Scripture, Justice, and Moral Agency
Why Christians Arrive at Different Conclusions Without Abandoning Christ
By Ayesha Kreutz
There is a conversation that comes up again and again, especially within the “Black community”. It is often one sided and those having it demanding complete agreement or be silenced. often sounds like this. Why do evangelicals believe what they believe, not as a question but condemnation. Or How can people claim the name of Christ while holding positions that feel disconnected from justice, compassion, or lived experience. To a lesser and lesser degree these days we get Why do so many white Christians reject progressive political frameworks?
I get many times the questions are rooted in real history, real wounds, and real differences in how Scripture is read and applied. Therefore they deserve a serious answer, not a dismissive one.
As a Christian, who is proudly black as well, I want to address this conversation honestly, without reducing it to partisan talking points or racial caricatures. Personally I think the tension we are seeing are not ultimately about race or party but more about worldview. More specifically, it is about whether Scripture or ideology is doing the discipling. I won’t get into the whys of that right now, though that deserves its own discussion and assessment. Maybe next time.
Scripture acknowledges culture, history, and ethnic context. The Bible never pretends those realities do not exist. We do ourselves a bit of a disservice by trying to pretend lived experiences are throw aways. They matter, even if only part of the equation and they deserve to be considered. The early church wrestled openly with Jew and Gentile divisions, power dynamics, and belonging. Paul speaks of Christ breaking down the dividing wall of hostility, not by erasing difference, but by reordering allegiance. Jesus Himself ministered first within Israel and yet extended mercy beyond ethnic boundaries. Scripture is not blind to context. Neither should we be. It is part of the reason I love being part of the Frederick Douglass Foundation and why we are so successful in many areas, when people listen.
Anyway….. Scripture also does something modern conversations often resist. It treats human beings as morally responsible agents, not primarily as products of systems or victims of circumstance. From Genesis forward, God speaks to people as capable of obedience, repentance, growth, failure, and accountability. Not to be hard or without compassion but for the sake of dignity.
This is where a major divide emerges between progressive Christianity and a traditional conservative biblical worldview.
Progressive frameworks tend to interpret injustice primarily through systems and outcomes. Traditional biblical frameworks emphasize moral agency, family structure, authority, and order alongside compassion. These are not competing values in Scripture. They are meant to be held together.
This is where I would like to bring in the tensions we are clearly seeing with in the immigration and illegal immigration space.
Scripture is unambiguous in commanding care for the foreigner. God tells His people to love the sojourner, to treat them with dignity, and to remember their own vulnerability. Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy all speak clearly on this. Mistreatment, oppression, and dehumanization are sins. Period. Got it.
At the same time, Scripture does not abolish nations, borders, or law. Acts 17 tells us God established nations and their boundaries. Deuteronomy speaks of God setting the boundaries of peoples. Romans 13 affirms governing authority as ordained by God to restrain evil and maintain order. These realities existed in biblical times, including during the ministry of Jesus. Boundaries and laws are not modern inventions, nor are they inherently unchristian.
This is where biblical precision matters, because Scripture itself makes distinctions yet conveniently left out by some and unknown by others. As Christians we should be the ones, teaching but to do that we first have to know the word.
A sojourner in Scripture is someone passing through or dwelling temporarily, not someone dissolving the concept of nationhood altogether. Biblical compassion does not require the erasure of law. It requires the just application of it. Biblically speaking, Scripture makes important distinctions that modern conversations often collapse. The primary Old Testament word translated sojourner is the Hebrew ger, which refers to a foreigner who dwells temporarily among a people with permission and under the laws of the host nation. A ger was known, counted, and governed, not hidden or lawless, as made explicit in Exodus 12:49, which states that there is one law for the native born and the sojourner alike. By contrast, a citizen or native born person is described with terms such as ezrach, meaning one who belongs to the land by inheritance and covenant membership, a distinction that runs throughout Israel’s civil and covenantal law. Scripture also records migration, the act of moving from one place to another, without assigning it moral value in itself. Abraham migrates by divine calling and negotiation, Jacob migrates during famine, and even Jesus’ family flees to Egypt for refuge, yet always within recognizable authority structures and never as a rejection of law or nationhood, as seen in Genesis 12:10 and Matthew 2:13–15. In the New Testament, the Greek word xenos refers broadly to a stranger or foreigner, while paroikos and parepidemos describe a temporary resident or sojourner, emphasizing non permanence rather than boundary erasure, as used in Ephesians 2:19 and 1 Peter 2:11. Scripture does not contain a category equivalent to the modern concept of an illegal immigrant or illegal alien as defined by contemporary nation states. Instead, the Bible frames the issue in terms of obedience and rebellion to lawful authority, with Romans 13:1–2 affirming that governing authority is ordained by God. At the same time, Scripture commands love, dignity, and protection for the sojourner, as seen in Leviticus 19:33–34 and Deuteronomy 10:18–19. Biblically, compassion toward the foreigner operates within moral order, not against it. Scripture affirms nations and boundaries as part of God’s design, declaring that He determined the times and boundaries of peoples in Acts 17:26. Justice in the biblical sense is not boundarylessness, but right order aligned with truth.
