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
0.14UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.11UNLIKELY
Fear
0.11UNLIKELY
Joy
0.56LIKELY
Sadness
0.5UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.68LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.9LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.66LIKELY
Extraversion
0.23UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.7LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.66LIKELY

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
Bible Reading
Introduction
We continue this morning with 5 Solae
What we are looking at are those points that were of central / key importance during the time of the reformation.
The church had drifted away from the true Gospel message.
They were on a path of a Gospel that was really no Gospel at all.
Within the church, it was preached that one should be in Christ, but that it was also necessary to do good works in order to obtain salvation.
And so Christ was needed, and was certainly a part of salvation
But He wasn’t all that was necessary.
He was not sufficient.
You needed to have more than just Christ…you needed to do certain works in order to obtain your salvation.
And what this led to was a situation where a person could never truly know their state of salvation.
Were they saved?
Had they done enough to please God?
And so this morning we come to our next Sola, and that is “Solus Christus” - Christ Alone...
Our salvation is through Christ Alone.
What do we mean by Christ Alone?
There are two senses to this phrase.
In the first place, and the one that I will only be touching on in this introduction, is in the sense that there is no other man who is Savior.
There is no other person who may come and claim to be a Messiah.
There is no other way in which man may be reconciled with God; No other way a man may come into right standing with God; No other way a man may one day enter into the presence of God…apart from Jesus Christ.
Jesus gave a claim to exclusivity.
No other person could claim to provide a way to the Father…only Jesus Christ.
In our world, there are many false Messiah’s even today.
Within South Africa, we have a self-proclaimed Messiah named “Moses Hlongwane”
He calls himself “The King of Kings, the Lord of Lords, Jesus”
The founder of that church, Isaiah Shembe (1865 - 1935) claimed to be sent directly by God.
Consider others...
When Peter and John had healed a crippled man, and they were brought before the Sanhedrin, they proclaimed to them .
Acts 4:
Jesus Christ is the only way of salvation.
There is simply no other way in which we may be saved.
The second sense in which we should understand this phrase “by Christ alone” is coupled with what we’ve considered over the past two weeks.
Sola Gratia, and Sola Fide
These previous two Solae, along with “Solus Christus” which we consider this morning, go hand in hand, and cannot be considered apart from each other.
They are like three legs of the same stool, where if you remove any one of these legs, the stool will collapse.
In ...
The emphasis there was the grace of God towards us...
It is only by His grace that we are saved
The fact of our salvation is entirely a gift from Him!!
But further, it is through faith that we are saved.
It is not through our works that we are saved.
But this morning, we consider the third leg of that stool - Christ alone.
Christ is the object of our faith.
1.
A Striking Contrast (vv.2-3)
As we consider Christ as the object of our faith, we will do that from our text in ...
And we’ll do that under 3 headings...
A Striking Contrast (vv.2-3)
Paul’s Solid Credentials (vv.4-6)
The Superiority of Christ (vv.7-11)
Firstly then, let us consider the striking contrast that Paul paints for us in verses 2-3
Paul begins this passage in verse 2 with a solemn warning!!
And in doing that, he doesn’t mince his words.
He gives 3 warning signals, coupled with descriptors of those people against whom he is warning the Philippians.
The NIV translation only puts the warning once - right at the beginning...
But the warning words are sounded 3 times...
“Watch out....watch out....watch out...”
The NKJV version puts it like this...
The threefold repitition sounds the alarm for the Philippians, that what Paul is here speaking against, is no mere triviality.
He is not speaking about disagreements over theology.
This is no academic / philosophical argument about different understandings of the Gospel.
Paul warns the Philippian believers that here is a serious danger - here you need to tread very cautiously.
How does Paul then describe these people against whom he is warning the Philippians?
The first is that they should “Watch out for those dogs...”.
Paul, so emphatic is he on his insistence against these false teachers, labels them “Dogs...”
Dogs were not lovable, huggable pets and companions in Paul’s Jewish culture.
They were regarded “as the most despicable, insolent and miserable of creatures.”
Dogs were despised because they would eat anything, including dead animals, human corpses, and their own vomit.
[Hansen, G. W. (2009).
The Letter to the Philippians (p.
218).
Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.]
Hansen, G. W. (2009).
The Letter to the Philippians (p.
218).
Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
The word is as insulting as could be found, and was as offensive in Paul’s day as it would be in our own.
But added to the weight and thrust of his words, is the fact that very often it was the Jews who would label the Gentiles as dogs..
And yet Paul here switches this around, and targets the word against the Jews themselves, or at least the Judaizers - those who were supporting Jewish traditions...
The words would have struck his listeners hard.
His second descriptor of these men is “workers of evil...”
Those who do evil!
Really what he’s saying there (which will become more clear as we look further down to verses 4-6 in a moment) is that these are those who advocate works...
“They are evildoers because their emphasis on the works of the law turns into a self-reliance that obscures the need for salvation in Christ.
Furthermore, they are evildoers because their work to convert Gentile Christians to Judaism by requiring circumcision and works of the law harms Christians by misleading them to supplement faith in Christ with works of the law.
Since these missionaries are drawing Gentile converts away from faith in Christ, they are evildoers.
They may boast of their good works, but the results of their mission are so devastating that a warning must be posted: Watch out for those evildoers.”
[Hansen, G. W. (2009).
The Letter to the Philippians (p.
219).
Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.]
Christ plus holding to certain works.
Hansen, G. W. (2009).
The Letter to the Philippians (p.
219).
Grand Rapids, MI; Nottingham, England: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
The third descriptor that Paul uses is “those mutilators of the flesh”.
The very obvious reference here - those to whom Paul refers - Judaizers - those who were saying that you needed to be circumcised in order to be saved.
Won’t say too much on them...
But note that he doesn’t give them the name that they would have liked - “The Circumcision”....that’s what they liked to call themselves.
But Paul instead calls them those mutilators of the flesh.
They were clearly requiring what went beyond Scripture…what went beyond Christ…in order to ensure salvation.
And so Paul’s words concerning them are harsh indeed.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9