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
0.11UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.47UNLIKELY
Fear
0.06UNLIKELY
Joy
0.53LIKELY
Sadness
0.52LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.65LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.42UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.97LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.51LIKELY
Extraversion
0.15UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.05UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.65LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
Paul looked on his ministry as something he received not because of any personal merit but on account of God’s favor.
Nor was this a matter of theoretical knowledge.
Paul experienced God’s mercy firsthand when he was stopped dead in his tracks while pursuing Jewish Christians who had fled Jerusalem for the safer haven of Damascus (Acts 9:1–9).
Then there was the surpassing splendor of the new covenant (this ministry).
The privilege of being a minister of such a covenant more than compensated for the trials and tribulations that he experienced as an itinerant preacher.
As a result, Paul did not lose heart (enkakoumen, v. 1*).
The Greek verb means “to act badly” in the face of difficulties; “to give up” or “grow weary” while pursuing a worthwhile goal
Paul, however, would not allow any obstacles inside or outside the church to pressure him into abandoning his ministry.
Instead of giving in to discouragement, he deliberately and categorically “renounces” the kind of behavior that characterized much of the itinerant speaking of his day.
He describes this behavior as secret and shameful (v.
2*).
The phrase is literally “the secret things of shame.”
“Secret things” are a person’s innermost thoughts and intentions (Furnish 1984:218).
The genitive “of shame” can be descriptive: “shameful secret practices” (Phillips) or subjective: “actions kept secret for shame” (NEB, REB).
Deeds one hides because of their shameful character is probably the thought here.
Paul rejects two types of shameful deeds.
First, he does not use deception.
Use is literally “to walk” (peripateō)—a verb that occurs frequently in Paul’s writings to describe the Christian life.
The Greek term for deception means “capable of anything” (pan + ourgia).
In the New Testament it refers to those who use their ability unscrupulously and denotes cunning or slyness.
Not only does Paul not resort to deception, but, second, he does not distort the word of God.
The verb distort (doloō) is commonly employed of adulterating merchandise for profit.
Paul refused to follow in the footsteps of others who tamper with God’s word in order to make it more palatable to the listener or more lucrative for themselves.
In short, Paul eschewed any behavior that was not in accord with the character of the gospel that he preached
Paul, instead, set[s] forth the truth plainly.
The Greek term translated “sets forth” (tē phanerōsei) refers to an open declaration or full disclosure.
The contrast is between a straightforward and open, as opposed to deceptive, presentation of the gospel—what we call “telling it like it is.”
Paul goes on in verses 3–4* to deal with the accusation that his message is veiled (kekalymmenon).
It would appear—if we can read between the lines—that Paul’s critics reasoned from the absence of large numbers of converts (especially from among his own people) to some fault in his preaching.
Paul is the first one to recognize that he is not an overly impressive speaker, as speakers go.
This was deliberate on his part, as he would have his audience know only “Jesus Christ and him crucified” (see 1 Cor 2:1–5)
So it is not surprising that he does not deny the charge.
The conditional form that he chooses acknowledges their claim: If [as you claim] our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing (ei + indicative).
But what he does not allow is that there is some fault with the message that he preached.
If the content of his preaching is veiled, it is not because he did not present the truths of the gospel plainly (v.
2).
The fault lies rather in three areas.
First, the audience is at fault.
If there is a hidden aspect to what he preaches, it only appears so to those who are perishing.
As in 2:15–16, Paul divides humanity into two groups based on their destiny: those who are on the road to destruction (tois apollymenois) and, by implication, those who are on the road to salvation.
To the one the gospel makes no sense (v.
3), while to the other it is plain as day (v.
6).
Everywhere we go, people breathe in the exquisite fragrance.
Because of Christ, we give off a sweet scent rising to God, which is recognized by those on the way of salvation—an aroma redolent with life.
But those on the way to destruction treat us more like the stench from a rotting corpse.
The fault lies, second, with the situation.
The minds of those who are perishing have been blinded.
The blindness is of a particular sort—it is a blindness to the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ (v.
4*).
The piling up of genitives both here and in verse 6 is typical of Paul.
The light of the gospel is probably a genitive of source: “the light which radiates from the gospel.”
Of the glory is most likely descriptive, “the light of the glorious gospel.”
As the Mosaic covenant shone with glory, so the gospel shines with glory.
Of Christ is plausibly construed as objective: “the glorious gospel about Christ.”
The fault lies, third, with the source of the blindness.
Unbelievers cannot see the gospel’s light because their minds have been blinded by the god of this age (v.
4).
This is the only place where Paul refers to the adversary of God’s people as a god.
He is usually called Satan or the devil—although in Ephesians 2:2 he is named “the ruler of the kingdom of the air.”
It could well be that these are traditional formulations Paul used because of their familiarity to his readers.
But there is no denying the power of this being.
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
2 Wherein cin time past ccye walked according to the dcourse of ethis world, according to fthe prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in gthe children of disobedience:
The preacher in our media-oriented society is pressured to use the pulpit as a stage for displaying eloquence, dramatic skill and fine oratory.
Congregations add to this pressure with their desire to be amused and entertained.
As a result, preaching is often seen by outsiders as just another stage performance.
And what is hailed as a successful ministry is sometimes little more than good acting.
But to his credit Paul can say of himself and his coworkers that we do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, and ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake (v.
5*).
1.
The Prince Of The Power OF The Air:
The Prince of atmospheric heavens Secondly, it emphasizes him as being in authority over the other angels that fell with him.
He is the prince of the powers, the other powers or the fallen angels.
Principality: the territory or jurisdiction of a prince
Power: possession of control, authority, or influence over others
Atmosphere: a surrounding or pervading mood, environment, or influence:
So In Your Guest-a-mation: What Jurisdiction/territory does satan controls and Influences?
engage with questions..
2. The God of This Age:
The fifth title of Satan is: the god of this age ().
The Greek word used here is not kosmos, but aion, which means “age.”
It emphasizes the system of philosophy which is contrary to God; this system of philosophy is the spirit of this age and this cosmos.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9