The Sins Of The Fathers - A Martyn Lloyd-jones Sermon Commentary (part 2 - On Rivers And Trees)

The Downstream Flow of Sin and Righteousness
So in part 1 we looked at seminal theory as it applies to our responsibility to our future generations. It appears that there is a linear relationship in regards to sin and righteousness, that is that since time flows linearly (at least in one sense) if I sin then my sin (or conversely if I do right my righteousness) will come down to my children. I propose two ways of thinking about this. The first way is to imagine that I am a river flowing down a mountain and I flow into a series of ponds or lakes downstream. Now if someone pollutes me then that pollution is going to affect everything downstream and the people who drink from the ponds or lakes below will get sick. If we want to extend this further let's say those ponds and lakes then flow out further and further into other streams and more and more people get sick. This is all because of the original pollution upstream. So it is with sin, it appears to compound in terms of its repercussions. Now conversely, if my river is pristine and clean then the people drinking downstream will be enriched by me; so it is with righteousness, the righteousness compounds. However, as discussed above this river analogy is only limited to a linear conception of the consequences of sin and righteousness, for a downstream body of water cannot flow upstream (notwithstanding that in a sense all bodies of water ultimately and finally circulate, as discussed in my post addendum at "**"). But, as discussed below, it appears that not all consequences of sin and righteousness are linear, so perhaps there is another way of thinking about this to capture the (somewhat) two-way flow of the consequences of sin and righteousness. For this I use the analogy of the tree.

The Tree of Life or the Tree of Death
Another way of discussing the seminal theory is to think of a father as the root of a tree and all of the branches as his children. This is similar to the concept of Christ as the vine and his disciples as the branches (John 15:1-7). Now, any given branch fundamentally needs the root but not the other way around. We need our father's DNA (or a father's DNA) or we would not exist. We need Christ's perfection and righteousness so that we may be justified in him or we would die. So in these ways the vine or root is necessary for the branches. However, lack of reciprocality is limited because the roots need "a" branch (or branches) but not any particular branch. I understand that Christ doesn't "need" mankind but I apply this in a sense that as he is the head of the body of the Church the head needs "a" body but not necessarily any particular member. Also, I understand that a father doesn't need children to exist but his name (as will be discussed below) will die out unless he has them. So unless the head is to be without a body and the father without a name so too the stump may remain but without branches the glory of the tree will not show forth.

The branches of the tree show forth the glory of the tree and bring forth its fruit. How is this fruit shown forth? In Christ it is in good works and in man it is in the man's name or reputation. The bible places great importance on one's name (Proverbs 22:1, Psalm 135). It is not for nothing that the bible frequently tells us of the name of a man's descendants and two books of the synoptic gospel provide Christ's geneaology. Inheritance matters and by implication name and/or reputation matters. Deuteronomy provides "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin." (Deuteronomy 24:16 ESV). Why would the sins of the children affect the father? Because the father must answer reputationally (and I think in a sense judicially (at least in the eyes of men)) for the children. So we see in Genesis Jacob must flee as a result of Simeon and Levi's murder of the Hivites (Genesis 34). Moreover, this brought a bad reputation to the family (Genesis 35 1-5). So as children our actions can bring honor or shame to our family line and all of our ancestors, in this way our sins and righteousness flow both forward and backward. This is why we must honor our father and mother that it may go well with us (Ephesians 6:2), for when we dishonor them we take the axe to our own roots and will soon find ourselves withered on the ground, and much moreso if we should dishonor the name of Christ.

Lord Jesus Christ, please forgive us and all of our ancestors for our sins and cover all of our family's iniquities. May we act in such a way that honors our ancestors and brings a good reputation to our name.

*ESV=English Standard Version

** I think this river analogy prompts a few other more interesting questions that I don't want to fully flesh out now but are food for thought. Can we imagine now a variety of streams interacting with each other, some more pure then others, some less so, and how the people who drink from those streams are affected as a result, as a kind of analogy to the interaction of people in a community and how their interactions with each other play out across generations. Perhaps a marriage can be seen as just the joining of two streams? And what of the kings of this world? Why are they so influential? Well perhaps a person in a position of influence is like a stream that is higher up on the hill, so it flows down and affects more bodies of water that are lower down; or perhaps it is just a larger body of water and so more people drink from it. These are just ideas that came to mind that might be helpful in thinking about sin and righteousness.

One last point on this, we read in Ecclesiastes about all the streams going back into the ocean and then flowing out again (Ecclesiastes 1:7). There is something there but I am not exactly sure what. Perhaps Adam was the original ocean of pollution (Rev. Lloyd-Jones talks about Adam's sin as "original pollution") from which all streams came and then maybe Jesus Christ was another, an ocean of purification. We read about salt as well and that may have implications for sin for we know that in the dead sea (the saltiest sea in the world I believe) nothing can live. Perhaps that salt in ourselves kills all of the sin in us and maybe we act as some kind of preservative for the world as a whole? I would be interested in others thoughts on this.

Blog entry information

Author
EzekielsWheels
Read time
5 min read
Views
334
Last update

More entries in General

More entries from EzekielsWheels

Share this entry