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
0.1UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.13UNLIKELY
Fear
0.11UNLIKELY
Joy
0.53LIKELY
Sadness
0.22UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.69LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.3UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.98LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.39UNLIKELY
Extraversion
0.23UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.16UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.61LIKELY

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
The Rider of the Clouds
A few of the fundamental elements of the Old Testament mosaic are familiar and we will not take the time to analyze those.
One of these is kingship.
The Israelite kingship had a quasi-divine flavor, which was common in the Near East - civilizations believed kingship was instituted by the gods.
In Israel’s case, the human king was chosen or adopted into the role of the “son of God” to carry out Yahweh’s rule.
This official status was legitimized to only one dynasty in Israel - the line of David.
Although it is clear how that would be important to the messianic claim, it leaves us with an important question: Would the messiah be truly divine — Yahweh incarnate - or would he be merely thought to be divine, by adoption?
By the time of Jesus’ birth - as God incarnate - Jews were intellectually acclimated to the idea of Yahweh being (at least) in human form, including being embodied.
The incarnation takes that notion another step.
There is indeed clear indication from the Old Testament that Israel’s final Davidic rule would be God become man — an idea reinforced by the New Testament - particularly in one telling scene.
The Divine Council Meeting of Daniel 7
All roads seem to intersect with the divine council idea somewhere.
The divine nature of the messiah is no exception.
The idea derives from a divine council scene in Daniel 7. The scene begins with an odd vision.
Daniel sees four beasts coming out of the sea.
The fourth beast is the most terrifying and imposing.
We learn that the four beasts represent four empires, as had been the case with Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 2. Then we read
Several things jump out at us right away.
First, we know that the Ancient of Days is the God of Israel because the description of his throne as fiery and having wheels matches that of the vision of Ezekiel 1. Ezekiel’s vision also included a human figure on the throne of God.
Second, there are many thrones in heaven, not just one (throne were placed).
These thrones mark the presence of the divine council.
Third the council is called to session to decide the fate of the beasts - national empires.
The decision of the council is to slay (11-12) the fourth beast and removed the dominion of all the beasts is important for eschatology, but that’s peripheral to our focus here.
We are searching for a divine messiah
There is a lot to unpack here.
It is clear from the text that the Ancient of Days (the God of Israel) and the “one like a son of man” are different characters in the scene.
“Son of Man” is a fairly common phrase in the Old Testament.
Ezekiel, for example, is called “son of man” dozens of times in the Book.
The phrase simply means “human one,” and so Daniel describes someone who appeared human coming on or with the clouds to the Ancient of Days.
It it that description that points in the direction of a second deity figure in the scene.
We are back to the concept of two Yahweh figures we saw earlier in the Old Testament.
The Cloud Rider
The first thing we need to understand is the wider ancient context for this description.
We’ve mentioned other ancient literature often as we have talked about this topic and this will not be an exception.
In the Ugarit texts (close neighbor to the north), the god Baal is called :the one who rides in the clouds.”
The description became an official title of Baal, whom the entire Near Eastern realm considered a deity of rank.
To ancient people all over the Mediterranean, Israelite or not, the “one who rides the clouds” was a deity — his status as a god unquestioned.
Consequently, any figure to whom the title was attributed was a god.
Old Testament writers were aware of this language and assigned the “cloud rider” to Yahweh.
The literary tactic made a theological statement.
The effect was to displace or snub Baal and hold up Yahweh as the deity who legitimately rode through the heavens surveying and governing the world.
This is the lone exception to the pattern of using this title for the God of Israel.
There is a second figure — a human figure — that receives this description.
Dan 7 describes two powers in heaven - two Yahweh figures, since, in all other places in the Old Testament the cloud rider is Yahweh.
Just as importantly, the one who rides the clouds receives everlasting kingship from the Ancient of Days.
Everlasting kingship belongs only to the son of David.
This is some of the messianic mosaic.
The ultimate son of David, the messianic king, will be both human (son of man) and God (the rider of the clouds) And that is just what we see in the NT.
Jesus as Daniel’s Son of Man, the Cloud Rider
With respect to New Testament studies, the phrase “son of man” is hotly debated.
Since is means “human one” and was a title used of prophets in the OT — many see no divine status attached to it.
That is likely the case in most occurrences of Jesus (fully man, fully God).
In Dan.
7:13 above is it declaration of deity.
There is no wiggle room there.
Two texts in Luke make a transparent connection between the profile of the suffering Messiah (anointed one - -christos) and the son of man phrase.
But the most dramatic passage in regard to Jesus as the divine son of man is Matthew 26.
In this scene Jesus is standing before Caiphas prior to his condemnation and crucifixion.
In what seems like a cryptic answer to a clear question Jesus quotes Dan 7: 13 to answer Caiaphas.
The reaction is swift and unyielding, Caiaphas understood that Jesus was claiming to be the second Yahweh figure of Daniel 7:13 and that was an intolerable blasphemy.
This is what the priest needed for a death sentence, but it also give clear testimony of Jesus as the final son of David, God incarnate, through whom the disinhereited nations would be reclaimed.
As with the ancient conquest under Joshua, that dominion isn’t going to come without conflict.
But this time, there will be no failure at the end of the campaign.
God’s message of the messianic mosaic to those hostile gods opposing his global Edenic vision was, “You’ll never know what hit you.”
One more thing to say to them — you can try and stop this but you will die like men,
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9