I’ve seen it posted many times on Facebook, the meme shared that reads, sometimes in varying forms: Heaven has a wall, gates, and a strict immigration policy; hell has open borders. Think about that. It’s a simple way to try to defend a certain political view on border security. The problem is, it’s both untrue and misconstrues scripture. And as if the meme weren’t enough, a politically vocal pastor stated in a nation interview recently: “The Bible says even Heaven itself is going to have a wall around it. Not everybody is going to be allowed in.”
So, let’s start with a simple fact: Nowhere does the Bible state that heaven has a wall around it. Now there are walls talked about in the Bible, built around cities, and perhaps this is what said pastor and the memes are referring to. For, in the book of Revelation, the New Jerusalem is described as coming down from heaven to the new earth with a wall around it and gates. But there is something counter to the point of the memes about this wall and gates.
John wrote, “By [the light of the glory of God and the Lamb] will the nations walk, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it; and its gates will never be shut by day—and there will be no night there. They will bring into it the glory and the honor of the nations” (Revelation 21:24-26).
Walls, yes; gates, yes; but the gates are never shut. They’re open so that the nations can come in and be a part. Walls around Old Testament cities represented security of various sorts. The gates being perpetually open in Revelation represents that in eternity no border security will ever be needed.
In this way, the gates of the New Jerusalem are a terrible illustration for a nation’s border security policy today.
Now, what about that “strict immigration policy”? Actually, when you come down to it, the immigration policy into God’s Kingdom is the least strict of all. There are no lines at security checkpoints, no background checks (indeed, he already knows our background perfectly and none of us, on our own, qualify to get in), no applying for asylum, no green cards, and so on.
God’s immigration policy is found in John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”
You want to make the move into God’s Kingdom, there’s one requirement: Trust in Jesus as your Savior-King. In God’s Kingdom, he looks at each of us and says, “You are not worthy to enter in and you have nothing to offer me or my country, so I’m coming out to you. If you will trust me, then I will bring you in with me and give you everything and it will be my absolutely free gift to you.”
In fact, it’s not hell that has open borders. Hell’s borders are shut quite tight. Without Christ, we don’t immigrate into hell, we belong there naturally due to our rebellion against God, as children of wrath. And in eternity, there is no walking back out of hell. Contrary to this, heaven and the New Earth are wide open to everyone from every place who will simply believe.
So, what is the point of all this? Should we follow the example of heaven and the New Earth and have open borders and an easy immigration policy? No, according to Romans 13 God gave governments the responsibility of protecting its citizens. Border security is an important issue in the current age of our nation-states, but it’s going to take politicians with attitudes of wisdom, compromise, and grace to truly fix our system.
The point is, however, that we need to stop making and sharing pithy statements that support a particular view but completely misrepresent the Bible. Whether you are for a plan like President Trump has laid out or whether you are for a different immigration and border security plan, it does us no good to misrepresent Scripture to make our point. Let’s place honoring God’s word above our politics.
Thanks Mike! Excellent clarification.
Thank you.
The 21st chapi of Revelation certainly does say that the New Jerusalem has a wall.
Greg – He said it has a wall. Please go back and read what the author wrote. However, he is correct that the analogy is exegetical unsound.
Thank you
Also she had a great and high wall with twelve gates, and twelve angels at the gates, and names written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel.
-Revelation 21:12 NKJV
Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. -Revelation 21:14
‘And he who talked with me had a gold reed to measure the city, its gates, and its wall.
-Revelation 21:15
Then he measured its wall: one hundred and forty-four cubits, according to the measure of a man, that is, of an angel. -Revelation 21:17
The construction of its wall was of jasper; and the city was pure gold, like clear glass.
-Revelation 21:18
The foundations of the wall of the city were adorned with all kinds of precious stones: the first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third chalcedony [agate], the fourth emerald. -Revelation 21:19
David R. Brumbelow
David, and?
I talked about the New Jerusalem in my post and even quoted Revelation 21… I’m guessing you and Greg Roberts didn’t actually read the post based on your replies.
