fbpx
Articles

Southern Baptists: A history of refugee care

/
March 15, 2016

This week marks the five-year anniversary of the Syrian Civil War. The war has its roots with the Arab Uprising, but the popular movement that overthrew dictators in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya has resulted in stalemate in Syria. As of today, control of Syria’s territory is divided between dozens of armed militias from across the political, ethnic, and theological spectrum that have formed a smaller number of shifting alliances. Territory shifts hands daily, even under the terms of the ceasefire that is now in effect.

The net result, in human terms, is the worst, most acute humanitarian disaster in a generation. Today over half of the entire population of Syria has fled their homes because of the conflict.

Of the estimated six million Syrians who have left their homes and fled Syria, Germany alone has received nearly 500,000. Another half million have left for other countries in the European Union. Turkey has received 2.7 million; Lebanon 1.5 million, and Jordan 1.4 million.

To date, the United States has received 2,819. There are, of course concerns about terrorists infiltrating the United States and our leaders should be vigilant in their oversight. But as many have demonstrated, the Refugee Admission Program is one of the least likely ways for a terrorist to try to obtain permanent residency or citizenship in the United States.

Christians know from Matthew’s gospel that Jesus tells us that the way we treat the “least of these” shows who we are in Christ. But this raises the question: what should the church do and what role should the church play in advocating for a country to fulfill commands given to the church? There are many ways of answering this question, but let us look at how the SBC has historically responded to the refugee situation in the past.

The SBC’s response to the refugee crisis after World War II

World War II produced what was then the greatest humanitarian disaster the world had known. Much of Europe had been reduced to rubble, scarred with long trench lines, and pocked by carpet bombing. At the end of the war, between seven and 11 million people had been forced to leave their homes.

By 1947, nearly two years after the war had come to an end, over a million people were still living in camps without a home. It was in this moment in 1947 that the SBC issued its “Resolution on Displaced Persons,” resolving that:

the Southern Baptist Convention go on record as favoring the admission by the United States of its fair share of those displaced people, such share amounting to 400,000 over a period of the next four years, and urge the Congress to provide emergency legislation to accomplish this result.

The SBC collectively recognized that the United States had an obligation to the rest of the world, and to Europe in particular, to do our “fair share” of creating homes and providing a homeland for those that had found themselves homeless because of the war.

The next year, Congress passed the Displaced Persons Act of 1948. It is difficult to say what role the SBC specifically played in helping this bill to be passed as many other church and religious organizations had joined in the call to accept more refugees. But suffice it to say that the SBC felt it was important to “go on record” that they were in favor of opening the doors to refugees from Europe.

There were problems with the implementation of the Displaced Persons Act, leading to a delay in the number of refugees accepted by the United States through the new refugee program. This promoted the SBC to speak again in 1949, resolving:

That the Southern Baptist Convention is in favor of the amendment of the Act to bring to the United States 400,000 such persons in four years and the removal of discriminatory clauses hampering the main purpose of the Act.

But there was something more. The onset of tensions with the Soviet Union and the early years of the Cold War had raised concerns about the compatibility of refugees from Communist countries with the American way of life. So this resolution added that “due care should be maintained in selecting individuals friendly to our form of government and likely to become good citizens.”

It took longer than four years, but by 1952, 400,000 refugees had been resettled in the United States. More than 70 percent of these were from Eastern Europe or the Soviet Union.

The Syrian Refugee Crisis Today

Today, six million Syrians are looking for a better life. Worldwide, there are more than 60 million refugees who have left their homes because of conflict or fear or persecution in their homeland.

What should the United States do? In 2015, the United States had accepted 0.042 percent of the total refugees registered by UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency. Many are asking good questions about the assimilation of refugees within America. This is an important concern as the United States should balance both compassion and security concerns.

For Christians in America, loving our neighbors is usually not easy, usually not uncomplicated, and usually not inexpensive. We must balance wisdom and compassion and make sure that we don’t become like the lawyer in the parable of the good Samaritan, who asked “who then is my neighbor?”

In the meantime, let us pray for those that are suffering, both our Christian brothers and sisters and those who, through our compassion, might be compelled to embrace Christ.

