This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Sermon on the Mount” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, September 6, 1987.

morning begins with a portion of the third chapter of Matthew. Then we will be reading from Matthew five and finally from Matthew eleven. So Matthew three beginning with verse thirteen. Then Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John. He baptized of him. But John forbade him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? And Jesus, answering, said unto him, Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness. Then he suffered him. And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water, and lo! The heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting upon him, and lo, a voice from heaven saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

Then from the fifth chapter of Matthew, beginning with verse 43, You have heard that it has been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you, that ye may be the children of your Father who is in heaven.” For he maketh his son to rise on the evil and the good, he sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? Do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? Do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect. Even as your father, who is in heaven, is perfect.

And finally from Matthew 11, reading from verse 25. At that time, Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, Because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto them, even so, father, for so it seemed good in thy sight. All things are delivered unto me of my father, and no man knoweth the son but the father, neither knoweth any man the father save the son, and he to whomsoever. the sun will reveal him. Come unto me, O ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

Are there not those, then, Lord, that you have raised up to preach? And do not they this day preach the glad tidings? And do they not teach and preach in light of the coming of that awesome day, that day delayed because of your mercy, because of your longsuffering? Surely, Lord, you have in fact, in response to the prayers of your people, raised up laborers for the harvest.

And may they preach with all of their might and energy the matchless riches found in Christ. And may the lost be found, and may the stumbling be held up May the wayward sheep be brought home, and may your children, your saints, destined for glory, be comforted. Amen. This morning we come to our third message on the theme of Jesus preaching. I will say our third message because it seems that there is yet one more to be delivered four rather than the originally envisioned three.

We have thus far considered the theme of the kingdom of heaven. We have as well looked into the theme of righteousness. This morning we come to the last theme. A theme that we will have to treat in two segments. The theme, the father in heaven. Our message this morning will consider the loss of that theme, the loss of the father to the church, to the faithful. The attempt to recover that theme or to recover the father to our faith. And finally, in a very cursory way, Jesus’ proclamation of the father. First of all, then, the loss of the theme. of the theme of the father. An English theologian in this decade, Thomas Snail, by name, has written a book entitled The Forgotten Father.

It is his contention that in the Church’s recent history we have had movements that have centered on the latter two persons of the Trinity, but none that have centered on the first. We have had a Jesus movement. We have had the charismatic movement and its concentration upon the Holy Spirit, but there has been no father movement, and he is pleading for a writing of that which is wrong, a correcting of the offense. Now, as you read through Mr. Smale’s book, you might be put off a bit and decide on your own that none of the persons of the Trinity need any movement whatsoever, be it a Jesus movement or a spirit movement or a father movement.

In that respect, you may well judge, and I believe rightly, Mr. Smale’s book as being tragically short-sighted and less than profound. If not parochial and provincial, there have been over against Mr. Smale Those who have looked into Bible studies or the study of church history. They they’re making similar observations, these with much more cogency, with much more power. Ripping off much more than the arguments made by Mr. Schmale. So our habit has been in our Bible study. and even in sophisticated biblical studies to relate the father.

The first person of the tragedy, so we confess exclusively to the works of creation and provenance. And we do so in a sort of Christ less and spirit less way. For instance, When taking up the matter of the fatherhood of God, we turn to the Old Testament, and there we concentrate on the figure of God as he appears there in somewhat of a Christless and spiritless fashion. Now, of course, we know that the God who reveals himself in the Old Testament is not Christless and he is not spiritless. But the impact of biblical studies and Bible study has been to relegate the father to the Old Testament. So then the father there can find. We identify Christ with the Gospels and spirit with Acts and Epistles, and there you have Now this is strange, to be sure, because if you have worked a bit with the Old Testament, you might know that really, in a direct fashion, God does not appear as Father at all in the pages of that test.

Now there are allusions There is a great deal of metaphorical language, political description of God’s relationship to his people, but a direct affirmation that God is father is absent. Now, you might take as an example of this the song that we just sang, Psalm 103. Now, I think a number of you know that song by heart. and you can rattle off those verses, wherein God is compared to a father pitying his children, taking care of them. We see it a political description.

And the psalmist there isn’t directly calling God father. Rather, he is using a political device to refer to God in that manner. So it’s not in the Old Testament we find God identified as the father. Instead, It is exclusively in the New Testament, we find him identified as such.

So our usual approaches to Bible study and biblical studies is off base. It’s incorrect. What about our our habit with regard to church history? In thinking about the father, as far as the development of doctrine is concerned, as far as the development of the church is concerned, Once more, our habit has been to concern ourselves only with the father when we’re speaking about creation and problems. I am large. You think of the classic creed. Well, we’ve been memorizing.