There was a hilarious article in the Babylon Bee about imposing the death penalty for commenting on an article without reading it.
How in the world is Mexico going to pay for such expensive walls?
The whole point of the post was that, yes, there is a wall; but it is a wall whose gates are always open, which negates the idea of the wall as keeping people out. Instead, it’s probably a reflection of glorious power of the city.
Obviously the backdrop of the post is the Trump’s proposed wall along the Mexican border. I’m not sure exactly what the author’s stance on that would be, but I don’t think the point of the post is “We should not have a wall on the Mexican border.” Instead, it’s “don’t bring twisted citations from Scripture into the debate on the wall.”
Sort of like do not identify Mary, Joseph and Jesus as illegal aliens. When Newsweek, (who really reads it?) the NYT, Time and WAPO quote the Bible I know they are using it as the word they live by and trust not to bolster their political viewpoint.
Dude, I have never voted for a Democrat in my life, and I’m guessing the author isn’t a registered Democrat either. We need to be far more concerned that we as Bible-believing Christians cite the Bible appropriately than whatever the world wants to do.
I actually think a wall might be the right call on the Mexican border. I just want to be careful that I don’t make a mess of the Bible in trying to make that case.
I think you are right. I don’t speak for Mike, but none of us here are Voices are Democrats (that I know of) and we are all on the conservative side of spectrum theologically and politically.
I am not sure if a wall is the best way to go. They built a lot of tunnels, which makes me think a wall might not be best. But BORDER SECURITY is a good thing.
The point in all of this is not that the US should have open borders (only a few crazies on the far left argue for that) but that we should stop doing hermeneutical violence to the Bible to support our political views.
Jeffress and others need to stop. Argue for border security and even a wall, if you like. Just don’t twist God’s word to do it.
I suppose I don’t make as sharp a distinction between Heaven and the New Jerusalem.
Somewhat related:
“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber. -John 10:1
And he was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven!” -Genesis 28:17
David R. Brumbelow
Need we point out…America is not heaven and Trump is not Jesus.
It is a false analogy.
THANK YOU!
Amen!!
Agreed.
Who said America is Heaven and Trump is Jesus?
Some have simply noted Heaven or the New Jerusalem has a wall. Kind of like many countries, homes, gated communities, the Vatican do today.
David R. Brumbelow
In John 10:7, Jesus says “I am the door”–so obviously a metaphor in 10:1.
As for the New Jerusalem–the Bible features it as an object in heaven that comes down and rests upon the New Earth. Nowhere does it equate it to heaven itself. The Bible simply never describes a wall around heaven, and the one wall within has gates always open.
So, like I said–it’s a terrible illustration for a nation’s border security. And we just need to stop using it as such.
Some people are for a wall, and that’s within their right as a citizen of the United States to hold that position and vote for those who support it. But we should give no leeway to misusing scripture to support that, the opposite, or any position.
Also somewhat related:
But there shall by no means enter it anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life. -Revelation 21:27
And yes, I read the article before commenting.
David R. Brumbelow
David B: I get the point to be, and I strongly agree, that we cannot equate scripture and America. That has always been a false teaching, and it is still is. You cannot use the Bible in this way. The Bible also tells us not to rewrite it (Revelation 22: 18-19) and I feel that is what is being done when used in this way.
I read it as well, I don’t parse each word. I do think the death penalty is a little extreme for my percieved offense.
Well, it is the Babylon Bee.
“Whether you are for a plan like President Trump has laid out or whether you are for a different immigration and border security plan, it does us no good to misrepresent Scripture to make our point. Let’s place honoring God’s word above our politics.”
Thank you, Mike Bergman.
Your statement is a 10 ring at a thousand yards bullseye shot.
This is silly. Heaven is not about politics but salvation. The only way into heaven is to become a child of God not Democrat or Republican .
What a John saw was the church, the New Jerusalem. A lot of mis- information out there.
