SERMON: “Favoritism in Church” (James 2:1–7)
“Favoritism in Church” (James 2:1–7)
Series: “James:
True Faith Works” #10 Text: James 2:1–7
By: Shaun
Marksbury Date: December 15, 2024
Venue: Living
Water Baptist Church Occasion: PM Service
I.
Introduction
Over the years, one of the most common complaints visitors
will have coming to churches is that there are cliques. Whether at fellowship meals or during
services, visitors often feel excluded when they see people forming tight-knit
groups that seem impenetrable. Visitors
pick up fast whether they are welcome!
This is true of long-term members, too. I remember hearing about one Christian who
constantly reached out to other believers at a church, offering to go to dinner
with them and help them with acts of service.
People from the wealthy part of town never responded to him, though, and
they made up a large portion of the leadership structure of the church. They not only rebuffed him for years, they called
his hospitality into question when he was being ordained! They didn’t let people outside of their
social tier into their world. He
eventually left the church, and people wondered why he and others never saw the
church as friendly.
It's natural that you will sometimes feel closer to some
people than others, but Christians should be open to all. We can see this highlighted in this
text. Remember, these are Christians who
fled Jerusalem because of persecution there, but they have tried to settle in
other areas. They need money, so some were
tempted to show favoritism to people with means while ignoring the poor. This is sinful behavior that shouldn’t be
tolerated in the church.
Churches can have a problem with partiality. We don’t want that said of us, though. So, today, we’re going to identify the problem
with partiality in church, and then we’ll see the people of partiality. Let’s consider the first of those.
II.
Identifying the Problem of Partiality in the Church
(vv. 1–4)
My brethren, do
not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of
personal favoritism. For if a man comes
into your assembly with a gold ring and dressed in fine clothes, and there also
comes in a poor man in dirty clothes, and you pay special attention to the one
who is wearing the fine clothes, and say, “You sit here in a good place,” and
you say to the poor man, “You stand over there, or sit down by my footstool,” have
you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil
motives?
We see James identify the problem of favoritism in these
verses. He begins with a command, but he
again speaks with gentleness. The ones
who may be tempted to violate these principles are brothers and sisters in the Lord.
Yet, he must address a clear problem in the church. James uses the Greek word which literally
means “to lift someone’s face,” as in waiting to pass judgment until you see
the person. This is dealing with someone
“with respect of persons”
(KJV). One lexicon defines this as
“to make unjust distinctions between people by treating one person better than
another—‘to show favoritism, to be partial, partiality.’ ”[1] As such, the phrase “personal favoritism”
refers to showing undue preference to someone based on superficial criteria
such as wealth, social status, or appearance.
This type of favoritism is inconsistent with the character
of God and opposes the faith of our Lord.
Even the religious leaders recognized this of Jesus, saying to Him, “Teacher,
we know that You speak and teach correctly, and You are not partial to any, but
teach the way of God in truth” (Luke 20:21).
Even though He kept the law perfectly, He never played the game of
political correctness. He went to places
the religious elite of His day disdained so He could preach to those in
need. He did not practice the false
traditions of which the Pharisees prided themselves, not fearing men, nor seeking
favor to make His message more palatable.
On the flip side, Jesus did not only hang out with
drunkards and swindlers; He also went into the homes of Pharisees. Peter later understood that the Lord “is not
one to show partiality” (Acts 10:34). James
later warns here, “But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as
transgressors” (v. 9). An attitude of
partiality is sinful.
We should seek to hold fast to this faith. Incidentally, the phrase “faith in our
glorious Lord Jesus Christ” is an early affirmation of the sovereignty and
deity of Jesus and the importance to placing faith in Him. Stephen called God the “God of glory” (Acts
7:2). This application to Christ is an
affirmation of His deity. Paul will
later refer to the crucified “Lord of Glory” (1 Cor. 2:8), another hint that
James and Paul are not at odds theologically.
When converted, the sinner has the glory of God shed abroad in his heart
(2 Cor 4:4–6). Thus, we should seek to
live according to the glory He has shared with us in this world.
In v. 2, we see where this happened. James also uses the Greek word we
transliterate synagogue here — though the translations choose to translate it “assembly”
(which is what it means). Later, James
also uses the word church (5:4), which is why the more general sense of
“gathering together” is used here. Keep
in mind that this was the earliest epistle, and these Jewish Christians would
have appreciated the concept of a “synagogue” for corporate worship. Later, the writer of Hebrews will use the
word to speak of Christian gatherings (Heb. 10:25). How Christians behave in the gathering does
reflect upon the image of God, either for good or ill — and there was
partiality in the gathering.
