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
0.09UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.06UNLIKELY
Fear
0.09UNLIKELY
Joy
0.54LIKELY
Sadness
0.46UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.8LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.76LIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.9LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.58LIKELY
Extraversion
0.36UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.41UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.37UNLIKELY

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
QUESTIONS:
1‌ .How has your research so far helped you focus your proposed topic more sharply?
Why?
2‌ .Where do you think you need to do additional investigation?
What resources would be helpful in that investigation?
_____
1.
When I came into the program, I only had “the idea of an idea” as to what I would write about.
I kind of knew what I wanted to pursue but I didn’t know if it was a legitimate topic.
So far, my research and the reading in this class have helped me to see that I am not way off base with my topic, and it has given me confidence to continue in this direction with my research and writing.
One thing that has helped focus my proposed topic more sharply has been the reading in this class.
The reading has exposed me to various kinds of theologies and methods that have been very helpful in formulating my own method.
I don’t rightly know if there is something already called “relational theology,” or if the idea may fit into another category of theology, but I think it may be the key to what I’m trying to do in this second paper and my dissertation.
I’m drawing upon Grenz’s and Lindbeck’s methods for this second paper, and I think their methods will also work for my dissertation.
‌In a second area, the research has shown me that grounding my topic in Scripture, especially a particular text, is the right starting point.
Working through scripture and history and ending up in the contemporary context seems to be a workable plan.
It helps to know that missional and political theologies tend to end up in a similar place, although I believe the processes may be different.
‌‌
2. My answers for number one lead into number two.
I need to do additional investigation into Grenz’s and Lindbeck’s methods.
For Lindbeck, I need to read more about his categories of doctrines.
The resource I need for this is his book The Nature of Doctrine.
‌For Grenz, I need to learn more about the community as his integrative motif in theology.
I also need to read more from Grenz about how he built upon Lindbeck.
I need to tease out more of what this connection is, especially if I’m going to draw upon both for my work.
For this I believe I need Grenz’s books Revisioning Evangelical Theology and Renewing the Center.
‌Additional research will need to be done in dealing with the social aspects of the contemporary context for my topic.
Liberal theologian Walter Rauschenbusch’s Theology and the Social Gospel will need to be consulted.
I also cannot see any way forward of dealing with strangers and the poor without bringing in some political theologies, such as Johannes Metz’s The Church and the World in Light of “Political Theology” and Gutierrez’s A Theology of Liberation.
In consulting both of these I will no doubt have to address the issues of Marxism and socialism.
‌In dealing with the contemporary context, I believe there will have to be some survey of Christian nationalism, specifically in a white American, conservative Christian context.
Robert P. Jones’ (PhD) books- The End of White Christian America (2016), White too Long: The Legacy of White Supremacy in American Christianity (2020), and The Unmaking of the White Christian Worldview (2021), look to be likely sources.
Additionally, I think there must be some look back at German Nationalism prior to WWII.
At this point, I do not know where that trail may lead, but it may start with Karl Barth’s neo-orthodox theology.
In the end, I hope to be able to bring the discussion back to an evangelical center with neo-evangelical Carl F. H. Henry’s God, Revelation, and Authority.
Perhaps, as Grenz has said, it is high time for evangelicalism to have a renewed theological center that spills over into society.[1]A
theology grounded in a radical relationship with God through creation, covenant, Christ, and the canon of Scripture, which calls for a radical responsibility to society and the world, may be just the center evangelicalism needs.
[1] Mary M. Veeneman, Introducing Theological Method: A Survey of Contemporary Theologians and Approaches, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017), 97.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9