Ronald E Clements

Old Testament Theology: Ronald E Clements

Submitted by: Vinod Shemron        Submitted to: The Rev. Dr. Jones Muthunayagom

About the theologian

            Ronald E. Clements is the well known Baptist scholar of the Old Testament in Europe. He was the Davidson Professor of Old Testament at King's College in the University of London; he earned his degrees at Spurgeon's College in London; Christ's College, Cambridge; and the University of Sheffield, where he received his Ph.D. in 1961. After lecturing seven years at the University of Edinburgh, he spent 1967-83 as a lecturer at Cambridge University. An ordained Baptist minister in England since 1956, he has written many works on the Old Testament.[1] This paper is presented on the basis of his work, Old Testament theology, a fresh approach.

Introduction

For the past two hundred years Old Testament Scholars have developed a distinctive presentation of the theological significance of this literature on the basis of a penetrating historical criticism. Increasingly, however, the form and structure of this discipline has moved away from other areas of theological investigation. The result is that today Old Testament Theology bears little relationship to the historic ways in which Christians and Jews have actually found theological meaning in the Bible.

The extent to which use has been made of the Old Testament by the great theological giants of Christendom has varied considerably, but it has seldom been entirely absent. Certainly within the Reformed tradition the impact of Luther's and Calvin's handling of the Old Testament, with their own great differences, have tended to mould the approach to the Old Testament in preaching, liturgy and hymnology for a vast number of Christians. Yet it is unusual to find any consistent concern to study this impact as a facet of understanding the Old Testament and its theological meaning.

Rather, the tendency has been to consider it appropriate almost exclusively within the general area of research of the particular theologian in question. Hence Luther's use and understanding of the Old Testament has been thought to reflect upon Luther, but scarcely upon the Old Testament. This is plainly wrong, and has undoubtedly contributed to the general impression that Old Testament theology is unrelated to any other branch of theology and is free to develop its own methods and to pursue its own goals.[2]

This is not the case, and the way in which this literature has been used and interpreted by theologians must be held to provide a significant datum of what Old Testament theology is about. As it is, the general tendency to leave aside such questions, as outside the orbit of Old Testament studies, has meant that the serious academic study of this literature has become isolated from the questions of what we are to do with it once we have studied it.

Methodology

There is a great deal of relevance for the appreciation of the Old Testament as a collection of theological writings in a critical examination of the way in which major theologians have dealt with it. At the outset it is suggested that this concern has come increasingly to dominate the discussion about Old Testament theology. Basic questions of methodology and ordering of the material have come to provide the more essential theological dimension of enquiry about the religion of the Old Testament.

Since this is so, it would appear highly desirable that the way in which the Old Testament has been understood and interpreted by one or two of the greatest thinkers of Christendom should normally have a place in the study of it as a theological work. Such would not simply reflect upon the theologian himself, but upon the material he handles. For the modern Protestant, it is evident that such figures as Luther and Calvin would have to be considered as major candidates for such a task.

R. E. Clements in his work Old Testament theology, a fresh approach has taken the topical method in elucidating his theological approach. It is distinguished from the dynamic-didactic method. In his approach he seeks to identify the Old Testament as a whole and does not take the New Testament into much consideration. The major topic that Clements talks about are, the dimensions of faith in the old testament, the God of Israel, the people of God, the Old Testament as law, and the Old Testament as Promise.

Dimensions of Faith in the Old Testament

            It is at once apparent to the student of Old Testament theology that the Old Testament does not present its faith in the form of a creed, or a set of theological treatises. Rather it is an ancient literature, stemming from a remarkably early age in the scale of world literary history, and it covers a great variety of types of writing and composition. The purposes for which these compositions were first made, the situation of their authors, and the identity and circumstances of those for whom they were written are largely matters which have to be inferred from the contents of each of them. Careful scrutiny shows that the reality is even more complex than this, however, for it is seldom that we are faced with a complete, and separately identifiable, book in anything like the modern sense. The books into which this literature is now split tip is in large measure an artificial creation of later ages, in which very long collections of material, such as the Pentateuch, have been divided up into shorter, more manageable, books, or chapters.