I want to add this comment. The United States is not in the Scriptures. The president is not King Cyrus. We are not the New Jerusalem or the Chosen People of God. This trend towards allegorization of Scripture to make it fit political times probably would make even Origen blush … and that is saying something.
This began on 45’s Inauguration Day when a certain pastor made a Nehemiah analogy and no one spoke out against it. It has only progressed from there. Proper exegesis is right and bad analogies are wrong whether the individual is pastor of FoxNews or Foxtrot.
Political twisting of Scripture began on January 20, 2016? Silly me. I thought it was as old as monarchy.
Twisting the Bible for political reasons is not a new thing, James. Not sure where you are going with it, but your point is well taken. Jeffress isn’t the first to do it.
Of course, since he is a Southern Baptist, we must confront his false interpretations and let this world know that this is not what the Bible says and that he does not speak the truth nor does he speak for us.
Just as the Republican party is leaving some of us behind, I fear the SBC will go the same route. It’s already happening.
That is exactly what I was thinking Amy. Good lay out.
Some posts above say that the gates are open to all.
The gates are always open, because the selection happens before this, when the goats and the sheep are separated. By the time of the Revelation passage, the goats have already been separated and sent somewhere else, where there *is* a “wall” that has no gates (or moat, that no one can cross). (Luke 16:26)
Ironically, one of the marks of a sheep in Matthew 25 is that he welcomes strangers.
Great post, Mike Bergman. I read it and I agree with all you say here – especially the part about not using Scripture wrongly to promote a political perspective. Thank you.
Excellent analogy and exegesis. Reminds some of the initiative at last year’s Annual Meet to revoke the invitation to Mike Pence, a godly man who has estranged himself from NeverTrump SBC pastors by virtue of, well, no biblical criteria for sure. But that doesn’t tarnish their standing as both theologically and politically conservative, although it would seem to run afoul of your aptly quoted Matthew 25 sheep criteria. Thank you Alan.
From a historical perspective, there is not a wall mentioned in the Bible that has any relevance, or can be compared in any context, to the wall Trump wants to build along the border. Nothing in the Bible justifies that. It’s a political issue. But like most right wing political issues these days, there are many conservative Evangelical Christians who seem to be quite willing to change their doctrinal and theological perspective to be consistent with the pseudo-conservative politics of the Trump administration, including the application of a vision of the “New Jerusalem” from the symbolic, apocalyptic literature of Revelation.
Walls were used in ancient times to protect cities from invaders. The record of their success recorded in the Bible is marginal at best. The walls of Jericho were brought down by God himself. The Babylonians took out the one around Jerusalem. And outside of Biblical history, the record is also marginal. The Great Wall of China did not protect the country from Mongolian invasion. The Maginot Line didn’t protect France from the Nazis.
The vast majority of the people who come across the border illegally are migrants who go back after growing season and harvest are over, those who are seeking asylum or those trying to escape extreme poverty. The alleged criminals and terrorists among them are mostly a myth. The crime rate among those groups of people is negligible. The dangerous thugs that traffic drugs and people across the borders are the ones to worry about and a wall isn’t likely to stop them, as the border patrol and local officials say. Most of the drug traffic comes through the ports of entry. Some of it comes under the places where the barricades, walls and fences are already in place, through well developed, sophisticated tunnels. As the BP in the cited story says, the ground under the border between Tijuana and San Diego, where there is a wall with barbed wire at the top is “like swiss cheese.” Their best advice for controlling drug traffic and trade in bringing people in illegally is to spend the money on beefed up enforcement instead of a wall.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/mexicans-see-models-of-trumps-impenetrable-wall-and-theyre-not-impressed/2017/10/16/4f54bdb8-ad22-11e7-9b93-b97043e57a22_story.html?utm_term=.134eccd631c0
Interesting discussion. There are thousands of references in early American writing that applies Scripture to particular political issues of the time. Applications of Scripture are different than exegesis. Some of the posts seem to lead to the conclusion that the Scriptures have no direct application to life in the Twenty-first Century. All of the Bible was written to a different people at a different time.
