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
0.16UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.2UNLIKELY
Fear
0.16UNLIKELY
Joy
0.15UNLIKELY
Sadness
0.54LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.67LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.03UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.95LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.91LIKELY
Extraversion
0.23UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.69LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.78LIKELY

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
*“Communion, Covenant, and Commitment”*
*Mark 14.22-31*
* *
            What does your life reflect that you are committed to?
Some indicators might be your Outlook Calendar or your financial statements.
It has been said that we are a generation that does not understand “commitment.”
However, I heard someone else suggest that we are truly a people of commitment, but the problem is we are committed to inferior things.
The reason I ask the opening question is because of where we find ourselves in the life and ministry of Jesus.
He is but hours away from the time that all of history anticipates.
Jesus is headed to the cross.
Mark has slowed down his narrative accounts of his life so that we can take a closer look at the things he wants to instill within his disciples.
There is intensity and specificity in the things he is calling his disciples to be and do.
And it is of great value to those of us who are contemporary disciples of his to consider how we should respond – either like or unlike the disciples who have gathered around the table with Jesus.
We remember from last week that Jesus and his disciples had come to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover.
Our drama began when the chief priests and scribes continued their plotting against Jesus and yet faced the challenge that Passover brought – a multitude of people who might be tempted to riot.
But then they had a breakthrough!
They actually acquired an accomplice who was one of his disciples.
His name was Judas Iscariot.
And, though Judas may have stumped the other disciples, Jesus knew who it was who would betray him and why.
It was all part of the divine plan of God.
Jesus had to go to the cross.
And this is the way that it was planned.
But in the midst of the plotting and prophesying of these events, there was a story of an unnamed woman.
It was here that we saw the contrast between one who would deny Jesus and the one who would give everything for him.
To the chagrin of many in the room, this woman expended an entire flask of very important ointment on Jesus.
And thus illustrated what being one of his disciples entailed – everything!
She had recognized the supreme value of Jesus and deemed him worthy of her life.
It was in this context that Jesus sits with his disciples over this meal and institutes the practice of the Lord’s Supper.
This occurs on the night when he will be betrayed.
Jesus knows what is coming and needs to provide them with this observance that will carry on through the church to this day.
We are in Mark 14.22-31.
Please turn there with me if you have not done so.
*READ.*
The Lord’s Supper is identified by churches in different terms.
Some refer to it as the Eucharist which means “to give thanks.”
Others refer to it as the “table of the Lord” or as “Communion” as we do.
Our first point is *Communion.
*
The disciples find themselves “reclining at table” which we recall was a more intimate time of fellowship.
In this setting Jesus takes some bread and says a blessing.
He then proceeds to break off pieces (which was a common practice) and hand out them out to those at the table.
And then when everybody has a piece of bread, he says, “Take it.
This is my body.”
And momentarily, Jesus will distribute a communal cup and say, “this is my blood.”
And over these brief statements, the church has argued what it means throughout history.
We know from Paul’s letter to the Corinthians, that this practice of Communion is meant to be continually carried out.
In fact, he uses many of the words recorded in this Gospel, as well as Matthew and Luke.
So when the disciples utter these same words in the practice of the church, some believe that they are to be taken literally.
That is, when Communion is observed in the church and when the elements are consumed, they literally are the body and blood of Jesus.
This is what theologians refer to as “transubstantiation.”
This is the view of Roman Catholicism.
A second understanding was one that was held by Martin Luther.
Martin Luther believed that the body and blood of Christ were present “in, with, and under the elements.”
In some way, they would be included within the bread and the wine.
This is what is known as “consubstantiation.”
So “transubstantiation” means transforms into those elements and “consubstantiation” means */with/* the elements.
Then there is a third (and perhaps a fourth) understanding of the words of Jesus regarding the elements of communion.
The two are similar in that they would maintain that they are symbolic references.
When Jesus says, “this is my body” or “this is my blood,” he asserts that they represent such things.
In light of the fact that Jesus is yet present as he declares these words, it would seem to rule out a literal understanding.
Jesus uses similar language when he says that he is the door in John 10.
He doesn’t mean that he is literally a door, but illustrates this aas a spiritual truth.
John Calvin would espouse one of these views, known as “spiritual presence.”
He would suggest that it is a symbolic understanding and yet Christ is somehow spiritually present in the participation of communion.
And Ulrich Zwingli held to a “memorial view.”
When Jesus says in some of the other passages that we are called to partake “in remembrance of” Christ, he means it is solely to reflect on the great truths of what happened at the crucifixion.
I don’t see much difference between these latter two.
Here’s why: We know that Matthew includes Jesus’ words that when believers gather (two or three), Jesus is present in the midst.
Understanding of course, that this is in the context of church discipline.
However, the principle is universal.
Jesus has also promised to be with us always.
And so in worship, there is always a special spiritual presence of Christ – particularly when celebrating communion with brothers and sisters as a church family.
Within the meal, there was a cup that was shared by them all.
(I would certainly have preferred my own).
But they would pass it around the table and drink from it.
And referring to its contents, Jesus says that “this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.”
Luke and Paul record Jesus as referring to the “new” covenant in his blood.
These words would have conjured up the prophecies of Jeremiah 31 where there was a promise of this new covenant that would write the law on their hearts and would forgive their sins forever.
As you may know, under the old covenant, the Israelites had to repeatedly offer sacrifices for their sins.
It was meant as a temporal provision until the Perfect Sacrifice would appear to pay for sins once and for all.
Let me show you from Scripture.
Turn to Hebrews 9.11.
I want this passage to show you the insufficiency of the old covenant sacrifices and how the death of Jesus Christ introduces the new covenant.
Hebrews 9:11–28 “11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, */not by means of/* the blood of goats and calves */but by means of his own blood/*, thus securing an eternal redemption.
13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, 14 */how much more will the blood of Christ,/* who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. 15 Therefore he is the mediator of a *new covenant*, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant.
16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established.
17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.
18 Therefore not even the first covenant was inaugurated without blood.
19 For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 20 saying, “This is the blood of the covenant that God commanded for you.”
21 And in the same way he sprinkled with the blood both the tent and all the vessels used in worship.
22 Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.
23 Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own, 26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world.
But as it is, */he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself./*
27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, 28 so Christ, having been offered */once to bear the sins of many/*, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.”
One commentator adds, “‎Just as the blood of a sacrificial animal sealed the covenant God made with Israel at Sinai, so the blood of Jesus sealed the new covenant God made with his new people, the church, at the cross.
Just as blood confirmed the death of an animal, so the blood of Jesus confirms his death.
The blood~/death of Jesus provided forgiveness of sins and right relationship with God.
The old covenant sacrifices anticipated the sacrifice of Jesus and depended on his death on the cross for validity.
And so, even before the events take place, Jesus says that this cup of wine represents my blood that will be shed on the cross.
And it will be quite an event!
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9