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
0.56LIKELY
Disgust
0.1UNLIKELY
Fear
0.07UNLIKELY
Joy
0.52LIKELY
Sadness
0.54LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.73LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.64LIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.81LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.37UNLIKELY
Extraversion
0.27UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.4UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.43UNLIKELY

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
Wednesday, October 19, 2022 Commands of Christ – 28c
Before we get to the lesson: Voting
If you have already voted, this is an irrelevant discussion.
If you haven’t maybe this will help.
First, an observation: There were many Christians who enthusiastically voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020.
Indeed there are many who would love to see him run again in 2024.
Even though he is a deeply, deeply flawed man.
All of us are flawed, but most of us have not done the things Donald Trump has done maritally, sexually outside of marriage, financially, public displays of anger, etc.
We don’t go off on a tear on Twitter every moment of every day publically saying horrible things about people.
The point is, if you were (still are?) enthusiastic about Donald Trump, why would you not vote for Herchell Walker even though he too is a deeply flawed man?
Like Donald Trump, he has no political political record to examine — so we can’t evaluate based on that.
He SAYS he is pro-life and supports other Biblical issues.
Like Trump, his life doesn’t necessarily reflect it.
BUT, realize that, because this vote is so close, NOT voting in this race or voting for the Libertarian candidate is actually a vote for pro abortion, anti Biblical values, Warnock.
Is that accurate?
Also, the party platform and the party in control of the House and Senate is a huge issue.
The Georgia senate race is a pivotal election to determine that.
Yesterday, President Biden said if they retain control of congress they will again push for a law that legalizes abortion.
SO, your prayerful vote is important!
As promised: Dr. Charles Stanley (from his radio broadcast, Insight for Living, of October 11, 2022)
https://www.intouch.org/listen/radio/anger-and-forgiveness-part-2
1.
I need to acknowledge I have experienced God’s total forgiveness in my life — by grace.
I didn’t earn it.
God’s been forgiving me all my Christian life.
I can forgive others because I am constantly forgiven by God.
2. I must be willing to confess my anger, hostility, bitterness, rage, resentment to God.
Confessions must be specific and personal.
3. I must admit that I have violated God’s Word by sinning against God and others.
4. Ask God to forgive you.
Specifically for what I’ve done and my attitude.
This is an act of the will — not emotions.
5. Go to person and ask forgiveness.
If person is not available (dead, etc.) set 2 chairs face to face and pretend person is in the other chair.
This is also a good way to rehearse before an in-person apology to get our approach right (conform to godly pattern).
To me, this is more about forgiving someone who was angry at us for (what seems like) an unjust cause.
Open: Last week we dealt with a Biblical account on the unrighteous anger of Cain.
NEXT week we deal with the outcomes of the righteous anger of Moses.
But, THIS week, let’s start by asking: do you have any counsel for Abel about how to deal with an angry Cain?
If he had known about it (anger is often a public spectacle), how could/should he have dealt with it?
Anger is contagious: We tend to get angry with someone who is angry towards us.
Remember, last week?
We tend to …
5.
The normalization of vengeful responses.
A quick scan of Twitter responses reveals that it is not unusual for responses not just to debate, rebuke, or confront, but to harm.
A person who is hurt by a post responds in a way that is calculated to hurt in return, to damage a person’s reputation, or even to attempt to end someone’s career.
(I would say: The same is often true of in-person responses.)
Here’s what we need to remember:
vengeful anger is always the result of some person trying to do God’s job.
There is only one judge of the heart.
There is only one who is able to mete out perfectly holy and just judgment.
This article is adapted from Reactivity: How the Gospel Transforms Our Actions and Reactions by Paul David Tripp.
So, instead:
Proverbs 15:1 (NLT) A gentle answer deflects anger, but harsh words make tempers flare.
Example: Judges 8:1–3 (NASB95) Then the men of Ephraim said to him, “What is this thing you have done to us, not calling us when you went to fight against Midian?”
And they contended with him vigorously. 2 But he said to them, “What have I done now in comparison with you?
Is not the gleaning of the grapes of Ephraim better than the vintage of Abiezer? 3 “God has given the leaders of Midian, Oreb and Zeeb into your hands; and what was I able to do in comparison with you?” Then their anger toward him subsided when he said that.
In dealing with an angry person, WE need to avoid anger ourselves (hard to do!).
Ecclesiastes 7:9 (NASB95) Do not be eager in your heart to be angry, For anger resides in the bosom of fools.
Proverbs 15:18 (NASB95) A hot-tempered man stirs up strife, But the slow to anger calms a dispute.
James 1:19 “This you know, my beloved brethren.
But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger;”
This can be reflected in the way we handle conflict.
Alfred Ells says…
Five Conflict Styles
Conflict isn’t easy on anyone.
Few people are skilled in handling conflict biblically and effectively, and even fewer do so.
Avoidance Style
This reaction to conflict is often motivated by fear of confrontation.
The thinking behind this approach goes something like I can’t win, so why try? or He won’t listen, so it’s not worth going directly to him.
This style perceives conflict as hopeless to resolve and often results in the person distancing himself from the other party, shutting down communication, and giving the other party the cold shoulder.
This is a passive-aggressive way of dealing with conflict.
The exception: Some conflicts are best understood as too difficult to handle.
The more you attempt reasonable discourse, the stickier and more convoluted the conflict becomes.
Continued dialogue makes the problem worse, not better, so it is best to avoid further attempts at resolution unless a mediator is present.
Yield Style
The thinking behind this style goes something like I’ll give in for the sake of the relationship or It’s not worth making a big deal out of it.
This style is also motivated by fear of confrontation because of the possible loss of the relationship.
The exception: Some conflicts are simply not worth having even though the relationship is valuable.
The issue is minor, and the energy necessary to achieve resolution is greater than the potential benefit.
Sometimes it is indeed best to yield and move on.
However, make sure this does not develop into an ongoing style of dealing with conflict.
Win Style
As the name suggests, leaders who respond to conflict with a win style are certain they’re right, the other person is wrong, and the goal is to convince the person of his or her error.
This style is a coercive and authoritarian attempt to resolve a conflict.
It often leads to attacking the other person instead of gracefully resolving the problem, as it springs from a “my way or the highway” attitude.
The exception: There may be instances when you’re in a position of authority and must exert your authority on behalf of the organization regardless of the other person’s viewpoint.
However, doing so without rancor or rudeness is a must.
Graciousness and sensitivity are advised.
Good leaders utilize this style infrequently and only as a last resort.
Compromise Style
The compromise style involves meeting halfway and giving up your ideal to achieve unity and peace.
This often happens when conflicting views cannot be readily resolved.
The key is to yield in areas that do not violate your convictions.
Doing so would be sin for you.
Research indicates that this style is not used often, but on occasion it can be beneficial.
Resolve Style
This is often described as the win-win style.
It’s the ideal way to resolve a conflict, because both parties come together and reason in a manner that leads to problem-solving and emotional resolution.
It takes a lot of work, and both parties must be willing to follow the biblical admonition to “first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye” (Matt.
7:5).
We must make sure we confess our own sin and shortcomings before approaching our adversary with his.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9