11

Yesterday I was debating the topic with my Progressive Christian friend who claimed that the Lord was a refugee.

Was Jesus Christ, by definition, a refugee?

0

12 Answers 12

27

Was Jesus Christ a refugee?

By definition, Jesus was in fact a refugee for several months or years? In fact the whole Holy Family were refugees when they fled to Egypt in order to flee from Herod the Great!

Were Jesus, Mary and Joseph refugees? Yes.

With refugees and migrants in the news, some commentators have sought to draw parallels between their plight and that of the Holy Family—Jesus, Mary and Joseph. How accurate are these comparisons? Were Jesus, Mary and Joseph what we would consider today “refugees”?

Yes.

In the second chapter of the Gospel of Matthew, we read the story of the “Flight into Egypt” in which, after the birth of Jesus and the visit from the Magi, an “angel of the Lord” comes to Joseph in a dream and warns him to leave Bethlehem for Egypt (Mt 2:12-15). Why? Because King Herod was planning to “seek out the child to destroy him.” Mary and Joseph do leave, along with Jesus, and, according to Matthew, make their way into Egypt. Afterward, King Herod slaughters all the male children in Bethlehem under two years of age. This dramatic episode is part of the Gospel reading for the “Feast of the Holy Innocents,” celebrated on Dec. 28.

So, according to the Gospel of Matthew, what is going on? A family is forced to flee their homeland for fear of persecution. This is the classic modern-day definition of a refugee. In fact, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees defines that group of people as follows:

A refugee is someone who has been forced to flee his or her country because of persecution, war, or violence. A refugee has a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group.

Even some older liturgical books of the Catholic Church commemorated this even on February 17: The Flight of Our Lord Jesus Christ into Egypt (Pro aliquibus locis)

19
  • 2
    @RayButterworth maybe we would put that under asylum seekers but this is not a mutually exclusive category to refugee status.
    – ninthamigo
    Commented Apr 27, 2022 at 23:10
  • 3
    @OneGodtheFather Think I am getting too tired here and confusing things. Simply wanted to say we do not know when the Magi visited them.
    – Ken Graham
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 0:50
  • 4
    @RayButterworth Herod was a client king under Rome's suzerainty, but still nominally independent. Fleeing to Egypt was leaving the political jurisidiction of Herodian Judea and entering the Roman Empire-proper
    – Tristan
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 14:24
  • 2
    @BrianMcCutchon all suggested dates occur before Judaea was placed under direct rule under Quirinius, because that was done in response to instability under the tetrarchy of Herod's sons
    – Tristan
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 18:58
  • 4
    The procedural distinction between "refugee" and "asylum seeker" is solely a legal one made under US Immigration law which has to do with when they were given their status (inside or outside of the US) and which particular process they have to follow. Morally, socially and biblically, there is no difference. And yes, a single person can be a refugee. Commented Apr 29, 2022 at 14:25
13

Yes, Jesus was a refugee multiple times.

1. Egypt

If you're forced to leave your home in the middle of the night (Matt. 2:14) because the government wants to kill you (Matt. 2:16), and you have to flee to a foreign land (Matt. 2:13) for an extended period of time until the political situation calms down back home (Matt. 2:20), I would say that decidedly qualifies as a refugee.

2. During His ministry

Jesus had to flee Nazareth, Jerusalem, and other locations for His safety. People sought to throw Him off a cliff, turn a mob on Him, stone Him, hand Him over to the Romans, etc. It was He who said:

The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head (Matt 8:20).

The reason there is so much drama in the Gospels as Jesus prepares to go to Jerusalem for His final Passover is that everybody knows the Sanhedrin is out to kill Him, and will apprehend Him the first chance they get where He's not surrounded by a throng of adoring admirers.


Additionally, it was Jesus who, just before His death, declared:

My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? (Matt 27:46)

The previous Sunday, He was adored by a multitude. By Thursday night, just 12 close friends remained by His side; then 11 when one went out to betray Him. The circle close around Him shrunk to 3 in Gethsemane, then James fled, then Peter denied, then John followed at an increasingly impotent distance.

As Jesus' disciples scattered and spread, leaving Him alone, He still always had the presence and support of the Father. Then, in Christ's final agony, the Father apparently withdrew that support: Jesus felt what it meant to be entirely forsaken, entirely alone. Because He won that victory, we need never be entirely alone.

