Thinking Biblically About Minneapolis
Thinking Biblically About Minneapolis
Like many of you, I have been following the news surrounding the unrest and violence unfolding in Minneapolis. Opinions are everywhere—especially on social media—spanning every political and social perspective. Many are even invoking Scripture to justify their positions, defend their actions, and condemn those who disagree.
That reality is precisely why I believe the Church cannot remain silent. We are not called to be reactionary or sensational, but neither are we called to retreat. When the world is loud, the Church must be clear—not quiet. Pastors, in particular, have a responsibility to help God’s people think biblically, morally, and rationally about what is happening in the world around us.
With that in mind, I want to share some reflections on what has happened—and what continues to happen—in Minneapolis. My goal is not to defend a political party or advance an ideological agenda, but to look at these events through the lens of Scripture. I want us to resist empty, emotional rhetoric and instead pursue careful, critical, and spiritual thinking. I do not claim to have all the facts, nor do I assume my conclusions are beyond correction. I remain open to having my mind changed by new information or better arguments, and I hope we are all willing to extend the same humility to one another.
A Biblical Perspective on Immigration
At the heart of this conflict lies the question of immigration. One approach prioritizes openness and hospitality to such a degree that concerns about public safety, borders, and national order are often minimized or dismissed. Another approach, reacting against that risk, would seek to close borders altogether, valuing protection at the expense of compassion. Both represent moral imbalances. Wisdom requires resisting solutions that elevate one virtue by abandoning another, and instead pursuing an approach that safeguards human dignity while preserving social order.
Scripture provides helpful guidance, particularly in God’s commands to Israel regarding foreigners and sojourners. While Israel was a theocratic nation and the United States is a constitutional republic, God’s law still reveals enduring principles about justice, hospitality, and order.
When Israel was delivered from Egypt, they did not leave alone. “A mixed multitude also went up with them” (Exod. 12:38). Foreigners were welcomed to join God’s people. Later, Israel was commanded not to oppress the sojourner, remembering that they themselves had once been strangers in Egypt. In Leviticus 19—the same chapter that commands, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”—God also says, “You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself” (19:34).
This call to love the foreigner should not surprise us. Jesus Himself was a refugee in Egypt as a child, and His teaching consistently calls His followers to love without partiality, to overcome evil with good, and to extend mercy even to enemies.
However, Scripture does not present hospitality without accountability. A closer look at the Mosaic Law shows that sojourners living among Israel were held to the same standards as native Israelites. They were expected to submit to God’s authority and live according to His laws—observing Sabbath regulations (Ex. 20:10), purity laws (Lev. 17:15), and prohibitions against blasphemy (Lev. 24:16). Those who openly rejected God’s law, whether native or foreigner, were cut off from the community (Num. 15:30–31). In modern terms, this amounted to exile or expulsion.
Israel was commanded to welcome foreigners, but not at the expense of its identity as a people devoted to the Lord. Compassion and cultural preservation were not opposites; they were held together.
This is where the modern conversation often breaks down. Many appeal to Scripture to support immigration while ignoring the broader biblical framework of law, order, and accountability. We should ask whether Scripture is being handled faithfully or merely used as a collection of prooftexts to support predetermined conclusions.
As Americans, we can affirm that immigration is a good and honorable thing while also expressing legitimate concerns about assimilation and cultural stability. If someone desires America to reflect Christian values, that commitment must extend beyond selective Bible verses. We do not get to embrace God’s Word when it is convenient and dismiss it when it is costly. Scripture calls for submission, not customization.
This concern becomes even more pressing as we welcome large numbers of people with fundamentally different worldviews and no interest in assimilating into American society. Israel welcomed foreigners—but not those seeking to redefine Israel on their own terms. A nation cannot survive if it abandons its identity entirely. Compassion without order ultimately leads to chaos.
Citizens of Heaven, Stewards on Earth
At the same time, Christians must remember that our ultimate citizenship is in heaven. Like Israel during the Babylonian exile, we live as God’s people in a land that does not fully reflect His values. Yet exile did not mean disengagement. Through the prophet Jeremiah, God commanded His people to build homes, plant gardens, raise families, and “seek the welfare of the city” where they lived, praying for it and working for its good (Jer. 29:7).