Travis Wussow

Travis Wussow serves as the Vice President for Public Policy and General Counsel. Travis led the ERLC’s first international office located in the Middle East prior to joining the Washington DC office. He received a B.B.A. in Finance from The University of Texas at Austin and a J.D. from The … Read More

Article 12: The Future of AI

We affirm that AI will continue to be developed in ways that we cannot currently imagine or understand, including AI that will far surpass many human abilities. God alone has the power to create life, and no future advancements in AI will usurp Him as the Creator of life. The church has a unique role in proclaiming human dignity for all and calling for the humane use of AI in all aspects of society.

We deny that AI will make us more or less human, or that AI will ever obtain a coequal level of worth, dignity, or value to image-bearers. Future advancements in AI will not ultimately fulfill our longings for a perfect world. While we are not able to comprehend or know the future, we do not fear what is to come because we know that God is omniscient and that nothing we create will be able to thwart His redemptive plan for creation or to supplant humanity as His image-bearers.

Genesis 1; Isaiah 42:8; Romans 1:20-21; 5:2; Ephesians 1:4-6; 2 Timothy 1:7-9; Revelation 5:9-10

Article 11: Public Policy

We affirm that the fundamental purposes of government are to protect human beings from harm, punish those who do evil, uphold civil liberties, and to commend those who do good. The public has a role in shaping and crafting policies concerning the use of AI in society, and these decisions should not be left to those who develop these technologies or to governments to set norms.

We deny that AI should be used by governments, corporations, or any entity to infringe upon God-given human rights. AI, even in a highly advanced state, should never be delegated the governing authority that has been granted by an all-sovereign God to human beings alone. 

Romans 13:1-7; Acts 10:35; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 10: War

We affirm that the use of AI in warfare should be governed by love of neighbor and the principles of just war. The use of AI may mitigate the loss of human life, provide greater protection of non-combatants, and inform better policymaking. Any lethal action conducted or substantially enabled by AI must employ 5 human oversight or review. All defense-related AI applications, such as underlying data and decision-making processes, must be subject to continual review by legitimate authorities. When these systems are deployed, human agents bear full moral responsibility for any actions taken by the system.

We deny that human agency or moral culpability in war can be delegated to AI. No nation or group has the right to use AI to carry out genocide, terrorism, torture, or other war crimes.

Genesis 4:10; Isaiah 1:16-17; Psalm 37:28; Matthew 5:44; 22:37-39; Romans 13:4

Article 9: Security

We affirm that AI has legitimate applications in policing, intelligence, surveillance, investigation, and other uses supporting the government’s responsibility to respect human rights, to protect and preserve human life, and to pursue justice in a flourishing society.

We deny that AI should be employed for safety and security applications in ways that seek to dehumanize, depersonalize, or harm our fellow human beings. We condemn the use of AI to suppress free expression or other basic human rights granted by God to all human beings.

Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14

Article 8: Data & Privacy

We affirm that privacy and personal property are intertwined individual rights and choices that should not be violated by governments, corporations, nation-states, and other groups, even in the pursuit of the common good. While God knows all things, it is neither wise nor obligatory to have every detail of one’s life open to society.

We deny the manipulative and coercive uses of data and AI in ways that are inconsistent with the love of God and love of neighbor. Data collection practices should conform to ethical guidelines that uphold the dignity of all people. We further deny that consent, even informed consent, although requisite, is the only necessary ethical standard for the collection, manipulation, or exploitation of personal data—individually or in the aggregate. AI should not be employed in ways that distort truth through the use of generative applications. Data should not be mishandled, misused, or abused for sinful purposes to reinforce bias, strengthen the powerful, or demean the weak.

Exodus 20:15, Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 40:13-14; Matthew 10:16 Galatians 6:2; Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 John 1:7 

Article 7: Work

We affirm that work is part of God’s plan for human beings participating in the cultivation and stewardship of creation. The divine pattern is one of labor and rest in healthy proportion to each other. Our view of work should not be confined to commercial activity; it must also include the many ways that human beings serve each other through their efforts. AI can be used in ways that aid our work or allow us to make fuller use of our gifts. The church has a Spirit-empowered responsibility to help care for those who lose jobs and to encourage individuals, communities, employers, and governments to find ways to invest in the development of human beings and continue making vocational contributions to our lives together.

We deny that human worth and dignity is reducible to an individual’s economic contributions to society alone. Humanity should not use AI and other technological innovations as a reason to move toward lives of pure leisure even if greater social wealth creates such possibilities.