And the opening statement of the Apostles created and I seem created there quite similar. Once more, attaches the fatherhood of God to creation, and we would then, of course, infer from that the works of Providence. And so it is in the development of the history of the Church, at least as some have surveyed it. Interestingly enough, the fatherhood of God was the topic of discussion from the years 100 to 300. and it was forced upon the Church, not because of the consideration of redemption per se, but because it was believed by some who were wandering around in the Church in those days that a holy God could have no contact with a sinful Earth. So it behooved the Church to affirm the fact that God, after all, was the Creator. I believe in God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth. That’s the background of that statement. We believe in creation. We believe that our God has created.

But having resolved that matter to the church’s satisfaction and those ancient Gnostics, the enemy they were confronted, being shelved or pushed aside or defeated, more or less, the church moved on to the doctrine of the sun. so that from three hundred A.D. to A.D. eighteen hundred, we can say roughly the sun takes center stage in his person. First of all, who is he? How is he related to the divine and the human and also his work? In the late Middle Ages, you have the appearance of St. Anselm and his exposition of the doctrine of the Atonement, focusing upon the work of Christ on the cross.

And then comes the Reformation, and we know all about that, how it’s focused on Christ’s satisfaction for us once for all, the recovery of the historical dimension of Christ’s sacrifice for sinners. So that it wasn’t a matter of you running off to the cathedral every morning for morning It was a matter of you passing yourself upon the sufficiency of God’s offering for you in Christ. A sacrifice in his son and your faith in that your reliance upon it. You’re resting in it was for you. the blessing of confidence, trust, and serenity.

Well, doctrine of the Father, doctrine of the Son, then from the 1800s to the present, it seems as if, with the rise of the enthusiasts, you might think the charismatic movement a modern phenomenon. It’s not modern at all. It just gained a great deal of currency in our own day. But the roots of the modern charismatic movement go back to the eighteenth to the eighteen hundred million before the seventeen hundred. We can say. And the spirit is there in this movement and preeminence and captured the attention of the church.

Well there is that habit then in studying church history to relegate the father. to the early days of the church and pretty much be unconcerned with him in the latter development of the doctrines that are so important to us. It leaves us, you might say, as orphans in a fatherless situation. That being the circumstance that confronts the church. Well, even if we don’t give a lot of credence to Mr. Schmiel analysis, we are forced to think again when we take stock of the direction that Bible study has taken and the study of church history, our appropriation of and the fatherlessness of our situation. Well. That brings us to the second point, namely the attempts at recovery It can’t be attempted recovery of the last of the lost rather lost father. Now, what is provoked is what I have already mentioned for you.

It is the fact that when we read our Bible, we can’t help but be impressed that for Jesus, the fatherhood of God was a central theme to his preaching. And therefore, you see, if we are to understand Jesus of right, we certainly have to deal with that thing. That thing for Jesus is central. But it is also unique. As we have surveyed the Old Testament We find that God is not directly called father in its pages, but then we come to the gospels and suddenly there is this barrage. There is this avalanche. And we find God referred to as father directly addressed as such by Jesus and then Jesus instructing those who would follow him, those who would be disciples to him to do the same.

And his message is unique for it is not found in the rabbi. It’s not found in the synagogue. It’s not found in the Jewish authorities of his day. There is no message like this. So Jesus comes on the scene with this utterly unique message about the father. Setting the theme of the fatherhood of God. At the very center of what he has said. Now it wasn’t the Conservatives and the Orthodox that recognize this fact. Oddly enough, at least in our most recent history. Instead, it was the liberals who realize this, and they set about to offer a correction.

But the correction that they offered to the church with the law was along the lines of a Jesus who simply came upon the scene as a prophet, one profoundly spiritual, who then presented to the world his message as if he were presenting to that world a previously undiscovered truth. Jesus, then, was a prophet with a bright new idea. And the great new idea was the fatherhood of God. This, then, as his message, truly a radically new message, said the liberals, led them then to conclude that his message along these lines was of the universal brotherhood of man under the indiscriminate fatherhood of God. that then the message and the religion of Jesus, from which is excluded a religion about Jesus and any redemptive note, any note of sin, any note of atonement, any note of sacrifice, any note of miraculous resurrection excluded. the universal fatherhood of God and the universal brotherhood of man indiscriminately and simply.

The response of orthodoxy has not been very satisfying, for in response to the liberal who took the field in the early days of this century, Orthodox theologians and Orthodox churches thought it was enough simply to reassert the doctrine of the Trinity. To speak once more about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. To answer the liberal notion that Jesus’ message about the Father was a bright idea, they simply came along and said, no, it’s not a bright idea, it’s only an old idea that Jesus is reasserting here. reaffirming.

But you see, that approach by orthodoxy misses the point. It misses the point because it cannot take into consideration, it does not deal with the force of Jesus’ preaching, and the fact that Jesus appears on the scene with a radically new message. A message about the fatherhood of God.