I’m not a great fan of Jeffress, but I don’t think painting him as some “Scripture twisting political hack” is really fair to the man. At least he is saying something to the public the many posters will never risk be accountable for.
I like the number of exegetes that point out “the wall has gates” that are always open.
Somehow, the whole idea of “entering properly through the open gate” gets lost in the Jeffress-bashing. Nobody climbs the wall to get into heaven. I might point out that asylum is an “open gate” in American jurisprudence. Anybody can apply at anytime–at a proper point of entry.
So, I will follow this thread, not because I think it will actually solve any real issue with immigration, but because I might finally find out exactly how many angels “do” fit on the head of a pin.
To compare this thread to “how many angels fit on the head of a pin” doesn’t surprise me, yet it does show how some Christians think it does. I have a suggestion Jack. Take 1 Corinthians 13 for example. Read it. That does fit into the 21st Century and yet the past 2 years it seems to be the one chapter that is ignored the most. Should I go on? I think a one year reading of the whole Bible is appropriate, taking a liner and underlining John 3:16 would also be a good start.
It’s amazing how Jesus always seems to be on Trump’s side.
Especially when Trump is never on Jesus’ side.
Lee, I don’t disagree, but you would get the exact opposite impression if you follow the upper strata of Evangelicalism, including Southern Baptists.
What’s most amazing about this post is that anyone felt the need to write it.
I regularly hear a lot of nonsense coming from SBC pastors about a lot of political things – trying to cherry pick scripture and then draw a straight line to policy.
And as Dave Miller has pointed out, this has been going on a long time. And it’s going on all the time. Unabated, as far as I can tell.
But like lots of things in this world, the most absurd things get attention because they are so easy to bat down.
It’s like there’s a rush at a KMART blue light special. People can’t get there quick enough to get the bargain or pick the low hanging fruit.
This is part of the Trump effect on those who are most exercised at his Presidency and his existence. We must be ever vigilant and very quick, especially in the case of Trump, to bat down biblical error before so many people are misled.
I am so glad we have this heavenly wall thing sorted out.
Speaking of heaven, I have lots of questions about heaven that hear routinely batted around.
Paul says that Christians should not speculate about the bodies we will have in heaven. Jesus says there is no marriage in heaven. What age will we be? All of these things really stretch the imagination about our heavenly state. But I regularly hear popular evangelicals preach about gender and race in heaven without a thought given to these questions. There will be no need for gender in heaven with no marriage. There is not even a genetic marker for race in our earthly bodies. What makes us think that we are going to be of certain races in heaven?
Meanwhile, we might also note that the really corrosive and divisive errors in hermeneutics enlisted in political discourse that deserve a more thorough reckoning seem to go unnoticed.
Are we more concerned that people know what the Bible says, or are we really more concerned about other things?
Good article, Mike.
I wholeheartedly agree that no one should twist or misuse scripture to make immigration policy points.
You said “John wrote, “By [the light of the glory of God and the Lamb] will the nations walk, and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it; and its gates will never be shut by day—and there will be no night there. They will bring into it the glory and the honor of the nations” (Revelation 21:24-26).
Walls, yes; gates, yes; but the gates are never shut. They’re open so that the nations can come in and be a part. Walls around Old Testament cities represented security of various sorts. The gates being perpetually open in Revelation represents that in eternity no border security will ever be needed.”
I think in keeping with the thesis of your post with which I agree… I think one must necessarily point out that the “nations” in that passage is referring to *people of* every nation… It’s not actually for referring to geographical and/or Geo-political plots of land at all… Or even in habitants of such on the basis of thier nationality.
It’s talking about people of every tongue tribe and nation who worship the lamb…in other words those who’ve repented and believed and therefore been ransomed by Christ unto everlasting life.
There’s no need for the gates to close because… Well… The inhabitants of both heaven/new earth and hell are sealed.
The discussion about border security, and the wall in particular, is so politicized that any Scriptural analogy or argument in favor of either side is likely to distract from the real meaning of the Bible passage being cited. The Bible simply wasn’t intended to be a specific manual for how a secular government like the United States should conduct its affairs. I agree that the meme is off-point and detracts from the far more important point that some people, tragically, will be excluded from Heaven, and their exclusion has nothing to do with their political party or favored immigration policy.