Jesus knows exactly what it is like to be a refugee: He is the ultimate example of being despised, rejected, and forsaken (see Isaiah 53:3-4)

7
  • 4
    IMO stretching it for when Jesus was an adult. If that's the case, everytime someone is threatened by a crowd they become a refugee. It is reasonable to hold that Jesus had a home in Capernaum during his ministry. Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 3:01
  • 1
    Yes, but that's not a refugee - He wasn't even living in Nazareth by that point (Matthew 4:13). Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 4:05
  • 2
    @OneGodtheFather Matt. 8:20 is after Matt. 4:13 =). That said, I follow your point, His status as a refugee when going to Egypt as a child is far more clear than His regular defensive movements as an adult. My broader thought is that He was cast out & rejected a lot Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 4:22
  • 1
    Matthew 8:20 is right after he's being pursued (in the good sense) by a massive crowd! Jesus could have asked a vast number of people for a place to lay his head, and He would have had it. But then at Matthew 9:1 He returns to 'his own town'. Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 4:52
  • 1
    @sharur No, this is a reference to Capernaum, not Nazareth. Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 17:28
13

Because Jesus never left the Roman empire (that we know of), the most technically correct term to use in modern English would be internally displaced person:

An internally displaced person (IDP) is someone who is forced to leave their home but who remains within their country's borders. They are often referred to as refugees, although they do not fall within the legal definitions of a refugee.

6
  • 2
    And similarly, since it was part of the government (the King) that was looking for him, "fugitive" would be a more appropriate term than "refugee". Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 14:01
  • 4
    the Herodian Kingdom was a client state nominally independent of Rome, but owing it tribute and soldiers. Fleeing to Egypt as an infant was therefore crossing a country's borders
    – Tristan
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 14:29
  • 1
    so I guess it depends whether you trust Matthew or Luke's account when it comes to the dating of his birth
    – Tristan
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 14:34
  • 2
    >> '... but who remains within their country's borders'. Semantics but 'country' != 'empire'
    – mcalex
    Commented Apr 29, 2022 at 1:57
  • 2
    My answer was almost tongue-in-cheek, applying modern day categories to the ancient world. There are indeed (silly) questions that would have to be resolved to be able to give a more complete answer: is a person appointed king by the Roman senate the head of a sovereign government? Was Herod pursuing Jesus in an official capacity, or as a private matter?
    – adam.baker
    Commented Apr 29, 2022 at 5:52
8

A standard definition of 'refugee' is

"a person who flees for refuge or safety, especially to a foreign country, as in time of political upheaval, war, etc."

Jesus' family fled for safety to Egypt from Judea. Whether this was a 'foreign country' in the contemporary sense is debatable - both these areas were under Roman control at the time (see Tristan's comment below, the exact status of Judea is debatable). Perhaps this was somewhat like moving from one country to another within the European Union nowadays.

There also was a large, established Jewish community at the time in Egypt, where presumably they were able to find help.

Also, because they fled after receiving the gifts of the Magi, which included gold, they presumably had some wealth - perhaps significant wealth - which also would have helped them during this time.

After perhaps a few months up to 2 years, they then moved back to the land of Israel, settling in Nazareth.

Answer: yes, for a short period of time Jesus was a refugee.

1
  • 2
    the Herodian Kingdom was not part of the Roman Empire. It was a client state of Rome that, whilst owing it tribute and soldiers, was nominally independent so I guess it depends whether you trust Matthew or Luke's account when it comes to the dating of his birth
    – Tristan
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 14:29
4

Although Jesus's family could arguably be a refugee while Herod tried to kill babies and children under two years old (Matt 2:12-15), for the rest of his ministry I don't think Jesus qualifies to be called a "refugee", so I disagree with @HoldTheRod's application of the verses he cited as meeting the modern definitions of a "refugee" or even an "internally displaced person" (IDP).

In contrast, David WAS a refugee when he had to reside in Philistines or Moab because Saul hunted him down. A better characterization is that Jesus was persecuted when preaching the gospel and at times suffered the feeling of alienation that a refugee or an IDP might feel. This is the feeling of why do the country of my birth rejects me when what I am doing is good for my people? This is similar to the feeling of Paul being depressed by the rejection of his own Jewish people in many synagogues during his missionary journeys (cf. Rom 9:3). But Jesus felt safe enough to reach out to the multitude in many towns before deliberately entering Jerusalem for the final time in his passion week. Paul was not a refugee either, in fact the Roman government recognized his citizenship and helped to protect his physical safety from the Jerusalem leaders when Paul deliberately went there! So both Jesus and Paul deliberately put themselves in harm's way for the sake of the gospel. In contrast, refugees do not deliberately put themselves in danger when there are many other safe places in the country!