That calling remains ours today. We do not abandon our nation, nor do we idolize it. We labor for its good, pray for its leaders, and shine the light of Christ—even among those who love the darkness. Our allegiance is first to God and His truth, and from that allegiance flows a commitment to justice, compassion, order, and peace.
Laws Must Be Enforced
Recognizing the tension between welcoming the stranger and maintaining a stable, ordered society, we must also address the role of law enforcement. Scripture shows us that God did not merely give Israel laws—He also prescribed consequences for breaking them. The severity of punishment corresponded to the severity of the offense, with capital punishment reserved for the most extreme cases. God intended His laws to be enforced. That is how societies function.
Governments exist, in part, to establish and enforce laws on behalf of the people they govern. Laws that are not enforced cease to function as laws at all; they become suggestions—easily ignored and selectively applied. When laws are not enforced, order erodes, and eventually, civilized society collapses.
In the United States, immigration laws are enforced in part by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a federal agency operating under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). DHS was established in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, when foreign nationals entered the country with the explicit intent to cause mass harm. Its stated mission is to “safeguard the American people, the homeland, and its values.” Sometimes that responsibility includes investigating those who pose a threat and removing individuals who refuse to abide by the law.
At present, we appear to be caught in a propaganda war. Some view ICE agents as courageous public servants enforcing the law and removing violent criminals from our streets. Others see ICE as a threat to immigrant communities, including those who entered the country illegally but have otherwise lived peacefully. Compassion often motivates this concern, and that compassion should not be dismissed.
What should be rejected, however, is the emotionally driven and often unsubstantiated rhetoric coming from both sides. On one end, ICE is described as terrorizing communities, abducting children, or operating as a modern “secret police” by throwing people into concentration camps. On the other, protestors are broadly labeled terrorists or murderers. This language is neither accurate nor helpful. It hardens positions, replaces reason with outrage, and demands loyalty to a side rather than commitment to truth.
There is a better path. It is possible to support ICE’s lawful role while also insisting on accountability, restraint, and humane conduct. Authority does not grant permission to act unjustly. Likewise, it is possible to support the enforcement of immigration laws without harboring hatred toward immigrants. Many of us cherish friendships with immigrants who have become legal citizens, contribute to our communities, and share our faith. Supporting the rule of law and loving immigrants are not opposing commitments.
If someone believes our immigration laws are unjust, they are free to critique them, protest them peacefully, and work toward reform. What they are not justified in doing is obstructing law enforcement or engaging in violence. Protest ceases to be peaceful the moment it interferes with officials who have been lawfully authorized to carry out their duties. Simply put, we cannot protest laws by breaking laws. Protest seeks persuasion; obstruction seeks coercion.
Lives Lost, Truth Required
Tragically, two people have lost their lives in recent weeks while interfering with federal law enforcement. These deaths should grieve us. I sympathize deeply with the families and loved ones who are mourning, and I hope these incidents are investigated thoroughly and fairly. At the same time, grief must not short-circuit discernment. If we wish to remain impartial, we must ask not only what happened, but why.
In the case of Renee Good, video evidence and expert analysis suggest that the officer reasonably believed his life was in danger when a vehicle appeared to be moving toward him. While I do not celebrate what happened, and while I do not believe it was her intent to harm the officer, intent is not always knowable in the moment. From the officer’s perspective, lethal force appears to have been justifiably used in self-defense.
In my opinion, the same cannot be said in the case of Alex Pretti. Based on the available footage, Pretti did not draw his weapon, did not threaten officers, and was even disarmed before being shot. He appeared to be attempting to assist a woman thrown to the ground after she was confronted by an ICE officer. In this case, he did not seem to pose a threat to anyone’s life and his death does not appear justified, so the individuals responsible need to be held accountable. Law enforcement does not have moral or legal license to take a life without reasonable cause.
