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
0.19UNLIKELY
Disgust
0.53LIKELY
Fear
0.09UNLIKELY
Joy
0.5LIKELY
Sadness
0.52LIKELY
Language Tone
Analytical
0.76LIKELY
Confident
0.01UNLIKELY
Tentative
0UNLIKELY
Social Tone
Openness
0.95LIKELY
Conscientiousness
0.78LIKELY
Extraversion
0.25UNLIKELY
Agreeableness
0.6LIKELY
Emotional Range
0.76LIKELY

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
JOHN 5:30-47
WHY I AM A BAPTIST
Jesus said to the Jews who were seeking to kill Him, “I can do nothing on my own.
As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.
If I alone bear witness about myself, my testimony is not deemed true.
There is another who bears witness about me, and I know that the testimony that he bears about me is true.
You sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth.
Not that the testimony that I receive is from man, but I say these things so that you may be saved.
He was a burning and shining lamp, and you were willing to rejoice for a while in his light.
But the testimony that I have is greater than that of John.
For the works that the Father has given me to accomplish, the very works that I am doing, bear witness about me that the Father has sent me.
And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness about me.
His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen, and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe the one whom he has sent.
You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.
I do not receive glory from people.
But I know that you do not have the love of God within you.
I have come in my Father‟s name, and you do not receive me.
If another comes in his own name, you will receive him.
How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God? Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father.
There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope.
If you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me.
But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?”1
Some years ago, I invited several Baptist pastors to bring a message telling why each one was a Baptist.
Among those who accepted that invitation to address the congregation were a denominational leader and several prominent pastors from within the communion with which I was then affiliated.
After they had spoken, with one exception, the congregation still did not know why any was a Baptist.
The denominational leader chided the congregation and chastised me for being “too independent.”
He pled with the church to be more co-operative within the denomination, which co-operation was determined by money sent to the hindquarters.
One man listed a number of benefits for “belonging” to the denomination, focusing primarily on the moneys that would flow to the church.
Yet another of these fellow elders presented an energetic and entertaining apologia for a denominational expression of Christianity that could well have been delivered by any evangelical Christian.
Mostly, we received a series of sociological arguments devoid of doctrinal support; and we were told the benefits of denominational membership without reference to doctrine.
Truth compels me to reject any ecclesiastical association without doctrinal foundation; mere fellowship is insufficient for religious co-operation.
Missionary enterprise alone is insufficient for extended ecclesiastical co-operation.
Any congregational association that seeks to honour Christ must have a doctrinal foundation.
To claim the name Baptist is to identify oneself doctrinally—it is not merely a means of situating oneself denominationally.
To appropriate the name Baptist implies that a person holds convictions concerning certain truths; she or he is convinced of the veracity of those particular truths.
It is my stated conviction that any Baptist should be able to state the reason for his faith and practise.
Any Baptist should be able to say why she is a Baptist, whether she shares in the life of one of the more than forty-five Baptist groups within North America, or whether she belongs to an independent congregation.
To say one is a Baptist is to aver a doctrinal position unique from other communions.
Ultimately, all ecclesiastical associations are on a doctrinal basis.
I was not “born” a Baptist.
I was “born again” a child of the Living God and having come to faith I adopted Baptist convictions.
I was not raised in a Baptist church.
I was not induced to become a Baptist out of convenience or through promises of support.
Almost without exception, denominational leaders representing several Baptist groups have made promises to me only to fail to honour their word.
It is fair to say that I was not led to my Baptist convictions through the veracity of any of a number of Baptist leaders.
Nevertheless, I confess that I have devoured Baptist preaching, rejoicing in the power of the pulpit exemplified by great contemporary Baptist preachers.
To this day, I thrill to hear great preaching, and Baptists convictions create an atmosphere for great preaching.
When I was saved, I began to read the Word of God.
As I read that blessed Word, I drafted a list of major doctrines broadly representative of the whole of Christendom.
All of these doctrines were at first questionable in my mind since I was so new to the Faith.
As I read the Word of God, I determined that each doctrine or practise claiming doctrinal authority was either true or fictitious; the basis for my determination was whether biblical support was present or absent for each doctrine or practise.
