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
0.47UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.1UNLIKELY
Fear
0.14UNLIKELY
Joy
0.54LIKELY
Sadness
0.47UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.54LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.66LIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.85LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.59LIKELY
Extraversion
0.19UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.54LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.62LIKELY

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
Scripture Introduction:
Have you heard the old joke about the guy who arrives in heaven, and he’s asked which denomination, Methodist—room 24, but be quiet as you go by room 8. Presbyterian—room 16, be quiet by room 8. Lutheran—room 11, be quiet as you go by room 8. Finally somebody asks, why do we have to be quiet going by room 8. “Oh, that’s where we keep the Baptists they think they’re the only ones here.”
Silly little joke.
That’s what we call tribalism.
It’s the idea that your group is exceptional, better than all the others, number one, etc.
There is extreme polarity (that’s two sides and little middle ground) and tribalism in America.
But it’s not new.
This has been going on for quite some time—we certainly see it in the NT, even amongst the disciples of Jesus.
I think the apostle John might have been the first Baptist.
Listen to :
38 John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.”
39 But Jesus said, “Do not stop him, for no one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me.
40 For the one who is not against us is for us.
The reason John gives for stopping this exorcist is that he “was not following us”.
Notice what he doesn’t say, “he was not following you”.
If this had been an unbeliever casting out demons then it would have been a different story.
This is, by all appearances someone who believes in Jesus, desires to follow Jesus, and join him in his mission of overturning the works of the devil by rooting out of His kingdom all sin and unbelief and replacing it with passionate worshippers.
But he’s not part of John’s tribe, he doesn’t do the way that John thinks he ought to do things and so he says, “let’s put a stop to this”.
If this had been an unbeliever casting out demons (sort of like the sons of Sceva in ) then it would have been a different story.
This is, by all appearances someone who believes in Jesus, desires to follow Jesus, and join him in his mission of overturning the works of the devil by rooting out of His kingdom all sin and unbelief and replacing it with passionate worshippers.
We saw last week that what Paul is saying here in is that we are running this race together.
These aren’t solo races.
We are to forget the behind and strive forward for the kingdom.
But what happens when somebody runs different than you?
What happens if their race looks a little different?
You’ve got one guy doing hurdles, another running a sprint, another jogging, one guy is crawling, and some people are doing things that you just really aren’t even sure what that is.
What do you do when people don’t believe quite like you do, or do things quite like you do?
Do you put a stop to them, like John did?
These guys aren’t following us.
They don’t look like us.
They don’t do things like us.
What do we do with that Jesus?
What Paul says this morning is really another way of saying what the Lord Jesus said to John the disciple.
READ TEXT
Sermon Introduction:
I am a John Newton nerd (wrote Amazing Grace) so you’ll have to bear with me as I will often give examples and little snippets.
This is one of those instances.
In June of 1772 he published a letter to a friend outlining his thoughts on a somewhat controversial topic.
He was just outlining the way that he saw things in Scripture.
Not being combative or anything.
He was very passionate about not “banging notions in peoples heads”.
His philosophy of ministry was to present the truth as he saw it in Jesus—to do so as winsomely as he possibly could, but to leave the results to the Lord.
He followed this in that letter.
One particular guy didn’t like the letter.
A fella by the name of Nicholas Manners published a detailed line by line response to Newton.
Let’s modernize this for just a moment.
You’ve just expressed some thoughts on Facebook, or Twitter, or Instagram, or whatever you kids are using these days.
You weren’t trying to start a fight, you were just sharing the truth as you saw it in Jesus.
And now somebody has just ripped your comment to shreds.
What do you do?
I’m a writer.
I sift through several articles.
I’m often privy to some of these heated theological discussions.
I see political fights.
And people fighting about some of the silliest of things.
So, I’ll tell you what happens when someone disagrees with you on the internet in 2019.
You pop your knuckles, grab a soda, and slam out a response.
Line by line.
Defending your argument and your dearly loved doctrine, under the guise of gospel fidelity.
n June of 1772 he published a letter On the Doctrines of Election and Final Perseverance(you can read that here).
Shortly thereafter a Methodist preacher by the name of Nicholas Manners published a detailed line by line response to Newton.
(I can’t find it online but you can buy it here).
What would be the typical response in 2011?
Pop your knuckles, get your Mountain Dew, sit at your swivel chair, and slam out a response.
Line by line.
Defending your argument and your dearly loved doctrine, under the guise of gospel fidelity.
You know what Newton did? 
Nothing.
That’s right.
Nothing.
“He let the dispute die in silence”.
When I first read about this story about ten years ago I was shocked at his response.
That guy was wrong.
Newton was right.
Shouldn’t he have defended himself—shouldn’t he have defended the truth?
Truth matters, man.
And when somebody is wrong you’ve got to confront it.
You have to defend the gospel, man or else it’s going to be disbelieved.
We’re always only a couple ways generations away from losing the gospel.
I wonder if these two ladies in had a similar mindset.
One of the best ways to motivate people is fear.
If we don’t do this particular thing then all of your dreams are going to be dashed.
You see this language used on both sides of the political aisle.
If you don’t get the right man or woman in office then the whole thing is going to crumble.
And that same thing happens in church.
If we don’t do this thing this particular way then the whole thing is going to crumble.
God will be dishonored.
The church will split.
The lost won’t be saved.
The whole thing is just going to go up in smoke.
“Oh, man.
Sorry, I was just thinking about maybe changing the font on the bulletin”.
And I’m not…no need to panic.
Let’s not live in fear.
Let’s not give in to fear-mongering.
Spurgeon:
A great many learned men are defending the gospel; no doubt it is a very proper and right thing to do, yet I always notice that, when there are most books of that kind, it is because the gospel itself is not being preached.
Suppose a number of persons were to take it into their heads that they had to defend a lion, a full-grown king of beasts!
There he is in the cage, and here come all the soldiers of the army to fight for him.
Well, I should suggest to them, if they would not object, and feel that it was humbling to them, that they should kindly stand back, and open the door, and let the lion out!
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9