Many anticipate that 2025 will be the year that serious and much-needed debate around immigration takes place in Western countries. Central to this discussion will be a proper understanding of what a “nation” truly is. Is a nation defined by people and place, or does it rest on a shared commitment to ideas, principles, and values? How, then, should we define the word?
Defining the Nation
Though the term has evolved in recent decades, both biblically and historically, nations have been seen as an extension of the family. From the dawn of civilization, nations have been understood primarily as groups of people united by a common lineage, living together in a shared territory, speaking a common language, and abiding by a collective system of laws.
The word “nation” originates from the Latin term “natio,” which initially referred to a group of people with a common origin or ancestry, essentially a tribe, breed, or race.
Over time, the term evolved, with “nation” appearing in Middle English around the 14th century as “nacioun,” meaning a group of people with shared ancestry and language. This was borrowed from Old French “nacion,” which also referred to birth, rank, descendants, or country. Thus, the concept of a nation has historically been closely tied to the idea of shared origin or birth.
Nations in the Bible
In the Bible, the “Table of Nations” in Genesis 10 lists 70 nations that arose after the Great Flood. Many of these nations were named after common ancestors who descended from one of Noah’s three sons—Shem, Ham, and Japheth. These nations settled in specific regions, spoke distinct languages, and developed unique systems of authority under which they lived.
Similarly, the nation of Israel provides further insight into the biblical and historic concept of nationhood. Israel’s identity was shaped by a distinct ancestry, defined by the descendants of Abraham, not Haran; Isaac, not Ishmael; and Jacob, not Esau (Deut. 26:5). The promise of Israel’s place in the land depended on their honouring not just the immediate previous generation but all those before them, whose faithfulness to God had accumulated their blessed inheritance (Ex. 20:12; Deut. 32:7). As such, the nation of Israel, defined as the descendants of Israel, shared a common heritage, language, land, and legal system.
This biblical understanding of nationhood forms a foundational aspect of the Mosaic Law and underpins directives like the requirement that Israel’s king be chosen “from among [their] brothers” (Deut. 17:15). This law alone presupposes that Israel is a nation defined by shared ethnic lineage. If Israel’s ethno-centric concept of nationhood were inherently immoral, it would not have been divinely instituted for Israel in a law that the Apostle Paul would later describe as “holy, righteous, and good” (Rom. 7:12).
Nations the Providential Work of God
It is often said, “Nations do not matter because God created one race, the human race.” While it is true that God made all people from one man, this does not imply that we should only recognize one global family group or nation called the “Adamites.”
As the Apostle Paul explained, God has been providentially working throughout history to form distinct families and nations, determining their allotted periods and dwelling places (Acts 17:26-27).
As such, throughout Scripture, God often interacted with people based on their lineage, blessing or cursing entire groups depending on the obedience or disobedience of common ancestors (Gen. 9:25-27; 17:7; Num. 14:18; 1 Sam. 2:30-31). This principle is reflected in the Ten Commandments, where the well-being of a people is linked to the faithfulness of their shared heritage (Ex. 20:5-6; Deut. 5:9-10).
The Challenge of Modern Globalism
In recent centuries, it has been argued that the preservation of family and national distinctions is a primary cause of global conflicts. As a result, many today advocate for mass migration as a way to weaken national identities by diluting distinct and defining family groups and cultures. Those who resist this effort, especially if they are identified as “white,” are often quickly labelled as “conspiracy theorists,” “racists,” and “supremacists.” However, Scripture views the displacement of a nation’s defining families by foreign influences in a negative light, even describing it as a “curse” (Deut. 28:43).
Migration undermines nationhood when newcomers either lack the intention or the means to integrate into the host nation’s defining family. When large numbers of foreigners arrive, true assimilation becomes nearly impossible, as many preserve their distinct identities and marry within their own ethnic groups.
This leads to the creation of “nations-within-nations,” reducing the influence of the host nation’s defining ethnos within its own borders. Consequently, the most multicultural nations often experience the greatest social fragmentation and division.
Biblical Principles and National Distinctions
Within the church, some have argued that national distinctions are abolished by the Gospel, citing Galatians 3:28, which states that “in Christ” there is neither Jew nor Greek. However, if being “one in Christ” removes all ethnic distinctions between Jew and Greek, then it must also remove distinctions between male and female. Yet, distinctions between male and female remain “in Christ” (Eph. 5:22-33), as do distinctions among nations, tribes, ethnicities, and languages (Rev. 7:9).
Others argue that as members of the household of God, earthly distinctions are now rendered irrelevant. However, this misunderstands the purpose behind God’s use of earthly concepts to convey heavenly realities. These concepts are not meant to replace the earthly distinctions, but rather to emphasize their significance.
We have a heavenly spouse (Rev. 17:7-9), but that does not absolve us of our responsibilities to our earthly spouses (Eph. 5:22-28). We have a heavenly Father (Matt. 6:9), but that does not diminish our duties to our earthly fathers (Eph. 6:4). We are part of a heavenly household (Eph. 2:19), but that does not negate our responsibilities to our earthly households (1 Tim. 3:4). We have heavenly kindred (Eph. 1:5), but that does not excuse us from our duties to our earthly family (1 Tim. 5:8). We belong to a heavenly nation (1 Pet. 2:9), but that does not override our responsibilities to our earthly nations (Jer. 29:7; 1 Tim. 2:1-3). We hold heavenly citizenship (Phil. 3:20), but that does snot absolve us of our earthly citizenships (Rom. 13:1-2).
God does not replace earthly realities with spiritual ones. Rather, He uses earthly realities to help us grasp spiritual truths that we do not have the mental categories to comprehend. It is precisely because these earthly realities are so valuable that God employs them to help us conceive of and appreciate spiritual realities. God understands our loves and natural affections. He uses them, redirects them, and refines them, only replacing them when the object of our love and affection is misplaced or out of order.