Similarly, books such as Psalms or Proverbs are collections of much smaller units in which only a relatively minor amount of editorial shaping can be discerned. In the case of the Psalms, in particular, little convincing explanation is available to show why particular psalms appear in the order in which they now do. The Old Testament, in fact, is a vast collection of material, which can loosely be called 'tradition', but which has been assembled into quite consciously arranged 'collections'. Only in a few cases does any separate part of these collections resemble a book in anything like the modern sense, with a carefully thought-out theme, or plot.[3]

            If we are to make use of these great collections it is necessary to learn something about their literary, cultural and religious setting in order to fathom within them that particular quality of faith which they present to us. Nor is this quest for a rediscovery of the faith of the Old Testament necessarily made easier because there exists an immense edifice of interpretative tradition which has been built upon it. This also is so vast as to require careful sifting and categorising, and it must in any case remain one of the aims of an Old Testament theology to appeal back directly to the faith of the Old Testament in testing, and if necessary correcting, the doctrines and ideas which have been drawn from it. It is important therefore that we should first consider the nature .of the Old Testament and note some salient features about its background before attempting to elicit from it a particular theology.

God of Israel

The literature of the Old Testament is fundamentally religious in its character, assuming the reality and activity of God even where it does not explicitly mention him. This is so most notably in the otherwise exceptional book of Esther, which is the only one of the Old Testament writings which does not overtly mention God. More often he is mentioned very frequently in these writings, referred to either by the generic title 'God' (Hebrew .elohim) or by his distinctive name 'Yahweh' (Hebrew yhwh).

A number of other names and titles also appear, and these all have value in enabling us to see something of the complex religious history through which tells Old: Testament concept of God has passed. In many cases they undoubtedly reflect distinctive local, and sometimes international, traditions about gods which were current in the ancient West Asia. However, in its preserved canonical form the Old Testament certainly intends to present God as one unique supernatural being who had revealed himself to Abraham, Moses and other of the great figures of Israel's life, and who is the Lord and sole Creator of the universe.[4]

There is a very distinctive identity given to God in the Old Testament, which is on the one hand remarkably broadly based, because of its undoubted universalist elements, but which on the other hand is sufficiently circumscribed to assert again and again that particular rites, cultic traditions, and even sanctuaries, do not belong to him and have no place in a true knowledge of his being and will. A very careful line is drawn between a broad syncretism which could claim almost any and every religious tradition as in some sense attributable to 'God', and a narrow exclusivism, which owned allegiance to only one local, or community, tradition.[5]

The emergence of torah –instruction was a way of establishing this line of demarcation which became all the more important to grasp once a large number, and ultimately the majority, of Jews came to be living among gentiles in the Diaspora. Yet the nascent Old Testament was not the only means of drawing this line, since we find earlier that an important element of cultic uniformity was established by restricting the legitimate cult of Yahweh to the sanctuary in Jerusalem. Paradoxically, however, this restriction came at a time when other pressures were forcing the faith of Israel to become more and more conscious of the universal and supra-national power and sovereignty of its God. The very tensions inherent in this meeting of the Universalist and exclusivist tendencies in the religious tradition of Israel may be seen to have borne a distinctive fruit in the Jewish and Christian religions.

The distinctive identity of God in the pages of the Old Testament: 'I am the Lord (Yahweh) your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage' (Exod. 20.2). The words 'your God' identify him as the God of Israel, for there can be no doubt that the situation in worship in which this formula grew up ensured that these words were spoken by a duly authorised priest to the worshipping community of Israel. The second element, however, also has a bearing on this, for the words 'who brought you out of the land of Egypt' tie this knowledge of God to an event in the national past of Israel, which we find elsewhere was understood to be the foundation event by which Israel was given birth as a nation. The third element in this formula of God's identity is also interesting for the way in which it modifies the second. The words 'out of the house of bondage' identify Egypt with the conditions of slavery which Israel's ancestors had experienced there, and give to the fact of escape from thence a moral, as distinct from a more narrowly political character. Certainly the whole political side of Israel's existence, with its territorial and governmental claims, was regarded as dependent on the gracious will and actions of God.[6]