Shortly, as result of reading the Word of God, I came to the realisation that I was a Baptist.
Without seeking to become a Baptist, through carefully reading the Word of the Living God, I discovered that I held Baptist convictions.
The great Baptist principles—principles that mark Baptists as a distinctive people—are discovered in the Word of God.
These principles are as follow:
 Authority of the Word of God,
 Autonomy of the local church,
 Acceptance of Two Officers within the Church,
 Regenerate Church Membership,
 Maintenance of the Ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Table,
 Priesthood of the Believer,
 Individual Soul Liberty,
 the Separation of Church and State.
To be certain, the text before us does not present all eight of these great distinctive truths that mark the people known as Baptists, but several great doctrines which suffice to present strong reasons for adherence to Baptist principles are presented.
I invite consideration of the Master‟s interaction with religious dilettantes—unbelievers wearing the guise of worshippers of the True and Living God.
I AM A BAPTIST BECAUSE BAPTISTS BELIEVE THE WORD OF GOD.
“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about Me.” Above all else, Baptists are a people of the Book.
We baptise by immersion for no other reason than that it is commanded in the Book.
Even if we were unable to read the text in the original language we would nevertheless understand that baptism is intended to portray the burial and resurrection of Christ just as the one baptised identifies with Him through this act of obedience [cf.
ROMANS 6:1-11].
As Baptists, we cannot go beyond the Book in Faith and practise, but neither may we do less than that which is required by the Book.
This is the reason we cannot accept any action that denies the necessity of being born from above before identifying with the Master.
This is the reason we cannot condone sprinkling innocent babies in order to make them Christians.
We insist on the authority of the Word of God that only those who are redeemed may identify with the Risen Lord of Glory.
Baptists believe in the autonomy of the local congregation.
Who taught us that doctrine?
We believe that those who come to faith should be baptised following their confession and that the baptism they receive should be by immersion.
Where did we discover that truth?
We believe in the separation of church and state, though not separation of church from state, insisting that the ideal political condition is that represented by a free church in a free state.
From whence did that conviction arise?
Every conviction we hold is firmly rooted in the Bible.
We hold the Bible to be the Word of God—inerrant and infallible—a perfect rule of faith and practise.
In faith and practise, we go no further than the Bible leads us; but we dare do no less than that which the Word of God teaches.
We have determined that the preaching of the Word will be central in our worship simply because we realise that as a people of the Book we need to hear what the Living God says as His Spirit speaks through His written Word.
Some may object that this confession of reliance upon the Word of God is not unique to Baptists, and I gladly concede the point.
We rejoice in each evangelical congregation that affirms this truth; however, we are unapologetic in insisting that historically this was a position that distinguished us as Baptist.
Firm adherence to this doctrinal persuasion led our forefathers to resist every pressure to emulate the assorted religious societies that sought to employ the state in advancing their religious goals.
It was this firm belief in the authority of the Scriptures that led our forefathers to resist the push to treat baptism as a means of salvation; thus, because of our confidence in the written Word we refused to baptise our infants.
We Baptists are who we are today primarily because of our absolute confidence in the authority of the written Word of God.
Isn‟t it amazing that Baptists have held to this position throughout the long years despite persistent opposition from a majority of religious societies?
What is more wonderful still is that many other religions and churches now join us in making this same confession.
I do not wish to leave the impression that we live in the dim past; rather we hold that we are obligated to examine our faith and our practise in light of this written Word.
We cannot yield on the issue of membership, allowing the unbaptised to unite as fellow members.
We cannot yield on the issue of baptism as the symbol of faith in the Crucified and Risen Son of God.
Neither can we move one millimetre from our insistence that God has given us this Word as the sole rule of faith and practise.
We seek to implement what is written in the Word of God because we believe the Book is divine.
It is divine in its origin, it is divine in its preservation and it is divine in its intent.
In the text, Jesus pointed to multiple witnesses to His Person.
He spoke of His own witness [VV.
30, 31].
He pointed to the witness of John the Baptist, whom the leaders recognised as a popular figure despite refusing to believe him [V.
< .5
.5 - .6
.6 - .7
.7 - .8
.8 - .9
> .9