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
0.05UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.05UNLIKELY
Fear
0.08UNLIKELY
Joy
0.73LIKELY
Sadness
0.13UNLIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.8LIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.62LIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.92LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.18UNLIKELY
Extraversion
0.05UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.16UNLIKELY
Emotional Range
0.39UNLIKELY

Tone of specific sentences

Tones
Emotion
Anger
Disgust
Fear
Joy
Sadness
Language
Analytical
Confident
Tentative
Social Tendencies
Openness
Conscientiousness
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Emotional Range
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
In Genesis chaper 2 we see the wonderfully good account of creation, specifically the good creation of mankind.
Remeber that in chapter 2 there is no fall.
All of the earth is good.
Adam is good.
The land is good.
Satan has not entered into the story yet.
All that exists in Genesis 2 is good.
Good, but not perfect.
We see this paradox in light of Adam himself.
Adam is good.
The world he is living in is good.
The animals God created are good.
The garden Adam lives in is good.
Everything is good - there is absolutly no evil at all.
However we read an intresting verse:
Did you catch that?
Everything is good, but Adam without a suitible helper is “not good”.
Can you see the imperfection of the all good creation?
This state of “not good” is not evil, but it is, in God’s own words: “Not good”.
If Adam were perfect then he would not need Eve.
If Adam was not limited, being alone would not be “not good”.
When God was alone is was not “not good” because God is perfect and self existance.
Adam is good, but he is not perfect and self existanct so when he is alone is it “not good”.
Now I believe that if in a good creation, without any evil - so long as it is possible for there to exist “not good”, then there also exists the possibiulity of evil.
And agasin it must be stressed that the “not good” is NOT a design flaw, it is a design consequence of anything that is not perfect.
I say it again: Good and perfect are not synonamis.
If creation were actally perfect then there is no way that one could get something that is “not good”.
But again, the “imperfection” ofn creation is not a slight against God in any way, as it is impossible for God to create anything that is as perfect as He himself is since the thing would then be God, yet also not as this created “God” would have a beggining and thus not be perfect.
It is the same reasoning behind the illogical questions such as: Can God create a rock to heavy for himself to lift?
In the same way that thius question is illogical so to to God cannot create a creation as perfect as He Himself is.
Now that I hope we can see that creat6ion is good, but not perfect because it is both limited and not self existant we can look into its implications.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9