Therefore the 3 verses @HoldTheRod mentions need to be read in their proper context:

  1. "being despised, rejected, and forsaken" (Isaiah 53:3-4) refers to how people rejected the servant's message (Isa 53:1) and who thought that Jesus's beatings and death on the cross were punishment for his own sins (Isa 53:4). Read the full Isaiah 53 as a beautiful portrayal of how Jesus suffered for our sins. A refugee wouldn't be able to reach the masses that gathered for his sermon on the mount, who welcomed him in Capernaum and other towns, etc.

  2. "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matt 27:46) was not the cry of a refugee. This should be read as the servant's expression of faith in God who would resurrect him and who would deem him victorious (Isa 53:11-12). Jesus only said v. 1 of Ps 22 knowing that the listeners understand that he also referred to the triumphant v. 24 (see point #2 in this article). A refugee flights for safety outside the country, but Jesus deliberately stayed in Jerusalem, letting himself be captured (!!) after the agonizing prayer at Gethsemane.

  3. "The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head" (Matt 8:20). The context here was Matt 8:18-22 regarding the cost of following Jesus. Jesus was saying that we will encounter people who reject us when preaching the gospel. Did Jesus literally have "no place even to lay his head?" That's not true, since Jesus had stayed at many friends' houses such as the house of Mary and Martha in Bethany, etc. Jesus was an itinerant preacher who moved from town to town by virtue of the nature of his work, not as a refugee. At some places he was welcomed, at other places he was rejected.

5
  • as I've said in comments on other answers, Herod was a client king nominally independent of Rome, but under their suzerainty, whereas Egypt was a Roman province. So if Jesus was born in Herod's reign, he would not be an internally displaced person. Otoh, if he was born during Quirinius' governorship of Syria (as Luke says) then Judaea would be province of Rome and he would be internally displaced instead
    – Tristan
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 18:25
  • @Tristan Wikipedia defines "internally displaced person" as "someone who is forced to leave their home but who remains within their country's borders." The changes of who is client king / governor in the time of Jesus didn't force anyone to leave their home. If Jesus didn't preach the gospel, he wouldn't get in trouble. For sure, he wasn't in trouble with secular governing authorities, but with the religious authorities who defined orthodox doctrines. Even Pilate would've freed Jesus and wasn't going to force Jesus to flee. Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 18:41
  • Jesus fleeing to Egypt as an infant (as in Matthew) would make him a refugee. By the time he started preaching, Judaea was under direct rule so any flight at that time would indeed be him being internally displaced
    – Tristan
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 19:01
  • @Tristan My answer is excluding the flight to Egypt. Excluding that incident, he was never forced to flee by Roman authorities or by the Herodian descendants who were in power in certain regions. I don't see how he is "internally displaced" when he moved from one place to another by choice. Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 19:17
  • ah sorry, somehow I missed that part, nevermind
    – Tristan
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 20:05
4

It seems unfortunate that so many automatically think of the political meaning of a refugee being a person who flees his own country (or home) to seek refuge elsewhere, as an alien - no longer of fixed abode - at the mercy of an aggressive force unless fleeing. A refugee is a victim of political or social or agricultural crises, and to become a refugee is usually drastic action, of last resort, no other course being open if freedom, or life itself is to be maintained. This being a Christianity site, and the question being about the person of Jesus Christ, the biblical view of whether Jesus became a refugee should be sought.

Some allude to his earthly parents fleeing to Egypt when Christ was little more than new-born, but that does not qualify, because Joseph was told by an angel to go there for a certain period of time before any danger became apparent, and gold had just been gifted to enable this to be done without being cast on the mercy of others. Temporarily moving to an adjoining country, not depending on the good-will of that country, hardly qualifies as becoming a refugee. Further, the Old Testament foretold this event, so that God would call his Son out of Egypt (when the would-be-murderer of Jesus had died). This was all in the foreknowledge and control of God. The infant Christ was not a victim of circumstances.

When an adult, Jesus chose when and where to go in order to avoid other attempts on his life, prior to the ordained time for him to die. But when his time had come, he set his face towards Jerusalem, knowing he would be handed over to wicked men and killed. He had spent years without a home, going around, but never fleeing to another country. He never became a refugee.

If there is one crucially important point about the Son of God, it is that he left his heavenly home in order to be born in poverty, on earth, as a man. This was all in the plan and foreknowledge of the Father and the Son. The timing of that event was meticulous so that all the situations on earth would combine to see the fulfillment of hundreds of prophecies with regard to Christ. At no stage was Jesus ever a victim of circumstances, being forced to flee or to seek refuge anywhere.

