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
0.11UNLIKELY
Fear
0.1UNLIKELY
Joy
0.22UNLIKELY
Sadness
0.54LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.77LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.41UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.89LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.6LIKELY
Extraversion
0.29UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.63LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.73LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
The last time I preached in Galatians I pointed out that Paul spends the second half of chapter one, and all of chapter 2 defending himself and the message of the Gospel.
Paul didn’t go looking for Jesus, either in salvation or in the message he preached.
I really want you to hold on the thought that Paul was preaching came directly from God.
I have more to say about this in a few minutes.
In chapter 1, the emphasis is on Paul’s Apostolic Credentials.
In Chapter 2, the emphasis will be on the commendation given to him by the other Apostles.
The big idea is that Paul preached the same message as the other Apostles.
He has not changed anything..
He doesn’t pollute, dilute, understate, or overstate the Gospel message.
The Centrality of the Gospel
4 times in 10 verses.
Remember that the Gospel is defined as the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus.
But does Paul have it right?
Is what he is proclaiming and teaching about the law versus grace true?
IS the Gospel Jesus plus the law?
Is Paul a fraud?
Has he perverted the truth of God, and changed things up?
Confirmation sought for the message preached
Paul has been preaching his message now for well over 14 years, all in around 17 years.
He’s well versed in the OT as a Jewish rabbi.
And God had revealed to him the truth of the Gospel .
God has told Paul to go see the Apostles.
Notice he uses the phrase “Recognized as leaders” both in verse 2 and then something similar in 6 twice.
Paradox..
They were apostles, called by Jesus, and set aside for this task, and leaders.
But they were also men, and whatever authority the operated in, the church chose to follow.
Paul is not being condescending, but he does recognize the same call on his life that they claim on theirs.
His goal according to verse 2 is that he not run in vain… He seeks to confirm that his message is the right one.
Confirmation gained through the presence of Titus
Barnabas was Jewish..
He had been circumcised as such so he will not be a in issue.
Titus however is a Gentile.
He’s a Christian but has not been circumcised because he was not ever Jewish.
Paul’s argument here is that when they got to Apostles, if the Jewish law had been an issue for Gentiles, they would have compelled Titus to be circumcised since that was the ultimate symbol of the old covenant.
But you will notice that the “false brothers” didn’t go down without a fight.
SO Paul gave them a fight.
He believed that backing down on this issue was giving up on the Gospel.
He didn’t budge an inch.
Confirmation gained through the commendation of the Apostles
They added nothing to me.
apostleship to the Gentiles.
Apostle means sent out one.
Peter’s ministry was primarily to Jews
Paul’s primarily to Gentiles.
Clarification.
Not to different Gospels (verse 7) Gospel of Circumcision and of circumcision… best understood as who went where.
Gospel TO
One Gospel.
So Paul communicated to them what he had been preaching and it was the same thing they had preached.
This did two things.
He was as called by God as they were (His message was the same, but he was not schooled by them)
His message was authentic.
A word of caution: Watch out for anyone who would say, “The Lord gave this revelation to me like He did Paul”
This is said to keep scrutiny away.
If someone says the Lord told me, who wants to argue with God?
That’s the opposite of Paul… he brought his message for confirmation..
He was not afraid of the scrutiny.
Most of the time when I have heard someone say, I’m like Paul, God gave this to me, it is because they don’t want to be scrutinized.
This was a Gospel issue.
They did not get out in left field in their arguments.
These discussions are central… what does it take to be a Christian?
Is it Jesus plus or minus anything.
Remember that at this time, they did not have a complete NT as we do.
We have the writings of Paul, Peter, James, and John.
These are the very people who are hammering this out in Galatians 2. If we want to know the validity of our doctrine, we can simply go to the Scripture.
A Caveat:
Paul took it to heart their call to care for the poor.
More than once we find him talking about collecting and bringing an offering to the poverty stricken poor.
This was a concern of the church even hundreds of years later.
One Roman ruler noticed that not only to they take care of their own, but also others in whatever city was their home.
We cannot separate the Gospel which shows God love for the souls of people, from our care for the physical needs of people.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9