One of the fascinating things about following leftists on social media is that they are lemmings. The order goes out that all must put up a specific meme and, suddenly, all do. That’s why my long-ago high school classmates (99% of whom are leftists), suddenly started posting a variation of a meme insisting that Leviticus—a part of the Bible that is so dear to conservative hearts—mandates accepting illegal aliens. Naturally, these leftists, who wouldn’t recognize the Bible if it bit them, are completely wrong.
The most popular version of this meme, the one with almost 6 million views, came from Devin Duke:
A Bible lesson for MAGA: pic.twitter.com/drbEnHfzeu
— Devin Duke (@sirDukeDevin) July 1, 2025
Faced with this tweet, the X-poster who goes under the name @amuse wrote an essay explaining to Duke and anyone else who cares to become actually informed to explain that Moses, in relaying God’s strictures, was not mandating the end of borders, with the entire world flooding America’s welfare and DEI state.
I’m not going to waste my time explaining to my old high school classmates how the Bible works because I know I’ll just get irrelevancies in return. If I checkmate them on immigration, they’ll strike back with racism; if I challenge racism and they have no response, I’ll be flooded with climate change arguments. You know what I mean because I’m sure you’ve been there, too.
However, in case you find yourself in conversation with people who are genuinely interested in learning, here’s some of what @amuse has to say about how the Democrats, playing the part of the Devil in this drama, are quoting scripture to their own ends. (And no, just as Trump was not being antisemitic when he used the expression “shylock” to refer to a moneylender, something mindlessly common in his youth, I’m not being antisemitic when I use a phrase lobbed at Shylock himself in The Merchant of Venice.)
These verses instruct the Israelites on how to treat gerim, or sojourners, resident aliens who, crucially, accepted the laws of Israel and lived peaceably among the people. These were not foreign invaders, illegal squatters, or enemies of the covenant. They were, to borrow a modern analogy, lawful immigrants or refugees under the jurisdiction of Mosaic law. Leviticus 24:22 reinforces this distinction: “You shall have the same law for the foreigner and for the native-born.” In other words, the ger was held to the same moral and legal standards as the Israelite.
The key point is that these foreigners, living in a time before modern immigration laws, still had to follow immigration rules: They needed permission to be on the land and had to abide by Jewish moral and legal rules. Those who sought to upend Jewish values were subject to a very different type of mandate from God:
Exodus 23:33 is unambiguous: “They shall not dwell in your land, lest they make you sin against Me.” The context here is conquest and settlement. God commands Israel to drive out the Canaanite nations to prevent idolatry and moral corruption. This is not mere xenophobia, it is covenantal protection. Numbers 33:55 continues the theme: “If you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land... those you allow to remain will become barbs in your eyes and thorns in your sides.” The biblical model is not integration without conditions but separation when values and loyalties conflict.
Deuteronomy 17:15 explicitly prohibits appointing a foreigner as king: “You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother.” This is theocratic nationalism, not globalism. It is the recognition that self-governance requires a shared moral and cultural framework. Deuteronomy 28 goes further, warning that disobedience to God will result in foreigners rising in power over the Israelites: “The foreigner who resides among you will rise higher and higher, but you will sink lower and lower... they will be the head, and you will be the tail.” Foreign rule is not a blessing; it is a curse.
What’s fundamentally important here is that the Bible makes it clear that welcoming foreigners into one’s land must not be a suicide pact. Old Testament-era immigrants are welcome only to the extent that the Jewish nation thrives.
That’s the same way that conservatives, including those who take the Bible very seriously, feel about immigration to America: It’s not a suicide pact. Just as God told the Israelites that sojourners were to be treated well if they were not a threat to the institutions, we conservatives accept legal immigration, which, when properly applied, ensures that America is not conquered.
Thus, legal immigration means that we’re not swarmed by 10 million unvetted people in four years. It means we don’t give student visas and green cards to people open about their loathing for America and their loyalty to other nations and values. And it most certainly means that we don’t give people like Zohran Mamdani citizenship. Criminals, freeloaders, communists, caliphate-seeking Islamists, etc. all threaten our values and national security and today, as was the case approximately 3,400 years ago, they need to leave.
Read all of @amuse’s essay, because it’s very good, covering both the New Testament and rabbinical law. But the key point is that, as always, Democrats are wrong, and conservative immigration policies are entirely consistent with Biblical mandates.
Image created using ChatGPT.