On the contrary, it is we who need to flee to Christ for refuge! The Bible states that due to the immutability of God's will, we find our refuge in Christ (Hebrews 6:19). We are as aliens in this world, as are all those who have the kind of faith in God that pleases him. Abraham set off, away from his homeland, to obey God's command, though he knew not where he was going. That didn't make him a refugee, but a sojourner in a strange country - a bit of a nomad. The key point, as Hebrews further states, is that he was seeking a better country - a heavenly one (Heb. 11:8-14). Moses left Egypt but not out of fear of the pharaoh: as seeing the invisible one who was calling him to lead his people to the promised land - which he only got to see from atop a mountain just before he died. He, too was a sojourner, a bit of a nomad, but not a refugee (Heb. 11:24-27). Jesus had nowhere to lay his head, but that did not make him a refugee.

Jesus certainly understands what it is like for people to become refugees, but that no more means he had been a refugee than his ability to understand what it is like for people to become crippled or blind must mean he became crippled or blind when on earth. The difference between Jesus and all refugees is that they cease to be in control of their circumstances, fleeing unwillingly; Jesus was always totally in control of his circumstances on earth, and willingly did everything that he did as that was the will of the Father. Never was Jesus a victim, as are refugees.

2
  • 1
    +1 Your answer's essential viewpoint is exactly like my answer. About us as "aliens in this world" it is true spiritually, but we need to be careful not to be "exiles", but to be ambassador of Christ within the cultures to make an impact, to re-live what Adam was tasked with (God's image-bearer in the world) and what Israel was called to be (light to the nations). See April 2022 Christianity Today article No, Western Christians Are Not In Exile. Commented Apr 30, 2022 at 14:31
  • @GratefulDisciple Indeed, there is agreement on various points, as also with Mike Borden's answer. Christians are certainly spiritual aliens and I recently gave another answer (as to Christians and politics) where I used that point about us being ambassadors for Christ. Must check your link now...
    – Anne
    Commented Apr 30, 2022 at 14:37
3

If a person deliberately, with planning and complete foreknowledge, enters enemy territory in order to rescue those who are being held captive there, can that person truly be considered a refugee?

This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; - 1 Timothy 1:15a

If such a one has actually created everything that there is and deigns to move about within that creation, where and from what shall refuge be sought?

Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head. - Luke 9:58b

A refugee is a victim, moved about against his will by harmful circumstance either natural or man-made. The Lord Jesus Christ was, at no point in all eternity, a victim. Yes, He was reviled and persecuted, mistreated, misunderstood, and put to death by the hands of wicked men but ... and this but is enormous ... this is exactly why He came:

Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour. - John 12:27

If being moved about within or without one's home territory is actually part of the rescue plan, how can those movement's be considered the acts of a refugee?

Jesus Christ is Lord! He was Lord before He came, Lord in His humility in flesh, and Lord evermore! No refugee is He.

5
  • 1
    It seems that you're arguing based on a definition of 'refugee' that not everyone would agree on, e.g. that it entails being moved against one's will. Merriam-webster's definition, for example, doesn't mention that requirement: "one that flees; especially: a person who flees to a foreign country or power to escape danger or persecution".
    – LarsH
    Commented Apr 30, 2022 at 18:59
  • "but for this cause came I unto this hour" - this cause is referring to his suffering and death on the cross. He did not come in order to be killed by Herod shortly after his birth. Instead, his family fled to Egypt to escape danger. Jesus did not flee from the cross, but his family did flee from Herod.
    – LarsH
    Commented Apr 30, 2022 at 19:02
  • @LarsH And if that flight to Egypt is a foreknown part of the larger rescue plan ...? Commented May 1, 2022 at 10:33
  • I believe it was. But what does that have to do with being a refugee? If you're implying that the meaning of 'refugee' includes lack of foreknowledge, from where are you getting that definition? Would you make the same argument about Jesus being crucified, that it wasn't actually crucifixion because Jesus went willingly and with foreknowledge?
    – LarsH
    Commented May 2, 2022 at 12:35
  • @LarsH No, but I would argue that His life wasn't taken from Him on the cross. We can say He was crucified but not that He was murdered because dying is why He came. We can say He moved about from place to place but not that He was a refugee because He knew He had no home here. IMO :-) Commented May 2, 2022 at 12:45
1

Indeed he was. He fled his home as an infant. It is also worth noting that he was arguably homeless throughout his ministry. "The son of man has no place to lay his head". Matthew 8:20.

1
  • Your answer could be improved with additional supporting information. Please edit to add further details, such as citations or documentation, so that others can confirm that your answer is correct. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center.
    – Community Bot
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 12:57
1

The answer comes down to if the Roman Empire was one nation or a collection of individual nations.