Some readers will disagree with my conclusions, and I welcome their thoughtful dialogue. What I am not interested in is recycled talking points from either end of the political spectrum. Too often, our allegiance to a side dictates our conclusions before we examine the facts. If we support ICE, we feel pressured to justify every action. If we oppose ICE, we feel obligated to portray every officer as evil and every arrest as injustice. In doing so, we sacrifice truth to protect our preconceptions.
Personally, I did not share the views of Good or Pretti, but I did not want either of them to die. I wish they had not been drawn into chaos or convinced that interfering with law enforcement was a righteous act. Both would likely still be alive had they remained home or protested peacefully. Scripture instructs us to “be subject to the governing authorities” (Rom. 13:1), not because authorities are infallible, but because disorder breeds destruction. The evidence of this is clear in Minneapolis.
Truth Without Tribalism
As Christians, we are called to love even our enemies and to use speech that heals rather than poisons. We should be careful about what we share and amplify—especially online. Does it honor God? Does it reflect truth? Or does it merely provoke outrage while earning approval from those who already agree with us? James warns us that the tongue is “a restless evil, full of deadly poison” (James 3:8). That warning applies just as much to digital speech as it does to spoken words.
Political leaders and commentators will continue to stoke fear and anger. That is unlikely to change. But we are not required to follow them into the fire. We worship the God of truth. Our allegiance is to Jesus, not to a party or politician. We must seek truth without tribalism, facts before conclusions, and charity even in disagreement.
I do not care whether you are on the left or the right, a Republican or Democrat—I love you either way. I want conversation, not shouting; dialogue, not threats; disagreement without dehumanization. Like him or not, Charlie Kirk often said, “When people stop talking, bad things happen.” Let us keep talking, keep listening, and keep learning from one another, even if we arrive at different destinations. We need to have the controversial conversations that we've been avoiding out of fear of conflict and losing those we love. Let’s learn to forgive, to repay evil with good, and to resolve the conflict that has polarized our people. Let’s keep loving our God and our neighbors in the name of Christ until He returns or calls us home.
Like many of you, I have been following the news surrounding the unrest and violence unfolding in Minneapolis. Opinions are everywhere—especially on social media—spanning every political and social perspective. Many are even invoking Scripture to justify their positions, defend their actions, and condemn those who disagree.
That reality is precisely why I believe the Church cannot remain silent. We are not called to be reactionary or sensational, but neither are we called to retreat. When the world is loud, the Church must be clear—not quiet. Pastors, in particular, have a responsibility to help God’s people think biblically, morally, and rationally about what is happening in the world around us.
With that in mind, I want to share some reflections on what has happened—and what continues to happen—in Minneapolis. My goal is not to defend a political party or advance an ideological agenda, but to look at these events through the lens of Scripture. I want us to resist empty, emotional rhetoric and instead pursue careful, critical, and spiritual thinking. I do not claim to have all the facts, nor do I assume my conclusions are beyond correction. I remain open to having my mind changed by new information or better arguments, and I hope we are all willing to extend the same humility to one another.
A Biblical Perspective on Immigration
At the heart of this conflict lies the question of immigration. One approach prioritizes openness and hospitality to such a degree that concerns about public safety, borders, and national order are often minimized or dismissed. Another approach, reacting against that risk, would seek to close borders altogether, valuing protection at the expense of compassion. Both represent moral imbalances. Wisdom requires resisting solutions that elevate one virtue by abandoning another, and instead pursuing an approach that safeguards human dignity while preserving social order.
Scripture provides helpful guidance, particularly in God’s commands to Israel regarding foreigners and sojourners. While Israel was a theocratic nation and the United States is a constitutional republic, God’s law still reveals enduring principles about justice, hospitality, and order.
When Israel was delivered from Egypt, they did not leave alone. “A mixed multitude also went up with them” (Exod. 12:38). Foreigners were welcomed to join God’s people. Later, Israel was commanded not to oppress the sojourner, remembering that they themselves had once been strangers in Egypt. In Leviticus 19—the same chapter that commands, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”—God also says, “You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself” (19:34).
