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
0.13UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.11UNLIKELY
Fear
0.1UNLIKELY
Joy
0.62LIKELY
Sadness
0.48UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.66LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.94LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.74LIKELY
Extraversion
0.07UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.54LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.73LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
We have the great pleasure of continuing to seek God out through His word.
As we read and listen to Him who has revealed His truth to us.
Please stand and turn to
Pray.
I want to read to you guys some lyrics to a wonderful song.
In Christ alone, who took on flesh
Fullness of God in helpless babe
This gift of love and righteousness
Scorned by the ones He came to save
'Til on that cross as Jesus died
The wrath of God was satisfied
For every sin on Him was laid
Here in the death of Christ I live
This song was written in 2001 by an Irishman and an Englishman.
It quickly became popular and just about every hymnal that was updated after the year 2005 added this song to its hymnal.
After the songs release, it has been re-done by many of todays leading christian artists such as the newsboys.
It is one of my personal favorites as well.
To be honest, any song by the Gettys, Kieth and his wife krysten write and preform music together, any song they do I absolutely love.
The fact that they are from irland, brings a celtic sound along with the Irish accent, it is just wonderful music to listen to.
Well, in 2013 this hymn was in the spotlight.
The Presbyterian Church USA, a highly liberal Presbyterian branch, wanted to keep the song in their new hymnal that they were in the process of updating but they wanted to change some lyrics.
And they got a big fat no.
They said absolutly not.
The PCUSA asked why not, celebrating grace baptist hymnal has the change, why cant we.
Well it turns out that the editors for the celebrating grace baptist hymnal did not have that permission and now they are in danger of a major copy right issue.
Publishers do not want a copy right legal issue on their hands and they pay a lot of money to make sure that what they produce has no copyright laws.
They dropped the ball on this one I guess.
I do not know if this is true or not, but i think the publisher not only corrected the issue but also offered to replace all the ones they have sold just to avoid legal action.
I read that they were in the process of doing that but I do not know if it was fully done.
The line in question, on that cross where Jesus died, the wrath of God was satisfied.
What they wanted to change it to was on that cross where Jesus died, the love of God was magnified.
Well, they were accused of trying to take out Gods wrath.
To which the PCUSA replied, no, we have plenty of wrath in our hymns, it is the word satisfied we have a problem with.
This means the lyric comes too close to God killed Jesus.
That is how it was said, it comes to close to God killed Jesus.
Well, What we have here is a negative sentance structure that is often used when one is trying to manipulate.
It puts a person in a state of fear, fearing that it may be seen that they agree with the horrific statement.
For example, if there was a politician that I just dispised, and i was talking to someone who didnt feel the same way as I do.
I could say something along the lines of that man is like hilter, would you vote for hitler.
This manipulation, that is highly effective even though my example may have been silly, is happening right before our eyes.
It right now it is being done or said in the name pf racisim.
While I do acknowledge that rasicim is active and have been the subject of it in the past, I also can say that a lot of manipulation is being done in the name of racism and people fear being labled that.
Likewise, people do not like the way the PCUSA phrased what they think the word satisfied means.
That it comes too close to saying God killed Jesus.
I have a couple of questions.
Did the Father send the Son? Did Jesus pray take this cup from me, but not will be done but yours?
Did Jesus warn his disciples that his time was coming?
Did he not say at the last supper one of you will betray me?
Did he not tell Judas what you do, do quickly?
And after the life and death of Jesus, Peter preached a little sermon and said something that sermon that sounds a bit shocking to some ears.
Well according to this verse, Jesus going to the cross was in fact the predetermined plan of God.
So while nobody wants to get on board with the PCUSA way of saying it, the scriptures are clear, the cross was the plan of God.
The text we are looking at today discusses the wrath and justice of God and we will discuss what satisfied means.
So lets unpack our text for today.
We have some debates over this verse we have to get through.
The first discussion, and it is a short one, is the statement displayed publicly.
Not every translation states it that way because it is one of those verbs that have multiple meanings.
It is the same idea behind all these meanings and context is what helps us best translated it.
So say presented, others prefer put forward though that does not fit in the context.
Some want to translate it to set before the mind and some want to translate it to purpose.
But the context and the form of the word is used as an accomplishment, so we have to loot at the subject of the text to find out whose accomplishment, and that is God.
We see whom God right at the beginning of the verse.
It is Gods actions and we cannot void that, with that, and the words to follow, this verb could be translated multiple ways but three ways it should be taken.
One of them is the translation I am reading from, displayed publicly.
It could also be made known or demonstrate.
Set forth is another one but then you begin to take way the meaning.
The idea is that God, who is the subject here, made a display for all to see.
Now we are talking about the cross here.
The display is Jesus on the cross.
Paul is probably the most cross centered theologian of the New Testament.
As we are talking about justification, atonement, salvation in general, you should always be thinking the cross.
This is the public act that was displayed and that is the other thing that has to be communicated about this verb.
No matter how you translate it, weather it is made known, or set before the mind, the verb always, always, always means in the public eye.
Whatever it made know, using this verb means in the public eye.
Which is what the NASB, the translation I am reading from, makes clear.
it is a public act by God.
Ok, our next obstical is in the word Propitiation.
Not every translation uses that word.
The KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV use the word probitiation but the NIV and the NLT do not.
It is a very difficult word to translate because it is exact meaning is mercy seat.
The Mercy seat was the cover to the ark of the covenant that blood was sprinkled by the high priest the one time a year he was allowed to go in.
But paul is not trying to give us an OT image, if so, he would have told us, He always refrences his OT images.
The word also became known as Propitiation and over time there was an official word used for the word propitaition this greek word used here and now is its root word.
John wineds up using the agmented version of the word in his epistle affirming Propitiation as sound Doctrine.
Now we are talking about nouns here, both the debated word in Romans and the one used by John come from the verb which mean propitiation.
I will explain propitiantion here in a second, let me tell you what other think in should mean, they think is should be translated as expiation.
Because if the word means mercy seat that is how we should understand mercy.
Notice how I said they said that is how we should understand mercy.
Expiation is a forgive and forget.
That God forgives sins and does not requrie an answer for them.
Propitiation means a price paid to someone who has been wronged.
Or it Refers to effecting the removal of an offense from an offended party’s consideration.
And mercy is most certanly the center of the word.
The problem is that it is not mercy the way these people want mercy.
Which is the right definition?
When we come to Jesus and asked to be forgiven of our sins, does God forgive and forget.
Does he act as if we never commited sins?
Or When we asked to be forgiven, did Jesus take the punishment for sin and we recieve mercy because we trust that our sins were answered for?
I have to ask, if expiation is correct, why did Jesus suffer so badly and die if he was not answering for sins?
Why did he feel separated from the Father?
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9