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
0.11UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.11UNLIKELY
Fear
0.13UNLIKELY
Joy
0.59LIKELY
Sadness
0.61LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.44UNLIKELY
Confident
0UNLIKELY
Tentative
0.41UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.81LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.86LIKELY
Extraversion
0.47UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.85LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.7LIKELY
Tone of specific sentences
Tones
Emotion
Language
Social Tendencies
Anger
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9
You guys have heard me talk before about some of the things I’ve read in the pastors’ groups I follow on Facebook.
I get a lot of encouragement from these groups.
It’s nice to see people struggling with the same things I struggle with.
It’s nice to know the problems I face as a pastor are not unique to me.
And once in a while, someone will post a solution that fits our context, and then what was a problem for me is no longer a problem.
But the truth is that I am frequently surprised at how different my situation is from that of some of the other pastors in those groups.
I am well-loved by this congregation.
I am well-compensated for the work I do here.
And the Lord rewards me by allowing me to see so many of you grow in your faith and in your walk with Him.
It is truly a blessing to be your pastor, and I often thank God for that blessing.
Sometimes, when I read the posts of other pastors who are being treated shamefully by their congregations, my heart just breaks for them.
You wouldn’t believe some of the ugliness that has been directed toward some of the pastors in those groups.
But what’s even more common than outright ugliness is the unreal expectations that some congregations have of their pastors.
And it’s when I read THOSE accounts that I most often shake my head in wonder.
There are pastors in church parsonages who have to be ready for unannounced, spot inspections of their homes by the church trustees.
There are pastors who are expected to be the church handyman, fixing everything that breaks around the building.
There are pastors who are expected to cut the church’s grass every week.
There are pastors who get into trouble if their wives, who are not paid by the church, do not volunteer to lead church ministries.
Now, I’m wary of sharing this with you, because the cynical part of me worries that, having done so, I’ve given you ideas about how to change my work contract this year.
So let me tell you what I tell my wife: I’m not that guy.
She didn’t marry the guy who is the handyman.
She married the guy who can WRITE about the handyman.
If I’ve got to fix what breaks around here, then we’re all in trouble, because it’ll be worse when I’m done with it than when I started.
And if I’m cutting the grass, then I’m not spending the time I need to spend in prayer and Bible study.
The reason I shared all this is to tell you all how thankful I am for folks in this church who handle these tasks.
Just this week, Alan Schubert and Dave Francis spent a couple of days fixing a major problem with the septic system.
And guys, I’m SOO sorry for flushing the toilet while you were out there.
Don’t even get me started on how much time Alan spends dealing with alarm problems and HVAC problems and everything else.
And now is an appropriate time to tell you that he could use some help.
Ask him, and I’m sure he can find a way for you to pitch in.
But it’s not just the physical building that gets attention from folks in the church.
Amy Harrell and Cynthia Harris do the things every week that keep the church finances in order.
Tracy Francis puts together our budget and makes sure we’re in good shape throughout the year.
Cynthia and Annette and Connie Schubert work on children’s ministry and soon, we hope, youth ministry.
Miss Lynn and lots of other folks put together our church breakfasts and other meals, like the one we’ll share after Emery Nichols’ committal service later today.
Earl and Glenda Smith and Sue Nichols make sure the cemetery is taken care of.
And Glenda and Mary Catherine Matthews handle the acknowledgements when we receive memorial donations.
When we have movie nights and other outreach events, the Missions and Evangelism team turns out to put up the inflatable screen and set up snacks for our guests.
Andy Harrell and Amy and Annette and Dave Francis get together to rehearse and provide the music for our services.
And whenever we change locations, Andy is always ready to lug the equipment up and down the hall so we’ll be ready on Sunday.
Your deacons — Michael Harris, Dave Chipman, and Rich Kovalik — help me with planning and with keeping in touch with families, letting me know of people who need special prayers or visits.
Mike Constant changes our sign so folks driving by will see what’s going on here.
And he and the other trustees and their helpers — Alan, and Dave, and Chip, and VJ, and Johnny — take care of more things than I could take the time to name around the building.
Diana and Boris San Andrés come out to make sure that our cleaning crew hasn’t missed something and that the bathrooms are spotless.
And I can guarantee you that I’ve left out some names in these lists.
And if I left yours out, please do not be offended.
I’ve already told y’all that I’m not the smartest tool in the shed.
A smart guy wouldn’t have named ANYONE.
But I wanted to give you all a sense of the scope of what it takes to keep this church — both the building and the institution — running well.
