The Narrow Path Ministries

For more than 4 years there has been a complex civil war going on in Syria. As the regime of Bashar al-Assad, rebels with an army of their own, ISIS (an Islamic terrorist group), and ethnic Kurds endlessly battle, many of the people of Syria just want out. And so over 4 million of them have left their homes to seek refuge elsewhere in the world.

But where can they go? Some neighboring countries have taken in thousands, but we're talking about a huge number of people. Western nations have increasingly been opening their doors to these refugees, but the growing threat of Islamic terrorism (with the news of last Friday's attacks in Paris still on our minds) has caused many to be concerned that members of ISIS could easily infiltrate these nations by claiming to be refugees.

Should we welcome these refugees? Basically, I've seen Christians fall into 2 different camps on this issue. Camp #1 notes the many places in the Bible that call us to care for foreigners in need and says welcoming the refugees is simply the right thing to do. Camp #2 points out that this approach is incredibly naive and would essentially invite terrorists into our midst.

What I find most troubling about all this is the lack of respectful dialogue. Camp #1 assumes Camp #2 has no love for hurting people. Camp #2 assumes Camp #1 has no grasp of reality. It seems to me that both camps have a valid point. Everyone should want to help people who are fleeing for their lives from a war-zone. And everyone should want to make sure terrorists aren't disguising themselves as refugees to spread throughout the world.

The answer to the question "Should WE welcome these refugees?" really depends on 2 key issues: First, what "WE" do we have in mind when we ask the question? Second, how trustworthy is the vetting process for these refugees?

As for the 1st question, we definitely need to clarify who this "WE" is we're talking about. If the "WE" is America, then we should just move on to the 2nd question (America should only consider taking in refugees that they are confident have no connection to terrorist organizations). If the "WE" is The Church, then the answer is YES. Whatever decision our nation makes, Christians should express love and care for these refugees living in their midst whether they are secretly terrorists or not since Jesus called us to love even our enemies.

Obviously, I don’t know the answer to the 2nd question. I’ve seen too many contradictory claims in areas outside of my limited expertise.

I've seen multiple articles that claim boldly that the vetting of refugees is incredibly thorough, to the point where the 'refugee' path would be the most difficult way for a terrorist to get into the U.S. Potential refugees to America have to go through intense U.N. vetting and then intense U.S. vetting. This process, it is claimed, is so thorough, that it would be nearly impossible for terrorists to slip through the cracks. This opinion is supposedly backed by the clean record of refugees already in the country.

But I've also seen multiple articles point out that the vetting process is very different in the case of these Syrian refugees. Apparently, some of those involved have simply admitted that we just can't vet these people because the data just doesn't exist in most cases. It'd be next to impossible to prevent someone already involved with or sympathetic to ISIS from using the refugee path to gain access to America.

In my opinion, it is the responsibility of our national leaders to make the case to the American people for or against the vetting process as it concerns these refugees. Most of us don't know the first thing about the refugee vetting process. It needs to be explained honestly by our national leaders. Unfortunately, honesty is hard to come by when every issue gets instantly politicized.

Both the Church and the State have God-given roles (and they are not the same). The Church has a role to reach people at the heart level through love... to spread the good news that Jesus Christ is King of a never-ending Kingdom of peace. The State has a role to reward good behavior, punish bad behavior, and protect its citizenry. The state has an obligation to do its due-diligence when it comes to vetting refugees. And the church has an obligation to love whoever ends up next door.

But I've also seen multiple articles point out that the vetting process is very different in the case of these Syrian refugees. Apparently, some of those involved have simply admitted that we just can't vet these people because the data just doesn't exist in most cases. It'd be next to impossible to prevent someone already involved with or sympathetic to ISIS from using the refugee path to gain access to America.








