rsw2007 wrote:Thanks for responding to my request. I'll take a look at the link.
Below is the piece I did for a devotional blog. Spell/grammar said 11% passive. I'll appreciate your comments and suggestions. Thanks again.
We are fascinated with royalty. Over two billion people watched the recent British royal wedding. The pageantry is attractive but the need for a king has a long history. In the Old Testament, the Israelites rejected God’s authority in favor of having a king like other nations. God allowed it but the error was repeated centuries later.
In a small Judean town, a king was quietly born into the care of a carpenter and his wife. At the appointed time, he revealed himself to save the world. He claimed to be the Son of God and was hated for it. Death was the only solution for this offense. The silent king stood before the ruling governor as his accusers alleged he was a threat to Rome. The Emperor Caesar was their king, not this man from Galilee. The governor sent him to die nailed to a cross with a title for all to see – JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS. Again God was thrown aside for a worldly king.
But this crucified King did not remain in the grave. This Almighty King defeated death and lives in Heaven waiting to return to claim His earthly Kingdom. Through the ages His people shared the Good News about Him. He is a King who can forgive and forget sins, bring peace to a troubled heart, restore health to a diseased body and more. No ruling monarch can do that. They sit on a throne because of their bloodline. Our King sits on His throne because He shed His Blood for us – JESUS THE MESSIAH, THE KING OF KINGS.
Jacki, I wouldn't fret about passive voice at all, based on this sample. Most of the time that you use 'was,' it is as a helping verb (as in the phrase "was repeated" or "was born"). In addition, you use plenty of fine, active verbs (rejected, defeated, restore, thrown). The piece is vibrant with action--you're a fine writer.
This is why I don't use those tools on my computer--they are really quite poor at actually interpreting what a writer has done. Keep up the good work!