Now, there have been those within orthodoxy who are much closer to the mark. I have in mind Herman Ritter was the Dutch New Testament scholar who is said in his book, The Coming of the Kingdom, that the fatherhood of God cannot be disassociated from the doctrine of the kingdom. And as the title of his book suggests, there is a coming of the kingdom. There is also then the coming of the revelation of God as father, and they go together and they cannot be separate.

There has been the observation of Sinclair Ferguson, who is now convinced that the doctrine of sonship has been shortchanged by orthodox and reformed theologians and by the reformed church. For while the chapters on creation and Providence get nine paragraphs in the Westminster Confession of Faith. The doctrine of adoption gets what one. So then, Dr. Ferguson sets about to write this long and correct this error by setting at the center of the theological task, the affirmation and exposition of the doctrine of adoption that we are.

I cannot forget. One of the finest sermons I ever heard preached. It was preached in nineteen seventy one. It wasn’t a very impressive crowd that heard it. But it was a message that was impressive. And of course, the text was impressive. It came from Philippians chapter four. And the great joy that is spoken of there by the apostle. And the tremendous confidence that is there. I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.” You know the verse.

But it was a sermon, oddly enough, on God the Father. And yes, even on God’s works of providence and how God cares for us. But the interesting thing about it was that it was built not on a consideration of an Old Testament text, but on a New Testament text, and it was based upon a consideration of the death and the resurrection of Jesus. There have been attempts then within orthodoxy to come to grips with the father of the situation that we have encountered in the church, a situation that has not been helped generally by voices within.

Jesus proclamation that. Of the father. In half. Just briefly, and by way of introduction to what we will say. Next week. The proclamation. Of the fatherhood of God. Could not take place. Apart from the revelation. That is why. In the Old Testament. There is no direct reference. To God. That could not take place. Apart from the revelation. Of the thought. That appeared to you from what we have read in Matthew in the eleventh chapter, that twenty-seventh verse.

All things have been handed over to me by my father, Jesus, and no one knows the son except the father, nor does anyone know the father except the son and anyone to whom the son will to reveal. You see, the proclamation of the father by Jesus is an exponent of the person of Jesus and dependent upon the manifestation of the son. It is when the son is clearly delineated that the father then is clearly delineated. The father then is not revealed until the son himself is revealed as he is in the Gospels. what other thing to keep in mind is that this is that this word about the fatherhood of God has implications, of course, for us.

For you know That is, Jesus makes his addresses throughout the gospel. He is repeatedly referring to God, not only as his Father, but as our Father, or your Father. But this word about our Sonship in relationship to our Father in Heaven is actually built upon the reality of Jesus’ Sonship. We have read from Matthew five, we could read the entirety of the sermon on the mountain. We could count up all the times in that sermon that God is called father in relationship to what making reference to our son.

But do you not realize that the do you not realize that before you get to Matthew five through seven, you already have first Matthew one through four. You’ve already read about the genealogy of the sun. You’ve already read about the birth of the sun. You’ve already read about the oppression that the sun experience and the flight of the sun into Egypt and the rescue of the sun from Egypt and his reinstatement within the land of promise. You have already read about the sun at the waters of baptism and you’ve already read about the father saying about the fun. This is my beloved son in whom I will please and you will read about the trial. on when they make a point of temptation to hear you with the word.

You are the son of God. You already read all of that material. So that by the time you get to Matthew five to seven, you’re not talking simply about a friendship, generally conceived as if we have in mind the universal brotherhood of man. You are talking about a friendship that is built on nothing less than the friendship of Jesus Christ. What do you think is happening in the baptism in the baptism? You’re seeing a preview of the crucifixion. What is happening when Jesus comes up out of the waters of baptism? You see, you preview of the resurrection.

And that affirmation of the sonship of Jesus Christ becomes the foundation of your claim to sonship. And Jesus addressed to you that you can, after all, because of what Jesus Christ has done for you. call God your Father in the very same way that Jesus was.

It’s the same word, and it’s on your list. Well. The final point for you. If the Old Testament thing. Confidence. Without the explicit and direct doctrine and proclamation of the father. if he was able to cross. In the circumstances that he how much more you. Who have the incomparable privilege in the latter. Of calling. Your phone. Through Jesus Christ. Certainly. What I have just said. Can be placed as an exclamation point. To the marvelous lessons that we have had morning instruction from Jonathan Stark on the book of the back. Back.

So praise God with the confidence that he exhibits in that last. He without the express. Direct message that God is Father, how much more? You, and what confidence that you have before God. In the end, our Father we begin to grasp something of that incomparable privilege of speaking of you as Abba, as Father.

Your spirit at work in us, confirming us in the reality that we are. by virtue of the work of Jesus Christ, the sons of God. May we have, then, that magnificent confidence and trust that should, in fact, be ours as those who have been made sons through Christ’s death and resurrection.

The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.