The people of God

According to Clements, if the primary point of reference in the understanding of who God is in the Old Testament is that he is 'the God of Israel', and then the natural correlate of this is that Israel is to be understood as 'the people of Yahweh'. This clearly involves some understanding of the identity, scope and purpose of the people called 'Israel'. From the point of view of the Old Testament the answer to this question of identity is resolved very simply by the portrait of Israel as the patriarchal ancestor of the nation, whose twelve sons produce offspring which become twelve tribes, who themselves ultimately grow and prosper until they become a nation (Gen. 35.22-6).[7]

            He would go further to say that the claim, that the people of Yahweh have all been descended from one man asserts, by its nature, a 'racial' theory of identity and membership within this community. Yet we find that, precisely because it is understood as a religious community, the racial criterion alone has seldom sufficed to resolve all questions about the nature and role of Israel in relation to Yahweh. Other factors of a moral, spiritual and political kind have all played their part. Indeed the importance of the concept of Israel's nationhood in the Old Testament witnesses to a measure of overstepping of the straight forward 'racial' theory of accounting participation in this community.[8]

            However, the situation becomes more complex once the Old Testament evidence is examined in critical detail. First of all we find that the picture of the origins of Israel from the twelve sons of one ancestral figure is a kind of image or structure imposed upon a tradition which was historically very much less clear. Furthermore, how and why the 'image' of the descendants of the twelve sons as twelve tribes arose in the way it did has been, a matter of considerable debate. Even the time of origin of such a portrayal has been strongly contested. Whether it does accord with some kind of pro-national social and institutional structure, or represents a later idealised picture of a past are views which have each gained adherents.

Clements elucidates that the concept of race, territory and government are not in themselves, necessarily religious in their nature, so that a more directly religious quality of faith, or allegiance to torah, also came to play its part and how this occurred and how differing emphases came to be placed upon each of them, is a feature of the unfolding of the tradition in the Old Testament. The ability to interpret the history of this tradition by reference to the actual course of Israel's political and social history enables us to see it in a fuller light. It does not of itself, however, enable us to resolve the tensions that are apparent between the different factors. Even more important from the theological point of view, it does not enable us to single out anyone feature of the Israelite tradition so as to make it possible for us to establish this as the 'norm or the ideal of what constitutes Israel.[9]

It is not true that universalism eventually predominates over nationalism, or that 'religious community' naturally displaces the 'territorial state'. Nor is it clear that the Old Testament maintains any single interpretation of what constitutes the ultimate 'goal' of Israel's election. The images that are used to describe the future eschatological Israel is not of a kind that can be easily recast into explicit theological categories.

The Old Testament as Law

            This must necessarily include some attention to the literary form and structure of its constituent books, but also it should look at those broad categories by which the Old Testament as a whole has been understood. The importance of doing this is all the greater on account of the far-reaching consequences that develop from the way in which the unity of the canon is understood.

            Two factors can assist us in finding this basis of unity. One is the structure of the canon itself with its division into three literary collections of Law, Prophets, and Writings, in a three-tier level of authority. The second factor is provided by the way in which the early Jewish and Christian interpreters of the Old Testament have set about their task, with the indications which they give of the particular assumptions and presuppositions which they bring to the literature. Here immediately we encounter the most widespread and basic category which has been employed to describe the nature of the material which the Old Testament contains. This is the law or more precisely the torah since the question of how far 'law' is a very satisfactory translation of the Hebrew torah remains to be considered. Certainly it raises the question of what kind of law, and what legal authority and sanctions it may be thought to possess.