This call to love the foreigner should not surprise us. Jesus Himself was a refugee in Egypt as a child, and His teaching consistently calls His followers to love without partiality, to overcome evil with good, and to extend mercy even to enemies.
However, Scripture does not present hospitality without accountability. A closer look at the Mosaic Law shows that sojourners living among Israel were held to the same standards as native Israelites. They were expected to submit to God’s authority and live according to His laws—observing Sabbath regulations (Ex. 20:10), purity laws (Lev. 17:15), and prohibitions against blasphemy (Lev. 24:16). Those who openly rejected God’s law, whether native or foreigner, were cut off from the community (Num. 15:30–31). In modern terms, this amounted to exile or expulsion.
Israel was commanded to welcome foreigners, but not at the expense of its identity as a people devoted to the Lord. Compassion and cultural preservation were not opposites; they were held together.
This is where the modern conversation often breaks down. Many appeal to Scripture to support immigration while ignoring the broader biblical framework of law, order, and accountability. We should ask whether Scripture is being handled faithfully or merely used as a collection of prooftexts to support predetermined conclusions.
As Americans, we can affirm that immigration is a good and honorable thing while also expressing legitimate concerns about assimilation and cultural stability. If someone desires America to reflect Christian values, that commitment must extend beyond selective Bible verses. We do not get to embrace God’s Word when it is convenient and dismiss it when it is costly. Scripture calls for submission, not customization.
This concern becomes even more pressing as we welcome large numbers of people with fundamentally different worldviews and no interest in assimilating into American society. Israel welcomed foreigners—but not those seeking to redefine Israel on their own terms. A nation cannot survive if it abandons its identity entirely. Compassion without order ultimately leads to chaos.
Citizens of Heaven, Stewards on Earth
At the same time, Christians must remember that our ultimate citizenship is in heaven. Like Israel during the Babylonian exile, we live as God’s people in a land that does not fully reflect His values. Yet exile did not mean disengagement. Through the prophet Jeremiah, God commanded His people to build homes, plant gardens, raise families, and “seek the welfare of the city” where they lived, praying for it and working for its good (Jer. 29:7).
That calling remains ours today. We do not abandon our nation, nor do we idolize it. We labor for its good, pray for its leaders, and shine the light of Christ—even among those who love the darkness. Our allegiance is first to God and His truth, and from that allegiance flows a commitment to justice, compassion, order, and peace.
Laws Must Be Enforced
Recognizing the tension between welcoming the stranger and maintaining a stable, ordered society, we must also address the role of law enforcement. Scripture shows us that God did not merely give Israel laws—He also prescribed consequences for breaking them. The severity of punishment corresponded to the severity of the offense, with capital punishment reserved for the most extreme cases. God intended His laws to be enforced. That is how societies function.
Governments exist, in part, to establish and enforce laws on behalf of the people they govern. Laws that are not enforced cease to function as laws at all; they become suggestions—easily ignored and selectively applied. When laws are not enforced, order erodes, and eventually, civilized society collapses.
In the United States, immigration laws are enforced in part by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a federal agency operating under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). DHS was established in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, when foreign nationals entered the country with the explicit intent to cause mass harm. Its stated mission is to “safeguard the American people, the homeland, and its values.” Sometimes that responsibility includes investigating those who pose a threat and removing individuals who refuse to abide by the law.
At present, we appear to be caught in a propaganda war. Some view ICE agents as courageous public servants enforcing the law and removing violent criminals from our streets. Others see ICE as a threat to immigrant communities, including those who entered the country illegally but have otherwise lived peacefully. Compassion often motivates this concern, and that compassion should not be dismissed.
What should be rejected, however, is the emotionally driven and often unsubstantiated rhetoric coming from both sides. On one end, ICE is described as terrorizing communities, abducting children, or operating as a modern “secret police” by throwing people into concentration camps. On the other, protestors are broadly labeled terrorists or murderers. This language is neither accurate nor helpful. It hardens positions, replaces reason with outrage, and demands loyalty to a side rather than commitment to truth.