According to our FBI director Comey, the vetting process can not be effective because there are mostly no reliable records available to compare these folks against. On the other hand I do not think ISIS will tie up their terrorists for over 2 years when they can sneak them in across our borders. In my mind the actual problem is that these folks are almost all muslims and Islam IMHO is in reality an aggressive death cult disguised as a religion. So although 99% of muslims probably are not devout, the 1% that are can end up being really dangerous. These so called "radical muslims" are not radical, they are actually just devout, following Muhammed's saying from the Hadith.

Matt,

I agree with everything you said. The OT in particular has many commands to look after the alien. But if the US and European countries do not want to take them in there is another alternative: create a "safe" zone in Syria for them. But that is easy to say.

Hi Matt,

Good post and there is nothing for me to disagree with. As far as vetting is concerned, the reason it's difficult is because the people are displaced from their local environment. Vetting personnel do extensive research and interviews of the locals in their environment. This is a major problem when whole communities don't exist anymore, therefore those who were most likely affiliated with terrorist activity, vetting professionals no longer have the advantage of locals turning them in or providing critical information linking them to terror. Additionally, vetting professionals use a database of biometrics of fingerprints and DNA found on the battlefield or war zones to connect suspects to terror. The government doesn't like telling the public how they catch the bad guy, therefore neither will I. Nevertheless, this is why it takes time and money to catch these people. Vetting, if done right could take a year or longer. Some politicians could care less about doing anything right. These are the politicians who are extremely dangerous to the american public and who need to be resisted at every turn.

I agree with Homer. Create a safe zone in Syria and have the world community provide aid and support for the refugees until the situation stabilizes. Hard choices must be made and some politicians haven't the stomach for it.

God Bless.

I have a somewhat different take on the backstory.

At the moment Islam was invented, Christianity was thriving from Ireland to Japan, and from the tips of both Africa and India to the Russian Steppes. To make a long story short, Muslims have exterminated the Christians in 2/3 of the territory where they used to be represented. They have no plan on stopping until all of the Christians, or anyone else who opposes them, is converted or murdered. There are no other options for them. It's a religion of murder. It's never been anything different. Their invasion of Europe is self-consciously part of there plan to expand murder and subjugation into a former Christian civilization that is on life support. Why would you invite them into your country?

Doug

Hi Doug,

What you have said is accurate. This is why Romans chapter 13, especially verse 4, should be taken into consideration when trying to make sense of the world around us. Government plays its part to protect its citizens; christians play their part within the government as decisions are made on behalf of all the people. They may or may not clash, however christians should not be taken by surprise either way.

God Bless.

When it comes to stereotyping—painting all people in a group with the same brush, it seems that the practice has always run rampant in the good old U.S. of A. (and to a significant degree in Canada).

Blacks were stereotyped. Blacks were said to be childish, cannot be trusted, violent, etc., etc., etc.

Native Americans were said to be lazy, deceitful, taking advantage of whites, etc., etc., etc.

Now Muslims are the target. They are said to be violent, out to destroy Christians and Christianity, trying to impose Sharia law on everyone, attempting to force everyone to become Muslims, etc., etc., etc.

Some who hold this view of the Islam religion, have been involved in attacking Muslims, setting fire to mosques, and in other violent anti-Islam activities.

It is time to face the facts. The vast majority of Muslims are NOT out to get you! Indeed, they themselves are the victims of ISIS, and only wish to become citizens of a land where they can live in peace. If you are concerned with the violence propagated by ISIS, then do something about Isis! Don't take it out on innocent Muslim citizens, some of whom have lived in your country peacefully for several generations.

How would you feel if you moved to another country, and found that because a few fanatics tried to force Christianity on the citizens by means of violence and attempts to impose the Mosaic law on everyone, the citizens discriminated against all Christians, burnt down churches, and violently attacked every Christian they saw?

