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
0.14UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.48UNLIKELY
Fear
0.11UNLIKELY
Joy
0.56LIKELY
Sadness
0.53LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.21UNLIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.47UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.86LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.7LIKELY
Extraversion
0.37UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.71LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.62LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
Introduction
A few years ago, I went to see the Stephen Spielberg movie Lincoln.
The movie’s concern is only on the latter part of his presidency and life.
It centers on his great push both to get the 13th amendment to the Constitution passed in the House of Representatives, and to bring the Civil War to an end.
There was ample footage of the kind of debates that took place on the House floor.
To get the ⅔ majority in the House, Lincoln needed every Republican and four Democrats to vote in favor.
One of the Democrats he was trying to turn in favor of the amendment was Kentucky rep.
George Yeaman.
But here’s what Yeaman said at one of the debates on the House floor,
Although I’m disgusted by slavery, I rise on this sad and solemn day to announce that I’m opposed to the amendment.
We must consider what will become of colored folk if four million are in one instant set free…And, and!
We will be forced to enfranchise the men of the colored race—it would be inhuman not to!
Who among us is prepared to give Negros the vote?
And, and!
What shall follow upon that?
Universal enfranchisement?
Votes for women?
The house floor erupted with shouts.
The members on both sides unable to fathom allowing Blacks or women to vote.
But it’s hard for us to imagine living at a time when the thought of allowing Blacks or women to vote would’ve been so appalling in our country.
Of course, the 13th Amendment did pass, with every Republican and four Democrats (including Yeaman) voting in favor of it.
And even though Lincoln was successful, the movie ends with his assassination.
I knew that’s how it would end, but I still found tears welling up in my eyes when the credits were rolling.
And the tears were welling up because my heart was struck by the reminder of the immense price that is paid in the pursuit of justice and righteousness.
It often costs those engaged in the pursuit their very lives.
You cannot help but think of the one who embodies justice, righteousness and holiness in himself, Jesus Christ.
And the price he paid for universal enfranchisement—to bring people from every tribe, tongue and nation into the family of God.
And yet, the practical outworking of it has been difficult, to say the least.
The struggle against ethnic discrimination, even in the church, finds its roots in the book of Acts.
And we might even say the struggle begins right here in our text.
The promise of Jesus’ kingdom is not limited to any ethnic, socio-economic, political, or other type of group.
And the Holy Spirit has to make this clear.
I have three C’s for us as we work through these 23 verses; Comfort, Correction, and Courtesy.
The message of comfort that God gives to Cornelius, who is outside of the promises, excluded, disenfranchised.
The message of correction that God gives to Peter so that he better understands the Gospel.
And the courtesy, by courtesy I mean hospitality, that results from this understanding.
Comfort
This passage follows the apostle Peter’s witness by the water in the cities of Lydda and Joppa on the Mediterranean coastline when he healed Aeneas and resuscitated Dorcas from the dead.
And he stays in Joppa at the house of Simon the tanner.
And we get a hint even from where Peter is staying that God may be setting him up to explode his categories for who is included in Jesus’s kingdom.
Because tanners were considered ceremonially unclean among Jewish people since their work necessitated constant touching of dead animals.
And for an orthodox Israelite like Peter to be staying at a tanner’s house was boundary breaking itself.
But that was only a start.
Because God wanted to bring the comfort of the Gospel not just to Jewish tanners like Simon, and not just to half-Jewish Samaritans like you see in ch. 8, but to the Gentiles as well (that is, to everybody else).
So, there is this man, Luke says in v. 1, named Cornelius.
He is a Roman centurion, stationed in Caesarea (about 32 miles north of Joppa).
He is one of the centurions over the Italian Cohort.
And a cohort was made up of six “centuries.”
So, he was in command one of the six centuries, about 100 soldiers.
Centurions were men with great power.
In the blink of an eye they could have you flogged or killed.
But Cornelius wasn’t a ruthless commander, leading his soldiers by fear and oppression.
The opposite is the case.
Luke describes him in v. 2 as
He wasn’t a Christian.
He wasn’t a disciple.
He didn’t even know who Jesus was, but it is clear that the Spirit of God was at work in him, creating in him a desire to know God.
I find the comparison between Cornelius and Dorcas, who we meet at the end of ch. 9, very interesting.
Dorcas is a disciple, a follower of Jesus, and Cornelius is not.
They both were people of means, they had wealth.
And both of them were rich in mercy towards those who had need.
Dorcas was full of good works and acts of charity.
When it says that Cornelius gave alms generously to the people, it could be translated that he practiced generous charity with the people.
“Charity” in 9:36 and “alms” in 10:2 are from the same root word.
And he didn’t discriminate in who received his charity.
Because when the men are describing Cornelius to Peter down in v. 22, they tell Peter that the whole Jewish nation can testify that Cornelius is an upright and God-fearing man.
He was known in household, among his cohort, and in his community as a reverent, God-fearing man.
He was known for mercy, not oppression.
a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God. ()
Here’s my point.
Cornelius was outside of the promises.
But God was working on his heart.
There was a practical outworking in his extending charity to those in need.
But his heart was unsettled.
He prayed continually to God.
The word used for prayer in this context has the sense of making a request, beseeching God out of real need for help.
He didn’t need financial help.
He didn’t need physical help.
He wasn’t sick.
He needed comfort.
He needed a settled heart.
He needed to know Jesus, but didn’t know that’s what he needed.
The deal is that we have no idea how God has been working on people’s hearts independently of us.
Cornelius had never heard about Jesus or the Holy Spirit.
But God was creating a need in him.
A need to hear the comforting message of his salvation through Jesus Christ.
We don’t know who God’s working on, but we know that he’s still working on folks.
Our confidence as Christians is that the issues of the heart are unsettling people.
God has written his law on our hearts.
He is at work preparing the hearts of people to hear and receive his message of comfort.
God is concerned to bring comfort to Cornelius.
He gives him a clear vision of an angel with a clear message.
Cornelius is terrified in v. 4 after an angel of God appears and calls him by name.
He says, “What is it, Lord?”
The angel says, “Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God.” God is well aware of your prayers and your charity.
The message is that God is going to answer your prayers by bringing you some good news.
So, send men to Joppa and bring Simon Peter here.
Cornelius sends two servants and a devout soldier on this mission.
Correction
The problem in the text is that God needs to work on Peter too.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9