Sermon Tone Analysis

Overall tone of the sermon

This automated analysis scores the text on the likely presence of emotional, language, and social tones. There are no right or wrong scores; this is just an indication of tones readers or listeners may pick up from the text.
A score of 0.5 or higher indicates the tone is likely present.
Emotion Tone
Anger
0.53LIKELY
Disgust
0.17UNLIKELY
Fear
0.07UNLIKELY
Joy
0.54LIKELY
Sadness
0.5LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.77LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.01UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.92LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.8LIKELY
Extraversion
0.36UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.62LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.67LIKELY

Tone of specific sentences

Tones
Emotion
Anger
Disgust
Fear
Joy
Sadness
Language
Analytical
Confident
Tentative
Social Tendencies
Openness
Conscientiousness
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Emotional Range
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
*James 2:1-4*
*Discrimination in the Sanctuary of the Lord*
 
“My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory.
For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, ‘You sit here in a good place,’ while you say to the poor man, ‘You stand over there,’ or, ‘Sit down at my feet,’ have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?”[1]
Christians are immersed in the culture in which they live, and to greater or lesser degree, fallen creatures that we are, though citizens of heaven, we import our culture into the church.
Tragically, we tend to transform the church of the Living God into a reflection of the prevailing culture without even being aware of what we are doing.
Without planning for the transition, the church is one day more Canadian than it is Christian.
Nowhere is this transformation more evident than when we seek to become respectable within the communities wherein we worship.
Soon, our desire to be liked overwhelms our desire to please God.
At one time I pastored a Chinese congregation.
The Christians in that congregation were good people who longed to honour God.
However, the congregation struggled to move beyond being Chinese.
I was often frustrated by the tendency of church leaders to exalt Chinese culture over the instruction of the Word.
For instance, it was more important that missionaries be Chinese than that they be in doctrinal agreement with the church.
In a final message, I pleaded with the church to choose Christ over culture, a plea which in great measure fell on deaf ears.
On yet another occasion, I was approached by a black congregation who wished me to serve as their pastor.
During exploratory discussions, I was somewhat taken aback when one of my interlocutors raised a concern that white people might come to the church.
Lynda and I asked whether they were Christians that happened to be black, or whether they were blacks that happened to be Christians.
The pulpit committee was nonplused and asked for time to consider the question.
After some weeks, one of the members phoned.
He apologised profusely because he was the one appointed to bring their answer to me.
The congregation had come to the conclusion that they were black, and ultimately culture was more important than the Word.
Tragically, I have witnessed too many Canadian churches that have more pride in being Canadian than in being Christian.
Many churches in Canada have consciously, or unconsciously, decided that it is more important to align with the culture than it is to be Christian.
I briefly pastored a congregation in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia.
Though God was blessing with growth and the salvation of many souls, a conflict which required the attention of the church leadership arose within the church.
I pointed to the Scriptures as the final arbiter for resolving the dispute, but the chairman of the deacons arose and said, “We are Canadian.
If there is a conflict between the Bible and our constitution, we must obey the constitution.”
I was astounded, concluding that his arrogance was exceeded only by his ignorance.
Unfortunately, the deacons agreed with him in this matter, unconsciously setting themselves as infallible; they deemed the documents they had drafted superior to the Word of God, which was rendered in this instance subservient to their own imaginations.
In the ensuing years I have come to realise that the assertion of that arrogant man grew out of the common practise of “electing” church leaders.
Evangelical churches have developed the cult of democracy, imagining that democracy is divine.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Moses, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, warned, “You shall not follow a majority in wrongdoing” [*Exodus 23:2 nrsv Bible*].
God expects His people to seek the truth and then to do what is true.
Fifty percent plus one does not make an action right or justify a decision.
That self-important man, as is tragically true of too many who imagine themselves to be approved by God as church leaders, was chairman of the deacons simply because he had advanced himself as someone of importance and was willing to “let his name stand” for election.
The natural tendency for all mankind is to gravitate to the familiar; we are by nature uncomfortable when asked to accept the unfamiliar.
There is a level of trust demanded that we do not naturally extend to those representing what is in our estimate strange and different.
We prefer certain foods, and often refuse to try what we deem to be exotic primarily because it is different.
It is one thing when our discrimination is toward foods or other such less vital matters of life.
However, there is grave danger to the church when people begin to discriminate towards people, treating some with undue deference and treating others with disdain.
Likewise, we have a propensity to exert ourselves to elevate our own social standing through encouraging those we imagine to be of higher social standing to favour us with their presence.
In a former church, I faced almost constant pressure from individuals convinced that we needed to improve the quality of the congregation by bringing in “the right kind of people.”
