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
0.17UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.12UNLIKELY
Fear
0.12UNLIKELY
Joy
0.51LIKELY
Sadness
0.48UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.53LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.89LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.86LIKELY
Extraversion
0.26UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.5UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.63LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
\\ If God were process oriented, the book of Genesis might read something like this:
In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was without form and void; so God created a small committee.
God carefully balanced the Committee vis-à-vis race, sex, ethnic origin and economic status in order to interface pluralism with the holistic concept of self-determination according to adjudicatory guidelines.
Even God was impressed, and so ended the first day.
And God said, "Let the Committee draw up a mission statement."
And behold, the Committee decided to prioritize and strategize.
And God called that process empowerment.
And God thought it sounded pretty good.
And evening and morning were the second day.
And God said, "Let the Committee determine goals and objectives, and engage in long-range planning."
Unfortunately, a debate as to the semantic differences between goals and objectives pre-empted almost all the third day.
Although the question was never satisfactorily resolved, God thought the "process" was constructive.
And evening and morning were the third day.
And God said, "Let there be a retreat in which the Committee can envision functional organization, and, engaged in planning, be objective.
The Committee considered adjustment of priorities and consequential alternatives to program directions and God saw that this was good.
And God thought that is was even worth all the coffee and donuts he had to supply.
And so ended the fourth
day.
And God said, "Let the Committee be implemented consistent with long-range planning and strategy."
The Committee considered guidelines and linkages and structural sensitivities, and alternative and implemental models.
And God saw that this was very democratic.
And so would have ended the fifth day, except for the unintentional renewal of the debate about the differences between goals and objectives.
On the sixth day, the Committee agreed on criteria for adjudicatory assessment and evaluation.
This wasn't the agenda God had planned.
He wasn't able to attend, however, because he had to take the afternoon to create day and night, heaven, earth and seas, plants and trees, seasons and years, sun and moon, birds, fish, animals and human beings.
On the seventh day, God rested and the Committee submitted its recommendations.
It turned out that the recommended forms for things were nearly identical to the way God had already created them; so the Committee passed a resolution commending God for His implementation according to guidelines.
There was, however, some opinion expressed quietly that man should have been created in the Committee's image.
And God caused a deep sleep to fall on the Committee...
1.
Being able to accept my process in life is crucial and the truth is that we are all works of God in process.
1 Samuel 16:11 So he asked Jesse, “Are these all the sons you have?”
“There is still the youngest,” Jesse answered, “but he is tending the sheep.”
Samuel said, “Send for him; we will not sit down a until he arrives.”
[1]
19 Then Saul sent messengers to Jesse and said, “Send me your son David, who is with the sheep.”
20 So Jesse took a donkey loaded with bread, a skin of wine and a young goat and sent them with his son David to Saul.
[2]
1 Samuel 11:15 but David went back and forth from Saul to tend his father’s sheep at Bethlehem.
[3]
1 Samuel 17:34 But David said to Saul, “Your servant has been keeping his father’s sheep.
When a lion or a bear came and carried off a sheep from the flock, 35 I went after it, struck it and rescued the sheep from its mouth.
When it turned on me, I seized it by its hair, struck it and killed it.
36 Your servant has killed both the lion and the bear; this uncircumcised Philistine will be like one of them, because he has defied the armies of the living God.
37 The LORD who delivered me from the paw of the lion and the paw of the bear will deliver me from the hand of this Philistine.”
Saul said to David, “Go, and the LORD be with you.” [4]
2.
We have no idea what we are being prepared for at our current place in life.
David maintains in verses 34-37 that his experience as a shepherd made him the #1 contender for Goliath.
3.
What did David’s process do for him?
ð It gave him a sense of responsibility and taught him what “character” was about.
ð He learned how to get along with God in the quiet of the hillsides and taught him to express his heart.
ð He learned how to respect his superiors.
ð He learned about God’s faithfulness – he had delivered him in the past and he knew that God would continue to deliver him.
ð He learned patience.
The ability to live with a definite sense of destiny and to understand that he would have his turn.
4.
Characteristics of people who either do not accept or recognize their process.
ð They are generally unhappy and discontented
ð They tend to be critical of others in positions of leadership and have difficulty accepting leadership from others.
In order to be a good leader a person must learn to be a good follower.
ð Martyr complex – they are the only ones.
ð The Soapbox – They want to get out there too quickly.
Their immaturity obscures their message.
ð Premature Peaking – We seek position before we are ready for it.
Time is needed to prepare us for the opportunities that we will have.
\\ ----
a Some Septuagint manuscripts; Hebrew /not gather around/
[1]The Holy Bible : New International Version.
1996, c1984 (electronic ed.) (1 Sa 16:11).
Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
[2]The Holy Bible : New International Version.
1996, c1984 (electronic ed.) (1 Sa 16:19-20).
Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
[3]The Holy Bible : New International Version.
1996, c1984 (electronic ed.) (1 Sa 17:15).
Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
[4]The Holy Bible : New International Version.
1996, c1984 (electronic ed.) (1 Sa 17:34-37).
Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9