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
0.15UNLIKELY
Fear
0.11UNLIKELY
Joy
0.15UNLIKELY
Sadness
0.57LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.74LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.04UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.85LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.53LIKELY
Extraversion
0.01UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.21UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.58LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
I. Repentance
Comparison between different people who were confronted by God
Cain Gen 4:9-13
Saul 1 Sam 15:24-25
David Ps 51
No mention again of lessening the consequences
Does ask for restoration of full fellowship
Asks for forgiveness
Asks for sanctification
Acknowledges that we sin because we are sinners
Defining repentance
“Against the Lord” c.f. Ps 51:4 What about all the other people?
Bathsheba?
Uriah?
Joab?
II.
When God answers no
Why did David think there was a chance?
Jer 18:7-10; Jonah 4:2-3
David’s fasting and then odd ceasing of mourning is his confidence in the sovereignty of God.
God can save the child at any moment, if he wishes.
God does sometimes give a clear no.
III.
How is it right for the baby to die?
God has made it clear that children are not to be put to death for the sins of the parents Ezek 18:20
It is not normally the fault of the parents in this case John 9:1-3.
So when counseling parents on the death of their child, I would almost never conclude that there was anything wrong.
But the fact that it is not usually anyone’s fault is not the same as saying it never could be.
Sin always has consequences, yes consequences to one’s children.
That’s the nature of sin in general.
The only difference here is the level of specificity.
Ex 34:6
IV.
The Case for infant’s eternal safety
First, some hints
David’s statement does not help us determine what happens to infants who die.
The doctrine of heaven and hell hadn’t been revealed yet, so David doesn’t know where people go when they die.
He knows that death is not the end (1 Sam 28) , and that God is just and merciful.
He doesn’t know where he is going, let alone the child.
However, there is a note of hope and togetherness.
David’s statement reminds one of the expression that occurs some seven times in the Pentateuch, that someone was “gathered to his people.”
(c.f.
Gen 25:8).
This conception is of everyone being together in death (Job 3:11, 13-14).
So it really doesn’t tell us where infants go when they die.
But it would be a bit dissonant with the mood, if David went to heaven and his child went to hell.
He wouldn’t be “together,” though this interpretation does fit the context.
Second hint - Jesus’ words about little children Mark 10:13-16.
Again, this doesn’t teach us that little children are perfectly guiltless.
It does imply that we must accept salvation with no hidden agenda, no provisos, which children do automatically as they lack the sophistication to do that.
Again, doesn’t prove it, but it definitely predisposes us to look harder.
Now the proof.
Before a certain age, humans have yet to commit moral actions Romans 9:10-12; and have yet to understand the difference between right and wrong Isa 7:14-16.
However, humans sin because they are sinners, they do not become sinners when they sin.
Psalm 51:5; Romans 5:12
This original, or first, sin is a problem, as infants are born into a fallen race and equally bear the guilt.
Now, when Adam and Eve sinned, it was more than just that two individuals sinned, although that was true.
Every member of the human race - both of them - committed the exact same sin.
Therefore the human race sinned.
When Eve ate the fruit, only half the human race sinned, so while that made her a sinner, the human race as a whole wasn’t yet.
But when Adam ate, all members of the human race had sinned.
This means that the human race was guilty and merited God’s judgment.
This is why those after Adam still died, even though they didn’t eat the fruit.
They were part of the human race, which was under the sentence of death.
But this means that when an infant is born, it is born into a fallen race, and therefore has the cloud of death over it, even though it hasn’t done anything yet.
It’s still human.
But Paul goes on to say that Jesus’ free gift of salvation is much more effective than Adam’s sin.
Romans 5:18.
If Adam’s sin is universal and independent of choice, then Jesus’ atonement is likewise.
Now, each of us here have our own individual sins to deal with, so the atonement for Adam’s sin is, for us, a bit of a moot point.
We have to deal with our own guilt first, before the guilt of the human race means much.
But Jesus’ atonement dealt with the guilt that is due the human race.
That means that no one ever goes to hell just because of Adam’s sin.
Anyone who is punished, is punished for their own sins, not Adam’s.
Infants, however, do not have individual sins, as they have yet to become moral agents, able to choose between right and wrong.
Since Adam’s guilt is the only one that falls on them, and Jesus already paid for that, they will not be condemned, as there is nothing on their record to condemn them.
For us, however, we do have individual sins.
All of us do because we are all born wrong.
To receive salvation for individual sins we must individually repent and believe.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9