Violence is another area where ideological framing often replaces biblical clarity.
Scripture consistently places moral responsibility on the individual who commits evil. The soul who sins shall die. God renders to each according to his deeds. The one who sheds innocent blood bears responsibility. The Bible does not assign guilt by skin color, demographic category, political affiliation, or lawful ownership of tools. Collective guilt is not biblical justice.
Scripture also addresses the deeper conditions that contribute to violence.
Family structure matters. Fatherhood matters. Parental responsibility matters. Proverbs and the New Testament repeatedly emphasize formation, discipline, and moral training. Ignoring these realities while searching only for systemic explanations leaves the biblical picture incomplete. These problems run ramped in epidemic proportion today. If we would address the root cause of these things 70% of the fruit issues would be resolved.
This emphasis on agency and responsibility has deep roots in the Black intellectual tradition itself. Frederick Douglass famously rejected paternalism, even when it was offered under the guise of compassion. When asked what should be done with the Negro, his answer was nothing. Let him rise or fall by the same standard as any other man. That was not indifference. It was a radical assertion of dignity and equality. The same dignity God talks about and gives to us through His word.
That same conviction animates many Christians who resist progressive frameworks today. The belief is not that Black people or immigrants are incapable or inferior. It is precisely the opposite. It is the conviction that they are fully capable moral agents, made in the image of God, endowed with responsibility, dignity, and the capacity to flourish. They are not defined permanently by victimhood, nor do they require moral formation to be outsourced to the state. This is not indifference to suffering. It reflects a fundamentally different understanding of justice, dignity, and human responsibility, and it is where these conversations most clearly diverge at the level of worldview.
This is why many Christians arrive at conservative conclusions without believing they are abandoning justice or compassion. They see policies differently because they define justice differently. Not as the removal of all consequence, but as the restoration of right order. Not as sentiment alone, but as truth expressed through love.
None of this means any political party fully reflects Christ. None do. Every political ideology falls short of the kingdom of God. Christians should examine their loyalties carefully. Politics can disciple believers if we are not vigilant.
But it is also not true that all ideologies are equally aligned with Scripture. On questions of human nature, truth, authority, family, and moral responsibility, progressive ideology often departs more sharply from the biblical worldview. Acknowledging that is good discernment.
The deeper issue beneath these recurring debates is authority. Are we interpreting Scripture through political frameworks, or are we allowing Scripture to judge our politics. When ideology comes first, Scripture becomes a prop. When Scripture comes first, ideology is tested, corrected, and often rejected.
Christ calls His people to love mercy, pursue justice, and walk humbly. He also calls them to truth, repentance, obedience, and responsibility. He does not pit compassion against order. He holds them together.
If the Church is going to navigate these conversations faithfully, especially within the “Black community” where history and pain are so real, to many, we must refuse both sentimentalism and cynicism. We must reject cruelty and reject false compassion. We must affirm dignity without erasing responsibility.
Christ alone is the standard.
Scripture alone is the lens.
When we hold to that, disagreement does not have to become division, and justice does not have to be surrendered to ideology. Read More on this topic HERE
Find me on Face book HERE Find me on Twitter / X HERE
Check out The Untamed Fury Book Series HERE