Advent and Immigration: What’s the deal with Matthew 2 and REFUGEES?

Around this time of year, we read through the different pieces of the nativity story, and often we romanticize these stories of silent sleeping babies, and celebratory shepherds, and kings. However, there are other aspects of the stories surrounding Jesus early years that are often left out of the Christmas narrative for our children. The massacre of the innocents is one of these. However, over the past few years, we have seen an increase in the use of Matthew 2, to push different ideas related to immigration, refugees, and documentation.

But what does Matthew 2 actually say about refugees? What do these verses tell us about the circumstances of a Roman-occupied world? What could making a simple change in how we go about our reading do for the world around us today

THE STORY: Matthew 2

After Jesus was born, magi from the east came to King Herod in Judea. While there, the chief priests and scribes searched the prophets and discovered that the long-prophesied Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem. Herod, a Roman puppet king, became paranoid about losing his power and sought to protect it by asking the magi to return with specific details about this newborn Messiah.

However, the magi did not return, having been warned in a dream. This enraged Herod. Lacking a direct target, he ordered that all male children two years old and under be killed. But Joseph, Mary, and Jesus, also warned in a dream, fled to Egypt and remained there until Herod died a few years later.

THE CONTEXT: Augustus establishes the Roman Empire

To understand Matthew 2, we need to understand the world surrounding it. As we read in Luke 2, Caesar Augustus had recently established the Roman Empire. During this short period of perceived peace, he ordered a census to be taken throughout the empire.

At the time, Augustus ruled over fourteen provinces, each with its own governor. These provinces were required to submit taxes, allow the occupation of Roman troops, and provide men for the army.

Culturally, however, provinces were largely allowed to continue as normal. Outside of language and certain imperial laws, local customs remained intact. Only those who desired Roman citizenship were required to fully assimilate. For most people, if you left the empire alone, it would largely leave you alone.

Herod the Great maintained full local control over Judea. This political dynamic caused much of the turmoil we see throughout the Gospel narratives. The majority of Jews who became Roman citizens were either enlisted soldiers, viewed by others as fighting for their oppressor, government workers, hated for taxing their own people, or enslaved individuals seeking freedom through the empire.

This divide also lay at the heart of many of Jesus’ interactions with the Pharisees, who were attempting to protect their community from assimilation under an imperial overlord.

THE ARGUMENTS

The controversy now is how this story is being applied, or misapplied, to today’s current political climate. Specifically, how should we classify the holy family in this passage? Were they refugees, immigrants, or simple travelers? Were they documented or undocumented? 

For this post, we want to look at the three most common arguments we have seen over the past few years, regarding the family's status as refugees and whether or not they were documented. 

ARGUMENT: The family was not refugees, because Egypt had a Jewish population there.

This argument misses key elements of both the narrative in Matthew 2 and the definition of the word refugee. According to the text, the family left Judea for Egypt because Jesus was the target of a political assassination. They were not traveling to visit relatives or seek opportunity; Joseph was taking his family to a foreign land to protect his child from state‑sanctioned violence.

This reading does not add to the text like many claim, but instead takes the danger seriously. Herod was prepared to murder hundreds of innocent children to preserve what little power he believed he had. This is where the definition of a refugee becomes important: “a person who flees to a foreign country to escape danger or persecution.”

Conclusion: According to the text, Joseph, Mary, and Jesus clearly fit the definition of refugees: “fleeing their homeland to escape political persecution." By modern terms, Jesus can rightly be described as a refugee.

ARGUMENT: Egypt was part of Rome, and therefore, the family was not a migrant or refugee family.

This argument reflects a misunderstanding of the Roman world. It is often suggested that traveling from Judea to Egypt was like traveling from Maryland to Florida, remaining within the same political system. Historically, this comparison does not hold.

While both Judea and Egypt were under Roman occupation, they were distinct provinces with different leadership, challenges, and cultural expectations. Rome ruled through local powers and governors, not through a uniform national identity. As a result, the holy family would have faced the realities of displacement in a foreign land, especially while fleeing violence.

Conclusion: Judea and Egypt, though both under Roman control, were politically and culturally distinct regions. The family’s move as described In the narrative, still constitutes forced migration, making them refugees.

ARGUMENT: The family was documented and therefore “legal migrants.”

At first glance, this argument appears plausible. Luke 2 tells us that Joseph and Mary traveled to Bethlehem to register for the census. However, this argument collapses under closer examination of both the Roman world and the biblical text.

Although Judea and Egypt were under Roman occupation, their inhabitants were not Roman citizens. They remained citizens of their own regions. Being registered in Judea did not grant legal standing in Egypt. The census itself was imperial, not regional, and primarily concerned with taxation.

Furthermore, Matthew 2 makes clear that Herod lacked specific information about the family. He did not know their identities or whereabouts, which is why he relied on the magi and later resorted to mass violence when they failed to return.

Conclusion: If Herod had no records of the family, Egypt would not have either. While the family may have been registered for Roman taxation, this does not mean they possessed documentation granting lawful residence in Egypt.

DOES MATTHEW 2 DEAL WITH REFUGEES?

Ultimately, these discussions should not matter that much in how we read the story. The nativity as a whole should show us the need to welcome others into our lives and be intentional in investing in others, just as Immanuel does with us. 

However, this conversation has become increasingly important as Matthew 2 is repeatedly weaponized for political purposes. Attempts to narrowly redefine refugee, migrant, and stranger often function to justify indifference or mistreatment. Because those looking to redefine refugees and legal migration in Rome are also looking to redefine it here. 

This is why, when reports of ICE abuse emerge or when politicians disparage entire nations or ethnicities, comment sections so often fixate on legal status rather than the image of God in the person affected. Those who turn Matthew 2 into a tool for exclusion are ultimately echoing the same question posed to Jesus: “Who is my neighbor?”

LUKE 2, MATTHEW 2 & MATTHEW 25

This Advent, rather than reading the Christmas story as justification for turning others away, we might instead read it through the lens of Matthew 25. When we encounter the crowded inns of Luke 2, rather than condemning those who had no room, we might reflect on the families we exclude through our own conversations about immigration within the Church.

When we read about the holy family fleeing Herod’s violence in Matthew 2, can we remember those escaping violence today, even when they hold different beliefs or identities than our own? 

This Advent, may we read the story of Immanuel in light of his own words: that how we treat the stranger, the vulnerable, and the displaced is how we treat him.

What difference might this make as we approach the new year?

---

This blog corresponds with an episode of this year's #12DaysofMisfits. Check out the full breakdown of Jeremiah 31 and the prophecy about the events of Matthew 2 now! https://youtu.be/gj3OL5-BkNo?si=E7jMsMiBk7PM8wN6

This post was written by Andrew Fouts. The founder and main content creator for Ministry Misfits. He also serves as one of the directors and writers for KFM Broadcasting Network.

This post was edited by Joseph Dea. Joe is a writer for his own blog at https://kfmbroadcasting.wixstudio.com/buddywalkwithjesus and is one of the directors and writers for KFM Broadcasting.

This blog is being cross-posted from the Ministry Misfits blog. Check out more resources from the Misfits at www.ministrymisfits.com