The Necessary Hierarchy of Affections
But are our affections out of order when they are oriented toward family or nation? As finite beings, humans are incapable of loving all people equally. While Christians are commanded to love others, the love required of us is not a levelling love that erases all distinctions and priorities. We are called to love God above all else. A husband should love his wife uniquely and more deeply than he loves his neighbour’s wife. Parents are meant to love their children more and in a distinct way than they love other children.
As such, our ability to love and understand one another is limited. Therefore, the Bible presents a hierarchy of affections (Ordo Amoris), and if this order is disrupted or inverted, it will negatively impact all other relationships.
If loving your spouse leads to neglecting your love for God, you are not truly loving your spouse. If loving your children causes you to neglect your love for your spouse, you are not truly loving your children. If loving your fellow Christian means neglecting your love for your family, you are not truly loving your fellow Christian. If loving the foreigner results in neglecting your love for your neighbour, you are not truly loving the foreigner.
By following God’s divine order, our love is properly directed and blesses those within our sphere of responsibility. As such, family ties—and by extension, national ties—remain important. This is not a negative aspect of life; rather, it is an inherent part of the human experience. It is not a sinful desire to be suppressed, but a good and godly desire to be redeemed for the benefit of those we are called and capable of caring for.
As J.C. Ryle wrote in Practical Religion:
“Next to the grace of God, I see no principle which unites people so much in this sinful world as family sentiments. Community of blood is a most powerful tie. It was a fine saying of an American naval officer, when his men insisted on helping the English sailors in fighting the Taku forts in China, ‘I cannot help it: blood is thicker than water.’ I have often observed that people will stand up for their relatives, merely because they are their relatives, and refuse to hear a word against them, even when they have no sympathy with their tastes and ways. Anything which helps to keep up the family sentiment ought to be commended.”
It is not wrong to have a special love for your family, tribe, and nation. What is wrong is implying that this natural affection either justifies or requires hatred for those outside of your family, tribe, or nation. The Apostle Paul expressed a special love for his kin according to the flesh (Rom. 9:2-3), yet no one could ever accuse him of hating the Romans (Rom. 1:14-15), Greeks (1 Thess. 2:8), or Celts (Gal. 4:19).
Biblical Models of Immigration and Nationhood
But what about foreigners who marry into a nation or seek to become part of another nation? While nations have always been defined by a dominant, distinct ethnos, this did not mean that foreigners were always excluded; rather, sometimes immigrants could join a nation if they adopted its customs, culture, people, and religion. Examples such as Rahab the Canaanite and Uriah the Hittite demonstrate that assimilation was possible even within Israel. However, foreigners were expected to integrate into the dominant, defining family of the nation—not maintain separate identities or create a distinct “ethnos-within-ethnos.”
The story of Ruth the Moabite exemplifies biblical immigration. Ruth, though always described as a Moabite, fully integrated into Israel through her marriage to Boaz and her renunciation of her former people, culture and religion (Ruth 1:16-17; Deut. 23:3-4). Within a few generations, her descendants were fully integrated Israelites with no divided loyalties, including Israel’s royal Davidic line.
Ruth’s declaration—“Your people shall be my people, and your God my God” (Ruth 1:16)—is a model of assimilation that respects the host nation’s integrity and religious commitment. This contrasts with modern trends, where many migrants maintain their separate identities, and instead choose, at best, to identify as “hyphenated citizens.”
However, there were no hyphenated citizens in Israel. Once the nation of Israel was established, anyone joining that nation was required to renounce their former religions and adopt Israel’s faith, culture, and practices. Additionally, all residing in Israel, both native and foreigner, were subject to the same laws as native Israelites (Lev. 24:22).
To prevent conflicting loyalties arising from divided ancestry, foreigners permitted to migrate to Israel were initially excluded from certain privileges and positions of power (Deut. 17:15; Num. 10; 18:7), and were even prohibited from owning land (Deut. 23:3-6; Lev. 25:10, 35-37). After several generations, some descendants of immigrants could become fully integrated into the congregation, not as hyphenated citizens with divided interests and loyalties, but as complete members of Israel.
Conclusion
Earthly nations and identities, properly ordered under God, play a vital role in His providential plan. They reflect the bonds of family and lineage, which are central to the structure of human society, and reflect heavenly realities we otherwise could not comprehend. What’s more, honouring these bonds maintains national unity and preserves the integrity and blessings that nations inherit through generations of obedience to the Gospel.
Transethnicism, the modern notion that people ought to be able to move about the world and identify as any “nation” they wish, attempts to inherit the blessings of obedience without the obedience itself. It is, in fact, the inverse of the Great Commission.
Christendom had a responsibility to export the Gospel, not to import disobedience. The Church was instructed to go into the world and bless the nations. They were to achieve this through the Gospel. However, the Western world has largely done the opposite. As a result, nations in the West have allowed the non-Christian world in, undermining long-established Christian institutions, morals, and laws, while introducing the curse of false religions and destructive cultures. What the Western world needs to remember is that blessings stem from generations of faithfulness to Christ, not the dirt Christendom was built on.
Understanding nations as extensions of family helps preserve both national integrity and social unity. Efforts to dissolve these distinctions through migration undermines the divine order that upholds the blessings of nationhood. True unity, as Scripture teaches, comes from honouring both earthly and heavenly identities without erasing the distinctions that shape them.
For a meaningful discussion on migration, we must acknowledge that nations require a distinct defining ethnos; otherwise, a nation’s identity risks being reduced to nothing more than the land their citizens live on.
