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
0.17UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.13UNLIKELY
Fear
0.15UNLIKELY
Joy
0.48UNLIKELY
Sadness
0.56LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.66LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.47UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.91LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.81LIKELY
Extraversion
0.2UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.54LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.69LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
Please remain standing as we read Gods word together.
Read
Pray
We are now entering chapter 7. Probably one of the most debated chapters in all of scripture.
The discussion began in chapter 5. chapter 6 and 7 are in explaination of the comments made in chapter 5.
Imagine chapter 6 and 7 are in parenthesis and then the original initial thought comes back beginning in chapter 8 verse 5. that is kind of what is happening here.
I have addressed the issues of yesterday, at least some of them.
I have addressed the issues of today, or at least some of them.
I want to address some issues that are timeless.
The issues that I have been talking about have been more ristricted to a certain time.
Our ancestors didnt have the same temptations as we have, they had temptations and strongs ones, but not the exact same ones.
So last week I talked about feeding our minds with meaningless junk, Our ancestors could not know the issues of television, smart phones, internet, and social media.
That is a issue and temptation restricted to a certian point in time.
It doesnt mean they had it easier, or better or vice versa.
Yeah we live in a time of luxury, but that luxury has handicapped us.
I imagine if our ancestors seen how we work they would look at us like we are a bunch of lazy bums.
And at the same time if they could see that horrors of the internet, I think they would be dropped to their knees in holy fear for our generation.
I think if they could see the mass sexual depravity of our time they would weep for their descendents.
Yes, I think your ancestors would shed many for you all if they seen what we have at our fingertips.
Of course the internet is a doorway for a lot of good and it has been.
But there is far more evil in that doorway than we could imagine.
So, form our point in time, it seems like a good invention, i think to other people in historical settings would see it as a curse.
If time travel is a real thing and we hop in our delorian and gun it to 88 (back to the future refrence check ching ) and brought someone back to see our age.
I would be curious to know how they would describe our time to people in their time.
Maybe one day I will get that answer.
The point is, different times have different problems.
Some things are simply restricted to a specific era.
But some things are not.
Some things are just universal and it doesent matter what country you are in, or time period you are in.
One of those things is sin.
Sin is not an era specific issue, it is a cosmic issue for every single desendent of Adam.
Another thing that is timeless is mans desire to save himself.
maybe it is mans desire to be like God that causes him to be like that.
The Original temptation that caused the original sin as it has been called.
Mankind has this desire that they can save themselves, that they need to follow these set of rules and regulations in order to be saved or remain saved.
Man wants to do do it his way.
I realize I am heavy on the masculine languge, ladies, you are in this as well.
I use masculine languae because the bible does and its habbit.
We are talking about mankind, human kind.
weather you realize it or not, you want to do things your way, even in your own slavation and christian walk.
I am the master of my ship, i am the conductor of this train.
Of course not many will admit that is their attitude because when it is phrased the way I said it leaves very little room for Jesus Lord of all.
But pay attention, you will see, that man is more intersted in keeping a checklist of right and wrong over what will Honor or dishonor my God.
In our desperate attempt to be workers of rightousness on our own we asked what would Jesus do instead of what would Jesus have me do? they are two seperate questions with complety different implications.
What it really boils down to, are we living for God or trying to live like God?
That question may seem odd to you, how can one live like God? well when man says he is the master of his own ship- who is in control in that scene?
Ah, but we wouldnt it phrase it that way.
We have other ways of robbing God of his glory.
We use language that sounds christian or godly and question those who point out the truth of it not being in the pages of scripture.
The Pharisees were men who wanted to live like God, in that they depended on their own righteousness- another word for that is self righteousness.
But when we think pharisee, we think of men trying to be Gods moral army.
Today, A pharisee looks postitve and flies under the radar.
They say if you want to receieve this blessing you must do… you know the rest.
its do these steps if you want to recieve- that is still depending on ones own righteousness to acomplish then recieve.
The bible calls it self righteousness- I am calling it living like God.
In that God is the only righteous one.
So again, are you living for God or trying to live like God.
Your fallen nature wants to do one, and only one.
Which is why Paul has to address this before he can move on.
which he does in chapter 8.
so lets break down our text for today and learn and grow as a body of believers.
Here is where Paul switches gears.
Chapter 6 was more of a focus on sin, chapter 7 will focus on law.
It will serve us well to go back and refresh our memeories for just a second.
This is what began the conversation to begin with.
The first verse of chapter 6 is
Paul had his lasers set on the sin side.
Now he wants to explain the law.
Paul knows he must do this because he knows his audience.
He knows the human nature and where the human mind wants to go if not properly instructed.
So verse 1 begins with or do you not know, brethren.
Some say he is speaking to the converted Jews because he uses the word brethren and then expalins he is speaking to those who know the law.
I have to disagree with that.
Paul in his writings has been very careful to seperate weather he is talking about the Jewish people when he says brethren or fellow christians.
If he is talking about the jews when using the word brethren, he will follow with kin or kindred.
Paul does not do that here.
Also, Paul has already defined what he means by law and has said it applies to everyone.
It could be that he is directing his message directly towards the converted jews though.
They were the ones still falling towards the law.
But he has been so long past that, it just seems that he speaking to believers in general.
You do not have to be a jew to be bound by law.
As a matter of fact, fallen man hopes for law and wants the law to be their savior.
How so? they think they rise and fall by law.
This is what Paul has been arguing against, those who feel they can be righteous on their own.
We just discuused this group.
Regardless of who the target audenice is, it is something we all must learn from so lets continue.
Paul asks a question and it is a set up questions.
A set up question is a a question where the answered is implied and already known.
And that question is do you not know that the law has, my translation says jurisdiction, others say domnion, but it means Lord.
Do you not know that the law is lord over a person as long as he lives?
Now the langaue forces you to ask yourself a question, who is Lord, Who is Lord of me, is it Law or Christ?
But Paul continues explaining.
Paul now draws an image.
Now Paul is not giving a sermon, or teaching on marriage, on divorce, none of that.
That is not his point, he is using an image to make a point but the point itself is not on marriage.
With that being said, that does not mean we are completly void of a marrige discussion in this text.
First of, Paul is drawing from the biblical view of marriage.
This is something he culture would have been better about than our culture.
We are in the New Feminist age that would just hate seeing this verse right here.
And this line of thinking is just about forigen to our land.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9