But as wary as we should be about proof-texting, that’s not to say that we can’t apply Biblical principles to political discussions. If you were to say to me that as a Christian I must oppose the wall as an immoral means of separating people, that a wall necessarily reflects unjust discrimination, or that Jesus would never support a wall that keeps people out, I think it’s entirely proper to look in Scripture and how both the Old and New Testament refer to literal and symbolic walls. Do those passages prove that the United States must, or even should, build a southern border wall? No, of course not. They do refute the notion that a wall intended for protection or the delineation of territory is inherently un-Christlike. Likewise, the Scriptures about caring for the foreigner do not mandate open borders, but they definitely should inform how we think about treating immigrants (legal or illegal).
Also, I do think the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21-22 is certainly representative of Heaven. It includes the throne of God, the river of life, the streets of gold, and the pearly gates. No one who does what is detestable or false will enter it. And it has a wall. The gates are never shut though, because it isn’t necessary for security– as if someone could slip into the city or take God by surprise. However, the walls do mark an important distinction between what happens inside the city and what happens to those who are outside. Not everyone gets in. Again, this principle has no neat or direct application to the U.S. border wall, and it gets muddied in the political debate, so I agree it’s unwise to use the wall of the New Jerusalem as a “gotcha” point in a meme. I would be careful about saying, though, that heaven has no walls. That could be equally confusing to someone trying to learn about Heaven in the context of this discussion.
Hi! Non-Christian lurker / very occasional commenter here.
On the subject of trying to learn about Heaven: OK, I /am/ confused. Is there a broad consensus among Baptists that Heaven is a physical place?
I ask because, from the outside, the description of the walls with perpetually open gates *seems* obviously symbolic rather than literal. Likewise, the numbers (twelves and multiples of twelves, explicitly linked to the tribes of Israel and the number of apostles) don’t seem like they’re just reporting what the architecture’s like; rather, it seems like they’re being used to make a theological point — in this case, the numbers are being used to buttress the author’s claim that that Christians have inherited Israel’s status as the chosen among nations.
Basically, I was raised to see Hebrew numbers as being a quality rather than a quantity — and it seems like that’s how John is using numbers /here/ as well (which is no surprise if he was a Jewish Christian in the early church).
Anyway! Would that reading be out of place in most SBC congregations? Would it be seen as outright heretical? Or would a substantial minority (maybe a majority?) of Baptists basically read it the way I did above? Help a fellow out. 🙂
David: Good points, but I very much doubt there is a consensus about the New Jerusalem being heaven. I think it’s symbolic. I can’t quite see literal heaven being a 1500 mile cube. But I know some people don’t agree. I don’t know if the belief in a literal cuboid heaven is tied to a particular eschatology or not.
I think the New Jerusalem in Revelation is representative of Heaven, but I agree that some elements of it are symbolic. Bill Mac makes a good point regarding the walls, in that Heaven is not necessarily confined to a certain number of cubic feet or miles. However, I do think there are physical aspects to Heaven. We will have glorified resurrection bodies, for example. Heaven is depicted in many other physical terms. Even if the walls are symbolic, there is a reason why God revealed them to John. I think they represent the glory of God and the foundation of the old and new covenants. They also represent the kingdom of God and a delineation between the bliss of those in God’s presence and the exclusion of everyone and everything that is wicked.
Thanks, y’all! Appreciate the explanations.
David Light:
I think most believers agree with much of what you said. Heaven does seem to be a location, but many of the descriptions seem to be symbolic. God certainly could create a place that matches the literal description, but those descriptions appear to be more symbolic
[…] “No, Heaven Does Not Have A Wall Around It” A short post about the misinterpretation of scripture to create not so pithy memes supporting immigration policy–by Mike Bergman https://sbcvoices.com/no-heaven-does-not-have-a-wall-around-it/ […]