This has been a familiar cry within several congregations I have known as people focus on the social status rather than the spiritual condition of those attending services.
I find such attitudes to be pitiful.
I still recall a family who came to that same church because they had been informed by another pastor that we were an “entry level congregation.”
Another man with severe needs approached me on one occasion because the pastor of one of the more prosperous churches within the community which he had first approached told him that he was unwelcome there.
That pastor did helpfully add that he would fit better in our congregation.
We, of course, did welcome him.
James confronted the natural tendency to “play it safe” within the congregation of the Lord, challenging each one who would read this letter to review his or her practise toward prominent individuals within society and toward those who are less prominent within society.
We would today unite in the fellowship of this growing congregation will do well to hear James’ words, learn from what he has written, and then do as he has instructed.
*The Admonition* — “My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory.”
As we begin our exposition, I note that James is addressing people whom he assumes holds the Faith of Christ the Lord.
He addresses those who read his missive as brothers, indicating that he assumes they are believers.
Just so, I assume that those to whom I speak share this common Faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.
Since the issue of how we live out this most holy Faith is critical, pause for a moment and consider what is entailed in being identified as a Christian congregation.
It means that those gathered in the assembly believe the message that Jesus died because of their sin and that He raised for their justification.
It means that each member has individually accepted this truth, and that each one has willingly surrendered rule over his or her life to the Living Son of  God.
Those gathered in such assemblies do not believe that they have organised a church, but rather they are convinced that God has created a church where He dwells by faith.
Thus, when James addresses readers as brothers, he is not merely addressing them as individuals, nor even as a social or political entity, but he is addressing them as the Body of Christ, united by love for the Saviour and held together in a common purpose by the knowledge of the work of the Holy Spirit among them.
Each member knows that he or she is gifted by God and responsible to administer the gifts God has entrusted to benefit every other member.
Moreover, each member realises that each of the members sharing the life of Christ is not only gifted for the benefit of all, but that each member is to be received as a gift entrusted by God who delights to shower His goodness on His children.
In the church, we must not permit ourselves to show favouritism.
The Greek underlying the text is difficult to translate with a single word.
The word that is central to the admonition only occurs four times in the New Testament.
It may be helpful for us to review the other three instances where this particular word is used.
First, the Apostle in *Romans 2:11*, informs us that “God shows no partiality.”
In *Ephesians 6:9*, Paul asserts that with God “there is no partiality.”
Finally, in *Colossians 3:25*, Paul cautions that God shows no partiality with respect to judgement.
So, the other three instances of the use of this word refer to God as impartial in His treatment of us, and in particular, that He shows no favouritism when it comes to judgement.
We are somewhat dependent upon the context to permit fully grasping James’ concern in the warning given to readers.
The context describes how we are to accept others within the Body of Christ.
Peterson focuses his rendering of this verse on how we receive people in the church.
“My dear friends, don’t let public opinion influence how you live out our glorious, Christ-originated faith.”[2]
The Good News Translation translates the verse, “My brothers and sisters, as believers in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, you must never treat people in different ways according to their outward appearance.”[3]
Other translators understand the passage to warn against bias or partiality.
Here are a few instances to consider.
“My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favouritism.”[4]
“My brothers, do not practice your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ by showing partiality.”[5]
“My dear brothers and sisters, how can you claim to have faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ if you favour some people over others?”[6]
This teaching is not novel when James introduces it; rather it is thoroughly grounded in the Law.
Moses cautioned those who would be required to judge in Israel to avoid prejudice.
“You shall do no injustice in court.
You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbour” [*Leviticus 19:15*].
This cautionary statement is emphasised elsewhere in the Pentateuch also.
“You shall not be partial in judgment.
You shall hear the small and the great alike.
You shall not be intimidated by anyone, for the judgment is God’s.
And the case that is too hard for you, you shall bring to me, and I will hear it” [*Deuteronomy 1:17*].
Compare that to yet another instance of warning against favouritism.
“You shall not pervert justice.
You shall not show partiality, and you shall not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and subverts the cause of the righteous” [*Deuteronomy 16:19*].
Thus, under the Law, from the beginning of biblical teaching, partiality or favouritism is proscribed for all who would honour God.
The teaching becomes foundational for understanding the way God relates to all mankind.
The theme of avoiding bias is iterated by Solomon.
“Partiality in judging is not good” [*Proverbs 24:23*].
That statement is echoed just a few verses later in the same book.
“To show partiality in judgement is terrible” [*Proverbs 28:21*].[7]
The case Solomon presented in either of these instances uses tapeinosis—a deliberate understatement to present a worst-case scenario.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9