Hi Paidion,

Although stereotyping is a problem regarding the current crisis with ISIS, the U.S. vetting of refugees must not be watered-down for political correct (PC) agendas such as, compassion over security and religious tolerance over profiling extremists. Consequently, we are dealing with ISIS as they attempt to use our liberties and laws against us, basically exploiting what they consider our soft targets. The U.S. must continue to be a hard target for our enemies; eventually the U.S. will get hit again, but shame on us if it's done via an exploitation of a known weakness we did absolutely nothing about. The focus is more on our government institutions/agencies sworn to protect us from our enemies. The percentage of citizens engaged in the activities you have mentioned are trivial to the real problem. We are a nation of laws and those people who break the law will most likely be put through the criminal justice system. Most Americans are tolerant and basically just want to be left alone.

God Bless.

Now Muslims are the target. They are said to be violent, out to destroy Christians and Christianity, trying to impose Sharia law on everyone, attempting to force everyone to become Muslims, etc., etc., etc.

Some who hold this view of the Islam religion, have been involved in attacking Muslims, setting fire to mosques, and in other violent anti-Islam activities.

It is time to face the facts. The vast majority of Muslims are NOT out to get you! Indeed, they themselves are the victims of ISIS, and only wish to become citizens of a land where they can live in peace. If you are concerned with the violence propagated by ISIS, then do something about Isis! Don't take it out on innocent Muslim citizens, some of whom have lived in your country peacefully for several generations.







ISIS gets it's ideology from the Quran and the Hadith. Sadly it is not really an isolated crazy far out interpretation of the Quran, it is a literal interpretation. So the real problem goes way beyond ISIS , it is Islam (submission) itself which at it's heart is a death cult. If ISIS gets destroyed there will be the next Islamic death group coming up after it.
As for muslims , they are mostly peaceful because they are generally not devout, but they can be turned anytime and then what? It's a sad fact that Islam can not co-exist with any other faith or secularism, just look at muslim countries and ask yourself, what happened to the non-muslims?

Hi Steve 7150, you wrote:ISIS gets it's ideology from the Quran and the Hadith. Sadly it is not really an isolated crazy far out interpretation of the Quran, it is a literal interpretation. So the real problem goes way beyond ISIS , it is Islam (submission) itself which at it's heart is a death cult. If ISIS gets destroyed there will be the next Islamic death group coming up after it.
As for muslims , they are mostly peaceful because they are generally not devout, but they can be turned anytime and then what? It's a sad fact that Islam can not co-exist with any other faith or secularism, just look at muslim countries and ask yourself, what happened to the non-muslims?

Whether Isis gets its ideology from the Qu'ran or not, the fact remains that the vast majority of Muslims have no desire to carry out religious wars against non-Muslims, and most of them ARE devout Muslims, attend Mosques, and pray to God 5 times per day.

Besides the Quran is inconsistent in the matter of violence (as is the Bible). When Muslims convert to Christ, they continue to pray to Allah. For the word "Allah" is simply the Arabian word for "God".


Consider the following passages from the Qu'ran that are positive toward Christians and Jews (and Sabians)

Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve. (Shakir 2:62)

Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabians and the Christians whoever believes in Allah and the last day and does good-- they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve. (Shakir 5:72)

Then you find one that indicates that Jews and polytheists are violent toward Muslims, but that Christians are close to Muslims in friendship:

Certainly you will find the most violent of people in enmity for those who believe to be the Jews and those who are polytheists, and you will certainly find the nearest in friendship to those who believe to be those who say: We are Christians; this is because there are priests and monks among them and because they do not behave proudly. (Shakir 5:85)

But then you have this passage that asks Muslims NOT to be friends with either Jews or Christians:

O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people. (Shakir 5:54)

Yet again, we find a CURSE upon the Jews and the Christians:

And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away! (Shakir 9:30)

So the various Muslim groups (like various Christian groups) cherry-pick their scriptures—accept the parts they want to believe and explain away the parts they do not wish to accept.

Thus we have peaceful Muslims and peaceful Christians, as well as violent Muslims (ISIS) and Christians (reconstructionists) who would have homosexuals and adulterers and others put to death in accordance with the Mosaic law.