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
0.2UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.18UNLIKELY
Fear
0.12UNLIKELY
Joy
0.45UNLIKELY
Sadness
0.53LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.5LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.7LIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.96LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.41UNLIKELY
Extraversion
0.16UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.56LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.73LIKELY

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
When I say Thomas, the apostle, what word would you associate with him:  Thomas the Twin or Doubting Thomas.
Probably the latter, although he is called Thomas the Twin or Didymas.
On the day of the resurrection, Thomas was the only disciple not present when Jesus appeared to the disciples on Sunday evening.
Thomas was not with the disciples that eveing.
So, when the disciples told him, *We have seen the Lord*, Thomas said these famous words, *Unless I see in his hands the mark of the natils, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never belive.*
We are fortunate to have a Thomas among the apostles.
It is a very good thing, and there are three reasons why this is so.
*Point One:  He is Not Credulous*
I was born in Missouri, the Show Me State.
No one knows where that name came from, but it has come to /represent Missourians as stalwart, perhaps somewhat stubborn and with a dedication to common sense/.
The mule is the state animal – and so we get /stubborn as a mule/.
However, that he was stubborn and would not believe unless he saw Jesus with his own eyes is a good thing.
One of the objections to the resurrection was the credulity or the gullibility of the disciples – almost as if they had been brainwashed.
The thought being that they were ready to believe in the resurrection with only the slightest evidence.
I don’t think that is true; however, it certainly isn’t true of Thomas.
He is slightly rebuked by the Lord in verse 29…*Have you believed because you have seen me.?  *And he should probably have believed based on the testimony of all the disciples.
But he didn’t.
The Bible is so honest.
It shows us Thomas and the others warts and all.
Further, it does point to a real problem – that is the fact that we Christians are gullible, and often not critical enough.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9