            In Mark 2.25-6 we find the citation of an incident regarding David and the eating of· the Bread of the Presence which is recorded in 1Samuel 21.1-6. This incident from the Former Prophets is interpreted as an example of the fundamental principle, applied to Old Testament laws and regulations that the humanitarian demand for preserving life is of greater importance than the more specifically cultic demand of respect for holiness. The background and assumptions of this interpretation need not detain us. It is simply a clear illustration of the way in which the record of narrative incidents, which were originally preserved for specific purposes of quite another kind, could later be interpreted out of the basic presupposition that they are torah law. Nor is this approach a uniquely Christian one, for we find very strikingly that it pervades almost· completely the mainstream of Jewish interpretation of the Old Testament. The Mishnah, and later the Talmud are full of citation and interpretative comment upon the Old Testament which regard it as torah.[10]

            As we move further away in time from the editorial and redactional activity which has shaped the Old Testament into its present form, so we tend to find that the assumption that it is all torah has tended to become more and more dominating in its effect upon the way in which the material is understood.

The Old Testament as Promise

            If we regard the way in which Christians have in the past found theological meaning and significance in the Old Testament, then one feature stands out above all others. This is the conviction that the Old Testament is a book of prophetic promise, which foretold an age of salvation that was to come. For the early Christians this age had come with the events concerning Jesus of Nazareth, so that the age of the New Testament and the early Church could be regarded as one of fulfilment.

In spite of the strength and firmness with which this 'argument from prophecy' has appeared in the Christian tradition, we find, somewhat surprisingly, that the main lines of a more modern critical evaluation of Old Testament prophecy have proceeded rather differently. The great strength of the prophets has been seen in the clarity and forthrightness with which they denounced the social and religious wrongs of their society, so that it was by this means that they became the heralds of a truly moral understanding of the kingdom of God. Where they have been seen as the forerunners of Jesus, it has usually been as a consequence of their sense of righteousness and social justice as essential to any true service of God.  The historical-critical attempt to present a theological assessment of prophecy has departed from the major lines of interpretation which had previously prevailed almost totally in Christian thinking. Whereas the latter has seen the prophets as the foretellers of salvation, the more critical approach has highlighted their role as the heralds of doom and judgment.[11]

A number of factors have played a part, but foremost among them is the concern which has prevailed in a modern critical approach to prophecy to get back to the authentic words of the original prophet. It is particularly when we examine the earlier prophets who flourished in the eighth century that we find that the main weight of their preaching was concerned with denouncing the sins of Judah and Israel. However, it is not until the latter half of the sixth century, with the prophecies of Isaiah 40-55, that a clear and unbroken announcement of Israel's impending deliverance and restoration is made. In other words, it was only when the exile was almost over and the judgment could be seen to have passed that the prophets begun to sound forth the hope of restoration which tradition has most closely associated with them.[12]

 We see that, fundamental questions about the actual course of development and whether it is the literary coming together which has occasioned the attempts at an overall pattern of interpretation. To some extent this is no doubt true, but it seems probable that an underlying conviction that the prophets did all proclaim a message which showed features of a common theme and expectation· has helped to fashion the literary collection into its present form. A deeper level of theological connection can be seen to be present, as is shown by the marked repetition of a number of basic themes.[13]

We may argue, therefore, that a theological study of the theme of 'promise' in the Old Testament must seek to elucidate the way in which this theme arose as the central one in the understanding of the preaching of the prophets. Before this can be achieved, however, it is necessary that we should obtain a clearer grasp of the earliest preaching of the canonical prophets of the Old Testament.

Conclusion

            If we are to find in the Old Testament a theology - a word about God which still holds good for us today - then we are in some measure committed to asking how the picture of God that the Old Testament gives to us can be properly regarded as true of the One whom we still call 'God'. In other words we must expect to find in the Old Testament truths about God which are more than historical truths, tied to the beliefs and events of a world that has long since passed. To do this we should not expect to find arguments and theories about his existence, of which we may still approve, but rather a general picture, often in the form of analogies and images, which provide us with a worthy and recognisable portrayal of the God whom we worship.

