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
0.12UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.11UNLIKELY
Fear
0.53LIKELY
Joy
0.57LIKELY
Sadness
0.6LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.75LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.23UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.93LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.71LIKELY
Extraversion
0.05UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.54LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.65LIKELY

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
William Barclay described what a leper looks like:
“The whole appearance of the face is changed, till the man loses his human appearance and looks, as the ancients said, ‘like a lion or a satyr.’
The nodules grow larger and larger.
They ulcerate.
From them there comes a foul discharge.
The eyebrows fall out, the eyes become staring.
The voice becomes hoarse and the victim wheezes because of the ulceration of the vocal chords.
The hands and feet always ulcerate.
Slowly the sufferer becomes a mass of ulcerated growths.
The average course of the disease is nine years, and it ends in mental decay, coma, and ultimately death.
The sufferer becomes utterly repulsive—both to himself and to others.”
We don’t know how long those ten lepers had been there.
We don’t know what their lives had been like before they were struck with this dreaded disease that turned you into a walking illustration of the ravages of sin.
We only know that their sad circumstance brought 10 people together, one of whom would normally not been a part of this group based upon the prejudices of the day.
The passage is easy to hear and understand, so it seems.
Jesus graciously heals ten lepers, and one of them, a Samaritan, returns to thank Him when he recognizes what a blessing the Lord has done for him.
If we know more about the workings of the Law, we know that Jesus’ words were completely in harmony with the Word of God as given through Moses and found in .
I won’t read it all to you, but will say two things: (1) generally speaking, there was no belief that one could be cured of leprosy other than by a direct intervention of the Lord.
Once a leper, always a leper until he died.
(2) If a priest determined that one was not a victim of leprosy, a ceremonial cleansing is to take place involving a sin offering and a burnt offering.
This offering could be costly, but like the offering given at our Lord’s presentation on the eighth day of His birth, was graduated based upon economic status.
At the moment that Jesus ministered to the lepers, He did not touch them, but simply told them to “Go and show yourselves to the priests.”They
had asked for “mercy,” and in response He spoke to them.
This could have been a blessing in itself, since under ordinary circumstances, few would even acknowledge their existence for fear of becoming contaminated and likewise separated from the community.
Still, Jesus’ response could seem abrupt, curt, dispassionate.
He did not tarry with them, did not commiserate.
He simply instructed them regarding a task.
Yet the task itself carried great weight, since it was what the Law commanded to be done in order to determine whether one was, in fact, a leper.
They had done this before, or they would not have even been identified as lepers.
Now Jesus wants them to do the same thing again, to risk hearing the judgment against them yet again.
In obedience, they did what He directed, “and as they went they were cleansed.”
He never promised to heal them, but He did.
It’s almost as an afterthought that Luke gives us this information.
How are we to respond to this tidbit?
Is it significant or do we let it pass us by.
We know that Samaritans and Jews do not have fellowship with one another, that there was hostility between them, such that Jesus would use that information as the significant piece of His teaching regarding the Great Commandment.
In this passage, only the Samaritan returned to give thanks to Jesus.
The word used to describe is action is εὐχαριστῶν, the active participle of εὐχαριστέω.
The related noun, εὐχαριστία, is the observance and elements of the Eucharist, Lord’s Supper.
William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 416.
It is used regarding the Cup by Paul in .
In formal settings we still use this word to describe Holy Communion.
All of these images are bound together in this short interaction between Jesus and the Samaritan man who was once outside of the Covenant and promises of God by the understanding of others, but by the Word of the Lord has been brought into the Kingdom.
His faith has saved Him - that’s what the Lord literally said on that day - not because his healing was earned, or was a reward, but that “by grace, through faith,” “the gift of God “ came to this man, and He was blessed by it.
As it was with him, so it is today.
Obedience is its own reward, as the others were cleansed as well.
Only this one received the assurance of salvation, the acknowledgement of fellowship with Christ, that not only heals you, it delivers you and transforms you from the domain of the Kingdom of darkness in to the Kingdom of God’s beloved Son.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9