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
0.18UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.44UNLIKELY
Fear
0.14UNLIKELY
Joy
0.44UNLIKELY
Sadness
0.25UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.94LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.07UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.99LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.57LIKELY
Extraversion
0.19UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.33UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.54LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
This Calendar Presentation contains a great deal of study material.
The problem is that none of us were living during the time periods in question, and therefore no one can actually “prove” which calendar system the priests of the Temple of YHWH were actually using.
Since the calendar question cannot be “proven”, our only other option is to investigate, and thereby amass an overwhelming preponderance of objective historical evidence.
That is exactly what this Calendar Presentation has accomplished.
The phrase: “overwhelming preponderance of objective historical evidence” is purposefully chosen.
This Calendar Presentation makes every effort to adhere to the following criteria:
“OVERWHELMING”: The goal is amass so much evidence demonstrating that the author’s calendar conclusions are historically valid, that the reader is literally overwhelmed.
This achievement is necessary just in case an opponent may find one or two pieces of evidence that may claim to demonstrate against the author’s conclusions.
“PERPONDERANCE”: Even if some conflicting evidence by an opponent is presented, the reasonable person will still conclude the author’s calendar conclusions, based upon the overwhelming evidence amassed.
The calendar question should not be answered by emotion, but by logical evaluation of the evidence.
“OBJECTIVE”: The evidence comes from a neutral source, and~/or, the author of the evidence, his own bias, does not influence the claims that are derived from using the evidence.
“HISTORICAL”: The evidence was written during the contemporary time period being studied.
“EVIDENCE”: The evidence being cited is valid, even in a court of law.
Absolutely rejected is “hearsay”; articles, commentaries, and encyclopedias that make claims about the ancient calendar, but then fail to cite any supporting references to physically verifiable historical documents.
Anyone can say anything, as long as they do not have to provide any real evidence to support what they say.
It is hoped that the reader will agree that this Calendar Presentation succeeds in amassing an “overwhelming preponderance of objective historical evidence”.
*The reader should begin by reading file “Enc202.rtf”*,
and then branch out to the other RTF files as their study progresses.
In Service To The Brethren,
Wayne L. Atchison,
An Elder in the Body of the Messiah
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9