According to Crisis Management professionals, in order to be called a "refugee", you have to cross an international border. If you are still in your own country, trying to flee violence, you are called an Internally Displaced Person (IDP).

So Jesus fleeing the mob trying to push him off a cliff wouldn't make him a refugee, nor would not owning his own home.

Fleeing to Egypt would, if Egypt is considered a different country.

But since Israel and Egypt were both under Roman control, I think the answer is "No, he was never a refugee."

But if you consider Egypt a separate nation, thus causing him to cross an international border, then he would be.

1
  • as I've said in comments on other answers, Herod was a client king nominally independent of Rome, but under their suzerainty, whereas Egypt was a Roman province. So if Jesus was born in Herod's reign, he would not be an internally displaced person. Otoh, if he was born during Quirinius' governorship of Syria (as Luke says) then Judaea would be province of Rome and he would be internally displaced instead
    – Tristan
    Commented Apr 28, 2022 at 18:25
0

Jesus was not treated as a political refugee during his public life, and during his trial . See John 18: 28-31 :

Then the Jewish leaders took Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness they did not enter the palace, because they wanted to be able to eat the Passover. So Pilate came out to them and asked, “What charges are you bringing against this man?” “If he were not a criminal,” they replied, “we would not have handed him over to you.” Pilate said, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.”.

Here we see Pilate affirming that Jesus is  a Jew to the core. He goes on the install the writing on the cross "Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews ". What else is required to prove that Jesus was not treated as a political refugee ? 
0

As the Lord moved from town to town in order to bring the good new of Lord message, and in the same time there were some persons whose scheme to arrest him ! In the book of John 8, he speak to people and finally they get angrier and want to catch him ! He manage to hide himself and get away of these places. In fact the Lord Jesus was not refugee, just as good shepherd he travel many times for his lambs.

1
  • Welcome to Christianity.SE! and thank you for your contribution. When you get a chance, please take the tour to understand how the site works and how it is different than others. I would also recommend reading the Help Center's sections on asking and answering questions.
    – agarza
    Commented Dec 25, 2023 at 4:32
0

The concept of a refugee, according to the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, refers to a person who, due to well-founded fears of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside the country of their nationality and is unable or, owing to such fears, unwilling to return to it. With this definition in mind, we will explore whether Jesus Christ could be considered a refugee based on the biblical account in John 11:53,54.

John 11:53-54 New International Version

So from that day on they plotted to take his life. Therefore Jesus no longer moved about publicly among the people of Judea. Instead he withdrew to a region near the wilderness, to a village called Ephraim, where he stayed with his disciples.

Jesus Christ as a Refugee: John 11:53,54 The passage from John 11:53,54 narrates a critical moment in Jesus' life when Jewish authorities were plotting to kill him. Faced with this threat, Jesus no longer openly walked among the Jews but withdrew to a city called Ephraim, near the desert, where he stayed with his disciples.

Dramatic Connotations of Ephraim: The choice of Ephraim as a refuge for Jesus adds a dramatic touch to the narrative, as Ephraim was a place looked upon with disdain by the Jews of that time. This aversion can be contextualized by considering references in the Old Testament about Ephraim. For instance, in Hosea 12:12, Ephraim is described as encompassing falsehood and oppression. The history of Ephraim is intertwined with issues of idolatry and disobedience.

Historical and Biblical Aspects of Ephraim: In addition to biblical references, historical data can enrich our understanding of why Ephraim was viewed negatively. Ephraim was one of the tribes of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, often associated with rebellions against central authority in Jerusalem. The history of these tribes contributed to the distrust and hostility from the southern Jews towards places like Ephraim.

Ephraim belonged to the house of Joseph, who married Asenath, daughter of Potiphar, who was an Egyptian officer and captain of the pharaoh's guard. There was an evident linguistic difference between the Tribe of Ephraim and the other Israelites, since when the Israelites of Gilead, under the leadership of Jephthah, fought against the Tribe of Ephraim, the pronunciation of the word shibboleth as sibboleth was considered sufficient evidence to identify individuals belonging to the tribe, so that they were instantly condemned to death.

Conclusion: While Jesus' situation in Ephraim does not align perfectly with the modern definition of a refugee, we can interpret his withdrawal as a seeking of safety in the face of an imminent threat to his life. The choice of Ephraim, a controversial place, adds layers of meaning to the narrative, emphasizing the drama of the situation. The combined analysis of biblical and historical elements broadens our understanding of Jesus' decision and suggests parallels with the modern concept of seeking refuge amid imminent dangers.

You must log in to answer this question.