There is a better path. It is possible to support ICE’s lawful role while also insisting on accountability, restraint, and humane conduct. Authority does not grant permission to act unjustly. Likewise, it is possible to support the enforcement of immigration laws without harboring hatred toward immigrants. Many of us cherish friendships with immigrants who have become legal citizens, contribute to our communities, and share our faith. Supporting the rule of law and loving immigrants are not opposing commitments.
If someone believes our immigration laws are unjust, they are free to critique them, protest them peacefully, and work toward reform. What they are not justified in doing is obstructing law enforcement or engaging in violence. Protest ceases to be peaceful the moment it interferes with officials who have been lawfully authorized to carry out their duties. Simply put, we cannot protest laws by breaking laws. Protest seeks persuasion; obstruction seeks coercion.
Lives Lost, Truth Required
Tragically, two people have lost their lives in recent weeks while interfering with federal law enforcement. These deaths should grieve us. I sympathize deeply with the families and loved ones who are mourning, and I hope these incidents are investigated thoroughly and fairly. At the same time, grief must not short-circuit discernment. If we wish to remain impartial, we must ask not only what happened, but why.
In the case of Renee Good, video evidence and expert analysis suggest that the officer reasonably believed his life was in danger when a vehicle appeared to be moving toward him. While I do not celebrate what happened, and while I do not believe it was her intent to harm the officer, intent is not always knowable in the moment. From the officer’s perspective, lethal force appears to have been justifiably used in self-defense.
In my opinion, the same cannot be said in the case of Alex Pretti. Based on the available footage, Pretti did not draw his weapon, did not threaten officers, and was even disarmed before being shot. He appeared to be attempting to assist a woman thrown to the ground after she was confronted by an ICE officer. In this case, he did not seem to pose a threat to anyone’s life and his death does not appear justified, so the individuals responsible need to be held accountable. Law enforcement does not have moral or legal license to take a life without reasonable cause.
Some readers will disagree with my conclusions, and I welcome their thoughtful dialogue. What I am not interested in is recycled talking points from either end of the political spectrum. Too often, our allegiance to a side dictates our conclusions before we examine the facts. If we support ICE, we feel pressured to justify every action. If we oppose ICE, we feel obligated to portray every officer as evil and every arrest as injustice. In doing so, we sacrifice truth to protect our preconceptions.
Personally, I did not share the views of Good or Pretti, but I did not want either of them to die. I wish they had not been drawn into chaos or convinced that interfering with law enforcement was a righteous act. Both would likely still be alive had they remained home or protested peacefully. Scripture instructs us to “be subject to the governing authorities” (Rom. 13:1), not because authorities are infallible, but because disorder breeds destruction. The evidence of this is clear in Minneapolis.
Truth Without Tribalism
As Christians, we are called to love even our enemies and to use speech that heals rather than poisons. We should be careful about what we share and amplify—especially online. Does it honor God? Does it reflect truth? Or does it merely provoke outrage while earning approval from those who already agree with us? James warns us that the tongue is “a restless evil, full of deadly poison” (James 3:8). That warning applies just as much to digital speech as it does to spoken words.
Political leaders and commentators will continue to stoke fear and anger. That is unlikely to change. But we are not required to follow them into the fire. We worship the God of truth. Our allegiance is to Jesus, not to a party or politician. We must seek truth without tribalism, facts before conclusions, and charity even in disagreement.
I do not care whether you are on the left or the right, a Republican or Democrat—I love you either way. I want conversation, not shouting; dialogue, not threats; disagreement without dehumanization. Like him or not, Charlie Kirk often said, “When people stop talking, bad things happen.” Let us keep talking, keep listening, and keep learning from one another, even if we arrive at different destinations. We need to have the controversial conversations that we've been avoiding out of fear of conflict and losing those we love. Let’s learn to forgive, to repay evil with good, and to resolve the conflict that has polarized our people. Let’s keep loving our God and our neighbors in the name of Christ until He returns or calls us home.
Recent
Archive
2026
2025
January
November