Genesis 1:27; 2:5; 2:15; Isaiah 65:21-24; Romans 12:6-8; Ephesians 4:11-16

Article 6: Sexuality

We affirm the goodness of God’s design for human sexuality which prescribes the sexual union to be an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage.

We deny that the pursuit of sexual pleasure is a justification for the development or use of AI, and we condemn the objectification of humans that results from employing AI for sexual purposes. AI should not intrude upon or substitute for the biblical expression of sexuality between a husband and wife according to God’s design for human marriage.

Genesis 1:26-29; 2:18-25; Matthew 5:27-30; 1 Thess 4:3-4

Article 5: Bias

We affirm that, as a tool created by humans, AI will be inherently subject to bias and that these biases must be accounted for, minimized, or removed through continual human oversight and discretion. AI should be designed and used in such ways that treat all human beings as having equal worth and dignity. AI should be utilized as a tool to identify and eliminate bias inherent in human decision-making.

We deny that AI should be designed or used in ways that violate the fundamental principle of human dignity for all people. Neither should AI be used in ways that reinforce or further any ideology or agenda, seeking to subjugate human autonomy under the power of the state.

Micah 6:8; John 13:34; Galatians 3:28-29; 5:13-14; Philippians 2:3-4; Romans 12:10

Article 4: Medicine

We affirm that AI-related advances in medical technologies are expressions of God’s common grace through and for people created in His image and that these advances will increase our capacity to provide enhanced medical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions as we seek to care for all people. These advances should be guided by basic principles of medical ethics, including beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, which are all consistent with the biblical principle of loving our neighbor.

We deny that death and disease—effects of the Fall—can ultimately be eradicated apart from Jesus Christ. Utilitarian applications regarding healthcare distribution should not override the dignity of human life. Fur- 3 thermore, we reject the materialist and consequentialist worldview that understands medical applications of AI as a means of improving, changing, or completing human beings.

Matthew 5:45; John 11:25-26; 1 Corinthians 15:55-57; Galatians 6:2; Philippians 2:4

Article 3: Relationship of AI & Humanity

We affirm the use of AI to inform and aid human reasoning and moral decision-making because it is a tool that excels at processing data and making determinations, which often mimics or exceeds human ability. While AI excels in data-based computation, technology is incapable of possessing the capacity for moral agency or responsibility.

We deny that humans can or should cede our moral accountability or responsibilities to any form of AI that will ever be created. Only humanity will be judged by God on the basis of our actions and that of the tools we create. While technology can be created with a moral use in view, it is not a moral agent. Humans alone bear the responsibility for moral decision making.

Romans 2:6-8; Galatians 5:19-21; 2 Peter 1:5-8; 1 John 2:1

Article 2: AI as Technology

We affirm that the development of AI is a demonstration of the unique creative abilities of human beings. When AI is employed in accordance with God’s moral will, it is an example of man’s obedience to the divine command to steward creation and to honor Him. We believe in innovation for the glory of God, the sake of human flourishing, and the love of neighbor. While we acknowledge the reality of the Fall and its consequences on human nature and human innovation, technology can be used in society to uphold human dignity. As a part of our God-given creative nature, human beings should develop and harness technology in ways that lead to greater flourishing and the alleviation of human suffering.

We deny that the use of AI is morally neutral. It is not worthy of man’s hope, worship, or love. Since the Lord Jesus alone can atone for sin and reconcile humanity to its Creator, technology such as AI cannot fulfill humanity’s ultimate needs. We further deny the goodness and benefit of any application of AI that devalues or degrades the dignity and worth of another human being. 

Genesis 2:25; Exodus 20:3; 31:1-11; Proverbs 16:4; Matthew 22:37-40; Romans 3:23

Article 1: Image of God

We affirm that God created each human being in His image with intrinsic and equal worth, dignity, and moral agency, distinct from all creation, and that humanity’s creativity is intended to reflect God’s creative pattern.

We deny that any part of creation, including any form of technology, should ever be used to usurp or subvert the dominion and stewardship which has been entrusted solely to humanity by God; nor should technology be assigned a level of human identity, worth, dignity, or moral agency.

Genesis 1:26-28; 5:1-2; Isaiah 43:6-7; Jeremiah 1:5; John 13:34; Colossians 1:16; 3:10; Ephesians 4:24