Bibliography

Clements, E. Ronald. Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott, 1978)

http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/452587.Ronald_E_Clements

---

[1] http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/452587.Ronald_E_Clements

[2] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 187

[3] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 26

[4] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 53

[5] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 55

[6] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 56-57

[7] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 79

[8] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 81

[9] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 81

[10] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 104

[11] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 131-132

[12] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 134

[13] R. E. Clements, Old Testament Theology (England: Marshall Morgan & Scott,1978) 136

Theme: God’s love: A call to preach and to sin boldly

Text: Colossians 3:12-17

12 As God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience. 13 Bear with one another and, if anyone has a complaint against another, forgive each other; just as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive. 14 Above all, clothe yourselves with love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony. 15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in the one body. And be thankful. 16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly; teach and admonish one another in all wisdom; and with gratitude in your hearts sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs to God. 17 And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

Prior to my theological exposure, I had several questions in my mind, as to why God created the LGBTQ people? Who are these homosexuals? Why they behave like that? Will they enter heaven with me? Why are they indulging in such ‘unholy’ activities?

It was in my third year of B.D. studies that I had encountered to learn more about the people with homosexual orientation and on the whole the LGBT community. I was so fascinated about the fact that God is indeed very creative in creating all of creation in a unique manner. This encounter enhanced my theological thinking and deliberations to broaden my perspective in this regard. This provoked me further to post such thoughts on the social network. But these posts were not well received by my friends. I was criticised for such posts. I wondered how intolerant the people can be towards people who are different. But I failed to realise that I too was like that, at one point of time, until I realised that God’s love transcends all human understanding.

Today, we see that there is a lot of discrimination within the church, like gender inequality where women and children are treated with the patriarchal bias, the people of the so called dominant caste ill-treating those of the oppressed caste, oppression based on creed, race, and sexuality and so on. But still we claim that we exemplify Christ in all possible ways – What hypocrisy? Is this what Christ wanted from us, ‘the Church’? Does the love of God sanction such atrocities within the body of Christ?

In this letter the author addresses the issues of baptism and circumcision. He responds to the issues by stating how the church ought to accept the people in spite of their differences. The questions, who can be a part of the church, and how the church needs to respond to the new believers? This is being addressed in the read passage, which is a part of the larger pericope from 3:5 to 4:6. The writer here places prominently before the readers, not only the Soteriological, but also the cosmical significance of Christ. Here we see that Christ is the Head both of the Church and of the new creation. All things created find purpose of existence in him.

In this congregation at Colossae, we can see there was a tension between the dominant and the oppressed of the various strata of structures. It was in such a context that the writer to the Colossians visualizes and urges an acceptance beyond differences. But what can bring about unity? The answer unmistakably is the divine love Agape.

The author of the letter writes to the church at Colossae, teaching them what is required by the people who have embraced Christianity, and lists the qualities necessary for living in the new community. The believers have already stripped off the old person, but still need to discard the vices, so now, as they have already put on the new self, they still need to clothe themselves with specific virtues like, compassion, humility, kindness, meekness and patience. It is the ability not to become frustrated and angered but to make allowances for each other’s shortcomings and to accept their differences, which is essential for harmonious living as one community.

Bearing with the others involves fully accepting them for who they are, with their weaknesses and differences and leaving to them their space, which the writer proposes as a possible solution. This must be a motivational ground for us to understand the forgiveness, which results in knowing oneself to have been forgiven by Christ, and to realise this generosity that requires to forgive others. Further in the passage we see that clothing the self with love which does not mean that you wear it on and remove it later, but wearing on the love that dwells throughout. This is the love that can be described as a bond of perfection. This we see in 1 Corinthians 13 of which love is the greatest virtue, and that love functions in a perfect way, or in a way that will lead to perfection. In the broader context of relationships, love acts as a bond not only for the other’s virtue, but also for the community which they are to be displayed. Perfection of this love is not some individually gained state but a corporate one achieved in a relationship of love.

The writer to Colossians, goes on to say that the peace of Christ is more explicitly personified and is seen as ruling in the new order. God has brought the believers into this new order of peace. Now they are to let this peace take control over both, the centre of the individual’s life and in the one body that they are called to be. The term ‘one body’ as mentioned in v15 refers to the unity of the body of Christ. The ‘peace’ as mentioned is God’s initiative and to respond to this peace is every believer’s responsibility. The initiative and the responsibility go hand in hand. In being called into one unified body of the corporate humanity we are called to live out its transcending the divisions to appropriate Christ’s peace. This is what we see in the art work.

