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
0.04UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.05UNLIKELY
Fear
0.06UNLIKELY
Joy
0.58LIKELY
Sadness
0.13UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.79LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.53LIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.96LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.63LIKELY
Extraversion
0.27UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.34UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.64LIKELY

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
Doctrinal Bible Church
Pastor-Teacher Bill Wenstrom
Wednesday January 11, 2023
Canonicity: Homologoumena, Antilegomena, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha
Lesson # 14
In the third century, Origen categorized Christian writings in order to identify for the church which books were recognized by the church as canonical and which ones were not.
Origen established three categories: (a) anantireta (“unobjectionable”) or homologoumena (“acknowledged”), which were in general use in the church, (2) amphiballomena (“included/contested”), which were contested, and (3) psethde (“false”), which included books that were rejected as falsifications and therefore the products of heretics.
Then along came Eusebius of Caesarea who in the fourth century reworked these categories formulated by Origin.
Eusebius categorized Christian writings as follows: (1) homologoumena (“acknowledged”), (2) antilegomena (“disputed”): (a) gnorima (“acquainted with”), for those most Christians acknowledged, (b) notha (“illegitimate”), for those regarded as inauthentic, and (3) apocrypha (“hidden”), which were recognized as spurious.
Today, these categories of writings are seen by scholars as being in four categories: (1) Homologoumena, books accepted by virtually everyone as canonical; (2) Antilegomena, books disputed by some; (3) Pseudepigrapha, books rejected by virtually everyone as unauthentic; and (4) Apocrypha, books accepted by some as canonical or semi-canonical.
The term homologoumena identifies those Christian writings that were undisputed during the first three centuries of church history and ultimately accepted into the New Testament canon.
For Eusebius, the homologoumena, the writings acknowledged as Scripture by the church of his day, included the four Gospels, Acts, fourteen letters of Paul (including Hebrews), 1 Peter, 1 John and perhaps Revelation.
The term antilegomena was used to identify those writings whose inspiration and canonicity were disputed (ἀντιλεγόμενος, “spoken against”), as opposed to those that were accepted by all (i.e., homologoumena).
In the New Testament, these books were Hebrews, 2 Peter, James, Jude, 2 and 3 John, and Revelation.
The term “pseudepigrapha” was used to identify those writings which were not recognized by the church as being inspired by God and thus not included in the New Testament canon.
This term is sometimes used synonymously with New Testament Apocrypha.
During the first few centuries, numerous books of a fanciful and heretical nature arose that are neither genuine nor valuable as a whole.
Eusebius of Caesarea called these “totally absurd and impious.”
Virtually no orthodox Father, canon, or council considered these books to be canonical and, so far as the church is concerned, they are primarily of historical value, indicating the heretical teaching of gnostic, docetic, and ascetic groups, as well as the exaggerated fancy of religious lore in the early church.
At best, these books were revered by some of the cults and referred to by some of the orthodox Fathers, but they were never considered canonical by the mainstream of Christianity.
The following writings fell under the category “pseudepigrapha”: (1) The Gospel of Thomas (early second century) (2) The Gospel of the Ebionites (second century) (3) The Gospel of Peter (second century).
(4) Protevangelium of James (late second century).
(5) The Gospel of the Hebrews (second century).
(5) The Gospel of the Egyptians (second century).
(6) The Gospel of the Nazaraeans (early second century).
(7) The Gospel of Philip (second century).
(7) The Book of Thomas the Athlete (8) The Gospel According to Mathias (9) The Gospel of Judas (late second century).
(10) Epistle of an Apostle (Epistula Apostolorum) (second century).
(11) The Apocryphon of John (second century).
(12) The Gospel of Truth (second century).
In relation to the New Testament canon, the term “Apocrypha” was used to identify those books which were not recognized by the church as canonical and like the Pseudepigrapha, were used by the heretics and were sometimes quoted by orthodox writers.
The following writings fall under this category: (1) Epistle of Pseudo-Barnabas (c.
a.d.
70–79).
(2) Epistle to the Corinthians (c.
a.d.
96).
(3) Ancient Homily, or the so-called Second Epistle of Clement (c.
a.d.
120–40).
(4) Shepherd of Hermas (c.
a.d.
115–40).
(5) Didache, or Teaching of the Twelve (c.
a.d.
100–120).
(6) Apocalypse of Peter (c. 150).
(7) The Acts of Paul and Thecla (170).
(8) Epistle to the Laodiceans (fourth century?).
(9) The Gospel According to the Hebrews (a.d.
65–100).
(10) Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians (c.
a.d.
108).
(11) The Seven Epistles of Ignatius (c.
a.d.
110).
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9