have to trust in the Lord and upon His pressing, I would humbly approach Tyler, giving him a chance not only to repent but reconcile by helping any of his employees in Pablo’s similar situation.

In my assistance, if I am held liable for assisting Pablo or any other ‘illegal immigrant’, so be it. If I even claim to know the heart of God, then my conscience could not bear otherwise.

Afterwards, this issue must be walked through with him as a repentant follower of Christ. Maybe this is an issue in his mind because the Spirit is calling him to come clean. The pastor needs to be sensitive to the work of the Spirit in this individual as he applies scripture. Is the US immigration law an unjust law? Probably not… the issue seems to be more the unjust treatment he will likely receive back in his own country. As far as 1 Tim 5:8 vs. Romans 13:1 goes, God will not call him to obey Him in one perspective and disobey in another. These scriptures are not in opposition to each other. They both must be made to square in his life. I think on the face of it, you must come clean with immigration (honesty issue) and trust the Lord to provide honest avenues for supporting his family. God may use the church to provide support where Pablo cannot. Pray, pray, pray and work patiently with Pablo, with tears, as he wrestles towards trusting God with his family as he follows the path of honesty. How he comes clean and prepares to do so should be done carefully and amidst much wise counsel.

As for Tyler Rogers, he should be confronted in love. Let him explain his reasons for why he hires illegals. Is it compassion for them, to increase profits, or both? That would dictate the type of council he should receive, but definetly moving him towards running his business according to the law of the land.

Where it gets more difficult is if either are unwilling to follow this council over time; does church discipline become relevant? I’ll leave that one for the seminarians! I’m just an engineer.

I sort of wonder whether in most SBC churches there’s a higher % of Tylers than there are Pablos.

Pablos exist because of Tylers are willing to hire them. Don’t see many comments on asking Tylers that they should also come clean w/ the appropriate authorities regarding their illegal hiring practices.

Let’s say Pablo was an legal American who had his spiritual experience but committed tax evasion. Tax evasion is clearly “less” severe than murder and probably equal with illegal immigration (in terms of perceived severity). Should we tell Pablo to pay his taxes? We should based upon Christ’s command to “render to Caesar what is Caesar’s”. It does not matter if Pablo evaded to help make ends meet to support his family. Respectable sins are still sins and so respectable crimes are still crimes.

The level which we should be thinking about this is not on the level of direct “advice” concerning his legal situation but of what conclusion Pablo should come to on his own given advice as a converted follower of Christ specifically. In other words, the Biblical advice necessarily determines what Pablo’s self-determined choice should be. Namely, that he turn himself in (the law not being unreasonable, given that there are legal ways to become an American) and understand that God works everything for the good of those who love Him. God may be calling Pablo back to his Country and if he does not “hate” his family in this sense, where he is unwilling to do anything that would separate them then he is not a disciple. Is it excruciating? Yes. It’s about as hard as willingly dying… in fact, that’s exactly what it is.

As another commentor has mentioned, the Bible has dealt with this situation, only in that case the man was a literal slave.

It is hard to argue that immigration laws are somehow unjust. But the Bible never makes that the standard anyway. There is nothing about living in El Salvador that is contrary to the revealed will of God, and thus, there are no grounds for civil disobedience. This should be looked at as an opportunity for missions and ministry.

To tear apart a family and to force a human being into inhumane working conditions is far more sinister than telling him to remain in his current state. While the Church rests under protections of the State, her greater responsibility has and will always be to her true King.