Why would someone show partiality? The temptation might be to give deference to
the rich Jews or even to Gentiles, as this passage highlights. James illustrates the issue with a
hypothetical scenario, and he sets up a conditional statement that runs from v.
2 through v. 4. His contrast is stark.
First, a visitor (maybe a Jewish person) comes in wearing gold
rings and fine clothing. In fact, the
term means “shimmering clothes” or “bright clothes” (LSB). As part of the mockery of Jesus, Herod
dressed Jesus in a “glorious robe” (same word for “bright,” Luke 23:11). Rings were often a mark of wealth and power,
and the vibrancy of the clothing speaks of cleanliness and means. James does not say “man of wealth” or
“influential man,” for the adornment speaks volumes.
Another man then enters, perhaps also a Jewish visitor. Unfortunately, it’s obvious he is poor, for
he is wearing filthy, shabby garments. The poor beggar would not have a change of
clothes, nor the means of keeping his current garments clean and in good
repair. Stains and tears might speak of
a life on the street. His clothes
contrast the gloss of the rich man’s clothes.
The congregation’s reaction reveals the problem. Christians should appreciate the
situation. Scripture presents us all as
having dirty clothing, but in the gospel, receiving clean clothing. For instance, Zechariah 3:3–4 says, “Now
Joshua was clothed with filthy garments and standing before the angel. He spoke and said to those who were standing
before him, saying, ‘Remove the filthy garments from him.’ Again he said to him, ‘See, I have taken your
iniquity away from you and will clothe you with festal robes.’ ” This bespeaks the gospel.
Unfortunately, the church only warmly welcomes the rich man. In v. 3, we read that they “pay special
attention to the one who is wearing the fine clothes.” The idea here is to look upon with favor, and
then invite him to a favorable seat. It
is the same term Mary used in Luke 1:48, that the Lord had “looked upon” her
humble estate and blessed her. It is
also the same word when the man cries out for Jesus to “look upon” his son (Luke
9:38). The problem here is not looking
and noticing, but looking with regard.
Thus, they offer him the best seat — because of limited seating, most people
would have to it on the floor.
Understand that this is expected behavior. These are the people given the best seat in
the synagogues and the place of honor at feasts, and they agape love them (Matt.
23:6). I was warned in seminary to
question churches carefully during the hiring process: sometimes, a family with
the most money will wield more power and influence than even the pastor. There are those in the church who have the
power, and they know it.
The poor man must , while relegating the poor man to an
inferior position, either on the floor with the other unimportant people or worse. To sit at ones feet shows dominance. Parents and teachers first place children at
their feet. When the Lord returns, He
will place His enemies and the nations of the world at His feet. This also forgets the smells of the day that
must inhabit the first-century foot. Thus,
inviting the poor to sit by the footstool was hardly a desirable place,
humbling the humble.
The world might say, “We should make the rich man sit on the
floor!” but that also misses the point here about partiality. Instead, they could have given a place of
honor to all guests, regardless of whether it was a rich or poor person. If they had offered a chief seat as an
example of the gospel to any visitor, things would be different. They gave preferential treatment to the rich
man, though, evidencing bad motives.
That leads to James’s rhetorical question in v. 4 — “have
you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil
motives?” They made distinctions or discriminated,
showing partiality. They can be judges,
but only judges with righteous motives.
Christians actual think evil thoughts when they become
unjust judges. The term here is “bad
reasoning,” their sin skews their mode of thinking. Paul describes this concept in Romans 1:21 — those
who do not honor God become futile in their thinking. The concept of evil comes to the forefront
here, perhaps because the believer might expect return for his services.
Instead of looking at the externals of what people are wearing,
Christians should focus more on the internal realities. We are dealing with people. That brings us to James’s next point.
III.
Identifying the People of Partiality in the Church
(vv. 5–7)
choose the poor of
this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to
those who love Him? But you have
dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally drag
you into court? Do they not blaspheme
the fair name by which you have been called?
James gives a different perspective by focusing on the people
here. Sometimes, it helps us to deal
with temptation when we realize that we are dealing with eternal souls. Of course, some are haters of God. Others have been chosen for God’s purpose.
He calls them to listen, and then he lists three questions
here, each expecting an affirmative response. In doing so, he shifts focus from the act of
favoritism to the people involved. By
examining both the poor and the rich, he challenges the congregation’s
assumptions.
A.