Verse 17’s language makes it amply clear that the scope of the strong urging (paraenesis) is being extended from community life and worship life to encompass all of life. To do ‘everything in the name of the lord Jesus’ is to recognize that Jesus’ lordship claims every part of the believer’s life. But it is also clear that this obedience is not a burdensome duty but the accompaniment and natural expression of thanksgiving offered to God through Christ.

LGBT: Excuse us please, but we would like to know why then have we been criminalised like this, when the ‘word of God’ asks its believers to embrace us with love and accept us with the differences?

Thank you for initiating the dialogue. Yes dear friends, why then do we criminalize the sexual minority when they are to be accepted into the Christian fold as they are? God has accepted them. Who are we to push them away? What then can we do? What is it that the read passage urge us to do? How can we express God’s love practically?

Well, the answer to these questions would be the one inspirational line that was said by one of our professor in class, “preach your conviction, and not your doubts”

Yes we are good preachers. For most of us who would return back to the church, this is our vocation. But how well do we use this opportunity of preaching to stand up against the unjust structures within the church and in society? That still remains a question. I would take it from here, this is my first point, “Preach your conviction”. Yes, we need to preach to the world our conviction, the conviction that God is love and this very love of God transcends all human made barriers, boundaries and understanding. Today I am sure that we are convinced that God has loved us and wants us to love others the same way, we are told to love our neighbors as ourselves, and I’m all the more convinced that this very gospel of love has no contradictions.

Congregation: Iyah we can love and accept them but for sure we cannot accept their sin they must repent for the sin they have committed and become like us.

My dear friend, if you say so then there is no use of the love that you show. For in the v14 from the read passage says that we must clothe ourselves in love, a love that binds us in perfect harmony, and this love when expressed means that, we are to accept them as they are and with their differences. There is much in the scripture about compassion for our fellow human beings, a call for empathy and justice for the marginalized, and a standard of honesty, mutuality and love in all relationships. Therefore, I say, preach your conviction that God is love and has called us to express that very love of God.

LGBT: ha ha ha… you say love and love and preach this love, what is the use of just preaching and not doing?

Hmmm… that is true what is the use of just preaching and not doing? I’m sure when we are convinced we surely want to do, as we preach. But a fear of being different from others, the fear of being branded a heretic, the fear of being called a sinner of the lowest order, sticks to our mind and dilutes our actions. This makes us merely preachers and not doers.

For this I would put forth another statement that caught my attention in class. That is ‘Sin boldly’.

Yes you heard me right, Sin boldly, that is my second point. In our Christian life, we tend to be more worried about the possibility of committing sin, and hence we prefer to stay detached from the sinful world to remain sinless and Godly. Luther’s advice to Melanchthon to “sin boldly, but believe and rejoice in Christ even more boldly” is very relevant to us. Since we are both saints and sinners, sin is inevitable in our life; Justified by faith rather than by “getting it right,” we are free to act, accepting the possibility of failure while trusting in Christ’s victory over sin and death. But the ‘sin’, I intend is not the sin in the literal sense. But it is in the sense of how people would consider the act of standing up against injustices and the structures of the society, like for example, speaking for the LGBT community will result in branding you to be a “Sinner” but that is okay, we ought to sin boldly.

But our problem here is, our reluctance to “sin boldly.” We do not want to get it wrong. As a result we abstain from all social interventions and lead a pious and spiritual life shielding ourselves from all the possibilities of getting contaminated by the world. Let me identify a few things that would help us explore possibilities to Sin Boldly. First of all we have failed in understanding the structural and systemic nature of sin, and as a result we do not perceive patriarchy, hunger, and casteism, as sin. We also tend to avoid and deny our participation in these systemic sins that cause death and destruction.

Secondly, our reluctance to “sin boldly” is also due to our denial of recognizing ourselves as God’s co-workers. As unified in the body of Christ, we are called and empowered by God to receive God’s love, and to live out this Just love in the world. We are here to let God work through us, in us and among us to bring healing from all forms of sins that would destroy God’s gift of abundant life for all. This is our vocation as Christ’s body on earth today.