I may be the preacher and primary teacher here, and because of that, you all wind up looking at me for a couple of hours a week.
But I literally could not do what I do here if it were not for all these other people — and more — doing all those things that I don’t have to do.
And I want you all to know how much I appreciate it — how thankful I am, especially when I read the stories shared by those other pastors who maybe aren’t loved as well as you love me.
I am so very thankful for the servant hearts that I see each week in this place.
And as we near the end of our long series, “The Church — Revealed” — we’ll conclude it next week — we’re going to look back at the Book of Acts to see how the mother church in Jerusalem addressed the kinds of problems that churches throughout the centuries have faced.
That church didn’t have a building to manage.
It didn’t have acres of grass to be cut.
It didn’t have a cemetery to manage.
And it surely didn’t have a septic system that would eventually fail.
But it did have people who needed help.
And the Apostles understood early on that if they didn’t get help in helping the people of the church, they would be overwhelmed and unable to do the work that God had called them to do — to pray for the church and to study God’s word so they could proclaim His truth.
Turn with me to Acts, chapter 6, and let’s read together about the situation there.
As you’re finding the passage, let me remind you that this church had grown exponentially in the weeks following Pentecost.
As Jesus had promised, the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Apostles and thousands of people had given their lives to Christ in response to their preaching.
This church was gathering on the steps of the temple and in one another’s homes for teaching and the Lord’s Supper and fellowship.
And both the new Christians and the city around them were being blessed by this great revival.
Since this all took place in Jerusalem, most of the new Christians there were Jewish.
Many of them would have been from Jerusalem — what our text refers to as “the native Hebrews.”
But many of them were Jews from other parts of the Roman Empire who had come to Jerusalem for the feast days and had remained there to be with their new brothers and sisters in Christ.
Those recent arrivals are the “Hellenistic Jews” in today’s text.
But growth always brings challenges.
And what we’ll see in this passage is that the challenges of the Acts 6 church were a direct result of the mixing of different cultures that took place as the new believers became one body in Christ.
Let’s pick up in verse 1.
So, there was a problem, and this is the first problem recorded in church history.
And, as with so many problems, this one manifested itself as a conflict between people.
This church that was described back in chapter 2 as having “all things in common,” as sharing their possessions with one another as anyone might have need, as “taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart” was already experiencing conflict related to the very things that it was commended for just four chapters earlier.
The Hellenistic Jews — those who had come to Jerusalem from other parts of the Roman Empire — were upset because the native Hebrews — the Jewish Christians from Jerusalem — were overlooking the Hellenistic widows when it came to food distribution.
We don’t know whether the oversight was an intentional snub or simply a matter of those who were giving the food away not knowing the newcomers in their midst or their need.
What we do know is that there was a legitimate complaint and a legitimate need.
The Apostles could have intervened themselves to make sure the Hellenistic widows were served.
But they understood that doing so would take them away from their primary duties — prayer and the ministry of God’s word.
And so, they called together the congregation — the Greek word here means “multitude.”
They called together the whole church and had them choose seven men to put in charge of the task so the Apostles could continue to pray and preach and teach.
These seven men would be the church’s servants.
The Greek word is diakoneo, and we get our word “deacon” from it.
A deacon is a servant.
In the Acts church, that meant — at least at first — serving tables, or distributing food.
But I think it’s reasonable to conclude that their service also would have extended to other needs that might arise in the church, too.
And note what Luke records as the qualifications for these servants.
They were to have good reputations, and they were to be full of the Spirit and of wisdom.
The Apostle Paul mentions deacons in his first letter to Timothy, and there he fleshes out these qualifications.
A couple of things reveal themselves to us in this passage.
First, unlike elders in the church, neither Luke nor Paul suggests that deacons must be qualified to teach.
But there is certainly a teaching element to their service.
After all, the selfless service of those first deacons in Acts, chapter 6, amounted to something of a teachable moment for that church.
And it seems, based on the continuing growth of that church, that the congregation re-learned the lesson of unity because of these servants’ actions.
But what we see in both Acts and 1 Timothy is that teaching does not appear to be the primary role of deacons in the church.
The other thing to notice in the passage from 1 Timothy is that the role of deacon is one that could be held by women in the church.
Look at verse 11.
The word “likewise” here suggests that Paul considers women to be eligible for service as deacons if they meet the requirements he has already listed, along with those in verse 11.
And in his letter to the Roman church, Paul writes this:
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9