The Poor are Part of God’s Chosen
James writes, “Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God
choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom
which He promised to those who love Him?” (v. 5). James indicates the same thing Paul did in
Ephesians 1, that salvation begins with the sovereign choice of God. God does not choose, however, based on what a
sinner brings to the table. In fact, He
most often chooses those the world deems unworthy (see 1 Cor. 1:26–29).
This rhetorical question highlights a biblical truth. God often chooses those whom the world
overlooks. Just as James can call
sinning people “beloved brethren,” Christians need to see the kinship we have
in Christ even among people who are undesirable by the world’s standards. After all, we are all called by the same
Lord.
Now, James is not advocating a “poverty gospel” that
glorifies financial lack. I’m sometimes
asked if I took a vow of poverty to be a pastor, which isn’t a thing. Moreover, this isn’t saying that only the
poor get into heaven; He even used such people in the early church:
- Joseph of Arimathea
donated his tomb for Jesus’ burial (Matt. 27:57–60; John 19:38–39).
- Barnabas sold a field he
owned to help the Apostles (Acts 4:36–37).
- The Ethiopian eunuch was a
court official to the queen, and after Stephen preached the gospel to him,
he presumably went back to Ethiopia with the good news (Acts 8:27ff).
- Peter preached to
Cornelius, a wealthy centurion who gave to the poor (Acts 10:1–2).
- The first recorded
salvation in Philippi was a businessperson named Lydia (Acts 16:14).
- Similarly, leading women
were among the first to be saved in Thessalonica (Acts 17:4).
- Finally, if there were no
saved rich people, then Paul would not have to write to warn them not to
be haughty (1 Tim 6:17–19).
James here makes the point that God choose poor people for
His purposes. Therefore, we are to care
when someone is in need, and not count it against them in the assembly. Perhaps they don’t put the best face on our
church services, but that is not a goal we should have.
James underscores an important reality, though. Earthly wealth does not equate to spiritual
riches. As Jesus said, “Blessed are the
poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3). Many of the early Christians were poor and
oppressed, yet they possessed the priceless treasure of faith. As such, Christians must guard against
equating worldly success with God’s favor.
Again, we must see those we would be tempted not want to
spend our time with as people. For some,
it may not be the poor, but people of a different culture, ethnicity, or
economic status. Whatever the case, we avoid
partiality when we see others as people saved by the same Lord.
We also must see that those we might be tempted to like are
sometimes not those we should respect, as we see next.
B.
The Rich are Sometimes Opposed to God’s Plans
James contrasts the poor with the wealthy oppressors: “But
you have dishonored the poor man. Is it
not the rich who oppress you and personally drag you into court? Do they not blaspheme the fair name by which
you have been called?” (vv. 6–7). The
church was dishonoring the poor by giving preferential treatment for those who
hate them.
Historically, the wealthy often exploited the poor through
unjust practices, including legal manipulation and economic oppression. In James’ day, many rich individuals — especially
unbelievers — used their influence to blaspheme Christ and persecute His
followers. The term here is literally
“to tyrannize.”[2] It was therefore ironic and sinful for the
church to favor such people while dishonoring the poor believers whom God had
chosen.
Believers must remember who owns them. The Lord has called us by His good name. We don’t need to become so focused on what we
might get from the rich that we willingly overlook blasphemies against our
Lord. That’s why we should be consistent
in calling out all bad behavior.
To be clear, this isn’t behavior reserved for the rich. There are Christians who partner with social justice
warriors because they make this mistake.
Some of the activists have been just as vocal slandering churches and
the Lord, and we should give them preferential treatment either.
IV.
Conclusion
Don’t take this passage to mean that God is
anti-wealth. Yes, there are those
obsessed with money, but then again, there are those who are poor because they
sin. If you squander you money and
resources through sinful pursuits and lawless living, then you are no more
righteous than the white-collar criminal who embezzled funds while laying
employees off.
Favoritism has no place in the church of our glorious Lord
Jesus Christ. It contradicts the gospel,
which unites all believers under the cross, regardless of earthly status. By rejecting partiality and embracing Christ’s
example, we testify to the transformative power of true faith.
As we reflect on this passage, let us recommit ourselves to
loving one another impartially, honoring the image of God in every person. In doing so, we not only strengthen our
fellowship but also glorify the One who “shows no partiality” and calls us to
do the same.
[1] Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament:
based on semantic domains. New York: United Bible Societies.
[2] John MacArthur Jr., Ed., The MacArthur Study Bible, electronic ed., (Nashville, TN: Word
Pub., 1997), 1929.