Our fear of “not being able to make a difference’’ is preventing us from this engagement. We are too preoccupied with the success stories. Our sense of powerlessness stems from our reluctance to recognize God as the pioneer and perfecter of our faith. Shiphrah and Puah, the two midwives are examples for the courage to “sin boldly.” They had to make a choice between the King’s order and the Divine will. It was a morally ambiguous situation. They were not absolutely clear about the consequences of their action. But they showed the courage to act, trusting in God’s promise and ‘sinned boldly’.

So let us then, defy the normalcy and other norms that are so called ‘normal’ and confront the sins of the society and express love. We will be branded sinners, but that should not hinder us from standing in solidarity with the oppressed in own respective contexts. If the society brands us as sinners, it’s Ok. For that is what we are called for, to be one unified body, in which Christ’s peace shall rule. Therefore let us as a church strive to express this love of God that binds us in perfect harmony.

So let us preach our convictions, and Sin boldly… Amen.

Senior Service:- God’s Love: A call to preach and to sin boldly

United Theological College

Order of worship

Name: Vinod Shemron. S.                              Date: 23^rd February 2015

*********************************************************

Prelude: as the music is being played, let us be disturbed by its difference in its uniqueness

Call to worship:

Come let us worship God, the creator of all creatures in a unique way

Come let us worship Jesus the liberator, who redeemed us

Come let us worship the Holy Spirit, who helps us to understand the love of God

We are here to worship God in truth and in spirit

Skit:

CM1: Hey listen, this is not a place for people like you.

CM2: Why have you all come here? You are defiling the holy place.

LGBT: What do you mean? We have come here to worship God, we are also created by this same God you believe created you.

CM1: What? Worship? Yes our God created you too, but you are all sinners and are doomed to hell because of your unholy activities

LGBT: No, we are just human beings like you, we too have desires and dreams

CM2: Eeewww… just get away. You are to be sent away, this is not a place for you

CM1: Hey maybe we can allow them to sit there…

(Pointing at the accused’s stand) listen you people, consider this our mercy to you. Don’t you dare move out from here

Hymn of praise and thanksgiving: (Standing)

Holy, holy, holy! Lord God Almighty!
All Thy works shall praise Thy Name, in earth, and sky, and sea;
Holy, holy, holy; merciful and mighty!
God in three Persons, blessed Trinity!

     Holy, holy, holy! We are here to thank thee,

     Though the eye of sinful one Thy glory may not see;
     only Thou art holy; there is none beside Thee,
     Perfect in power, in love, and purity.

Skit:

LGBT: Stop! Stop! Stop! All this invitation and singing, does it all really make sense when you have not allowed us to worship like the others?

LGBT: You have criminalised us and put us in such a state where we are separated and maligned.

CM1: Hey, we have just given you some place, so you better be happy for that, and don’t you spoil our worship.

LGBT: If this is called worship then we do not want to be in such a place

LGBT: If you say this God will not accept us, then we will say, we will not accept this God.

(Dear friends, Let us be seated and listen to the gospel to be shared for today)

Bible reading: Colossians 3:12-17

Sermon: God’s Love: A call to preach and to sin boldly

Confession:

We confess oh lord, our reluctance to accept the others with their differences. We were lethargic and insensitive to your call and to the cries of the queer community, the women, the children and the oppressed caste people, around us and remained fearlessly silent to our own obstructive thinking and not including our neighbours and friends into the fold. Lord forgive us for being agents of patriarchy, sexism, casteism and all the other isms that separate us from each other and apparently separating ourselves from you. We plead guilty oh lord, for being silent at times when we should have spoken. Help us to challenge our closed mind-set, quicken our conscience and broaden our thinking to express your love to the entire creation, and bind us all in perfect harmony. Amen.

Assurance of pardon:

Now that you have realised and pleaded for forgiveness and mercy, God is gracious to forgive you. Be assured of this forgiveness and tarry in peace. Amen.

