Sermon Tone Analysis

Introduction:

I have certainly been enjoying my study for these messages.

It is certainly enjoyable to get to know those men who walked closely with Jesus while He was on the earth.

Andrew was Peter’s brother, he is the disciple we know the least about.

Which is ironic where he was Peter’s brother and Peter being so in the forefront and Andrew being not well known.

Andrew was not included in several important events where we see Peter, James and John together with Jesus.

At other times he was featured as a part of the inner circle.

But one thing is certain Andrew did have a close relationship with Christ.

He was often the one who introduced others to Jesus personally.

Andrew was of the first disciples to be called.

John

Andrew was the one who was responsible for introducing his brother Peter to Jesus.

His eagerness to follow Jesus and his zeal for introducing other to Christ outlines Andrew’s character.

Peter and Andrew were from the village of Bethsaida.

This town was in the Northern Galilee region.

At some point the brothers relocated to the larger city of Capernaum, which was close to their hometown.

The brothers shared a house and operated a fishing business together, in the north shore of the Sea of Galilee where the fishing was good and located in the junction of key trading routes (which was good for business as well).

These brothers were most likely lifelong companions of James and John, sons of Zebedee.

The four shared common spiritual interested even before they met Jesus.

They took sabbaticals from fishing, visited the wilderness where John the Baptist was preaching and became disciples of John.

That is where they first encountered Jesus.

When they went back to fishing they remained partners .

These four seemed inseparable and the closeness of the little group was quite natural.

All four of them wanted to be leaders and they formed a collective leadership over the other disciples.

We know Peter was pretty dominant in this group from last weeks message.

Peter often spoke for the 12 whether they liked it or not.

They all wanted to be leaders.

They did have their shameful arguments as to who was the greatest.

Their eagerness to lead did cause clashes when they were together as a group, but there were instrumental in developing the early church.

But of the four Andrew was the least conspicous.

Scripture does not tell us a lot about Andrew.

Andrew’s name only appers in the New Testament only 9 times and most of those times are only referring to him in passing.

Andrew lived his life in the shadows, often in the shadow of his brother Peter.

Many time when Andrew is reference it is as Peter’s brother.

But there was no evidence that this was an issue for Andrew.

Afterall, Andrew was the one who brought Peter to Jesus and made the introduction in the first place and that decision was immediate and without hesitation.

I am sure Andrew was aware of Peter’s dominance before that introduction, yet he brought Peter into the group anyway.

This says a lot about Andrew’s character.

Throughout the scriptures Andrew is portrayed as a man who has the right heart for ministry, and he leads effectively in the background.

He didn’t seek to be the center of attention and he didn’t resent those who were in the limelight.

He was happy to do what he could with the gifts and calling God had given him and allowed others to do likewise.

Andrew seems to be the least contentious and the most thoughtful.

Whenever Andrew speaks, which is rare, he always says the right thing, does the right thing and never attaches dishonor.

Yes sure when there were mistakes made in the group corporately Andrew was included but whenever Andrew’s name is mentioned expressly he rises above the others and acts or speaks in a manner that scriptures commend him for.

He was an effective leader even though he never took the spotlight.

Andrew and Peter were brothers but had two different leadership styles.

But just as Peter was needed and called so was Andrew.

Andrew may have been seen as the better model for most church leaders than Peter was.

The name Andrew means “manly” which seems to be a good description for his personality.

Andrew was bold, decisive, and deliberate.

He wasn’t feeble or wimpish.

He was driven by a deep passion for truth, willing to subect himself to extreme kinds of hardship and pursued the truth plain and simple.

He had joined the ranks of John the Baptist.

John the baptist was not known to live a cushy life.

He was known for his rugged appearance and harsh lifestlye.

He wore camel hair and had a leather belt around his waist.

He ate locusts and honey.

He didn’t live in luxury or even menial comforts and the expectation of his disciples to live in the manner was so.

Therefore Andrew can be seen in this light.

There is much more that can be said about Andrew but this evening we need to focus on some important things to take away from his example.

Again this week we will be all over scriptures so bear with me as we move about.

But in the slides you can follow along more clearly.

Prayer over the word of God.

He saw the value of the individual person

This is what I love so much about Andrew’s life and what I love about Jesus.

He picked a person to be a part of the team that saw the importance of the one-to-one relationship, the individual person.

I am a relational person.

I love nothing more than to sit and chat and get to know people.

When it came to dealing with people Andrew fully appreciated the value of the single soul.

He was known for personal evanglism, instead of speaking to the crowds he witnessed relationally.

He was known for bringing individuals not crowds.

In almost every Gospel account of Andrew he is bringing someone to Jesus.

Oh to be that effective, oh to be that bold in my walk.

It is easy in some ways to address the crowd because most often they don’t debate, they don’t talk back.

But individually you are often hard pressed, challenged, and sometimes at a loss for what to say.

The fact that Andrew could work effectively in this manner teach us that there is a job for everyone, there is a purpose for all personalities and we are to look to find where we fit best.

Andrew’s first act was after he discovered Jesus he went and got his brother so that he could get in on it too.

This act set the tone for Andrew’s minsitry.

Andrew was present at the feeding of the 5,000.

It was Andrew who brought the boy with the loaves and fishes to Christ.

All the other disciples didn’t know what to do to feed the crowd.

It was Andrew who helped find a solution.

He took the young boy (another introduction to Jesus) and said:

Andrew knew if this little guy met Jesus and offered this small but significant offering Jesus could do something with it.

He may not have imagined Jesus would do such a massive miracle but the fact is Andrew had faith that His Master could do something with the little things.

It was already evident in how Jesus was using Andrew’s life and now once again Jesus was faithful to prove this to be true.

Then in

These men came to Philip wanting to see Jesus but Philip went to Andrew.

Then Andrew and Philip went to Jesus.

I believe this is another significant example that Andrew was the one who introduced people to Jesus.

Philip took the men to Andrew and Andrew introduced them to Jesus.

Why didn’t Philip take the men to Jesus himself?

Perhaps it was due to a lot of things but I believe Philip knew Andrew was effective and Andrew could introduce them to Christ, and perhaps do it best.

Andrew was not confused when someone wanted to see Jesus.

He simply brought them to Him.

He saw the need and knew where to obtain the answer.

Andrew brought Peter to Christ - first home missionary

Andrew brought the Greeks to Christ - first foreign missionary

One thing that this points out - The most effective and important aspect of evangelism usually takes place on an individual, personal level.

Most people do not come to Christ as an immediate response to a sermon in a crowded setting they often come because of the influence of an individual.