Skit and commitment song[1]:

(The LGBT friends will be reconciled in the first stanza and lead in singing the second stanza)

Lord we built walls that separate,

We thought we were great,

And shunned others down,

We pretend like saints and they the sinners,

And made this world a different place,

With no love, justice and peace;

Ch.:     Oh lord our God

            Embrace us with your arms of love

            Guide us to show your love from our heart

            Showing it as a whole and not just a part

Lord we’ll break these walls that separate,

Shun down the thoughts of dominance,

Pull down notions of being saints,

And make this world a better place,

With your love justice and peace;

Ch.:     Oh lord our God

            Embrace us with your arms of love

            Guide us to show your love from our heart

            Showing it as a whole and not just a part

Affirmation of our conviction (Church member and LGBT)

We believe in God, in whose image we are created to live in harmony with everyone and every creature. We were created in God’s likeness with unique dreams, desires, sexuality and form. We believe in Jesus, the Son of God, who came down to the earth to express the love of God to all. In all audacity, he sinned boldly by challenging the human made structures and embraced irrespective of gender, class, race, sexuality and ethnicity. He in his suffering and in his death, explained to us the way in which we are to love God and love our neighbours. And in his resurrection from the dead, he promised to come again to establish his reign in which peace and serenity will prevail and until then we as agents are to proclaim the love of God not only in words but in deeds. We believe in the Holy Spirit who helps us understand God’s word and enables us to do accordingly to demonstrate peace. We believe in the Universal Church, which is called out to be a living testimony of the love of God in embracing creation and binding in perfect harmony. We believe, the resurrection of the body, and await the life to come that is filled with love, justice and peace. Amen.

Intercession:

L: We pray oh lord for the Universal Church that she may teach your word and your way to set out a church that is inclusive of all people irrespective of their caste, creed, sexuality, race, and gender, and stand against the injustices in the society when and where it arises.

Silence…

G: We pray for all those in power. May your guiding presence be with them and help them to stand up for the right cause and do justice not merely as a duty but as a responsibility that has been vested upon them.

Silence…

B: We pray for all the people who are going through the various kinds of discriminations at all levels. God give them the strength to voice out from wherever they are, and support them with your agents of peace so that justice maybe granted and peace shall prevail.

Silence…

T: We pray oh lord for UTC and all those related directly and indirectly to the community. Give us the courage to free ourselves from the clutches of the dominant and embrace our vocation to rise against injustices everywhere, especially in our own church contexts.

Silence…

Let us pray for our families and our personal needs

Silence…

Lord’s Prayer[2] (sung)

Our God who dwells among us,

May your name be sanctified

Your kingdom come

Your will be done

On earth as in heaven

Give us today our needed meal

Forgive us, as we forgive

Lead us not into any temptation

Free us from all evil

For yours is the kingdom

Forever and ever, Amen

Closing prayer:

Ever loving God, you through your love sent your only son, that we may have peace and experience your extravagant love. We thank you for being with us throughout the worship and enabling us to understand the meaning of love and instigating our thoughts to ponder further and express in the right manner at all places. We pray this prayer in the name of him, whom you sent in love, Jesus Christ our lord. Amen.

Benediction:

Go therefore, and preach your convictions and sin boldly. May the Love, Grace and Peace of the triune God be with you now and forever more Amen

****************************

Acknowledgements:

v  I thank God almighty for helping me throughout

v  I thank my parents and my brother, I am what I am, mainly because of them. And also Dr. Muthuraj my tutor, and all the members of the faculty for inspiring me in one way or the other and guiding me through this phase of ministerial formation.

v  I thank my sister Blessy who made time to be with me and assist me with the music and also for her beautiful art work

v  I thank all my friends, brothers and sisters who acted in the skit and in the arrangements for worship today

v  I thank Samuel Ragland Paul for composing the music for the song

v  I thank all my friends especially BD IV for journeying with me these four years and enhancing my thinking and helping me evolve from what I was to what I am.

---

[1] Written by the worship leader and set tune by Samuel Ragland Paul of BD I

[2] Edited and set tune by the worship leader