One should hasten to emphasize the necessity of sincerity. Surely one must be sincere in religious matters (Matt. 22:37; Eph. 6:24; 1 Peter 2:2; II Cor. 8:8; Phil. 1:17; 1 Peter 1:22). Proper motivation is of utmost importance.
There are numerous examples where people have shown deep sincerity in religious matters. The woman who feeds her child to crocodiles pays a tremendous price. Would you for a moment doubt her fervent sincerity? I surely would not. You would try to teach her better, wouldn’t you? You would have her cease such a practice even though she was sincere. In this case, you would not allow that sincerity is the standard of acceptability. In fact, you would try to show her that more than sincerity is demanded. You wouldn’t endorse what she did though she is sincere. You wouldn’t endorse it because you know God doesn’t. You would not be sectarian because you did that, would you? Could this lady be sincerely wrong on this point and still be saved? If she could, wouldn’t you render a disservice to her to try to get her to give up the practice?
I think Sarah was sincere in her proposal that Abraham father a child of Hagar (Gen. 16:2). Surely you wouldn’t doubt her sincerity, but would that justify the practice? The intentions of both Sarah and Abraham were good. They wanted to obtain a child. Would their sincerity and good intentions make void Genesis 2:24? Wouldn’t you have an addition and substitution in this situation in spite of the sincerity and good intentions of both parties involved? Who among us would endorse this state of affairs in spite of the sincerity?
Take the case of Saul of Tarsus and his violent persecution of the church. You must freely admit his total sincerity. He tells of such. To the council he said, “Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day” (Acts 23:1). I have no reason to doubt that. Such a life would demand sincerity. He later stated that he “verily thought that he ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth” (Acts 26:9). Again, one finds an affirmation of his sincerity. I wouldn’t doubt it for a moment. But, is that alone the standard for acceptability? If so, he didn’t need to change, did he? You would hasten to say that he must change. You would say this because his practice was wrong in spite of his sincerity. Could he still be sincere in his opposition after he learned the truth about his mistake?
Now, does a person’s sincerity in the use of mechanical instruments in New Testament worship mean God will accept such a practice? After all, it is a practice for which there is no authority. It is a practice of presumption. Such adds to and substitutes from that which God ordains in worship (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). There is no scriptural authority for its use in New Testament worship! Sincerity will not change that fact. Sincerity will not make it acceptable anymore than such would make ice cream and cake a part of the Lord’s Supper acceptable. In fact, you wouldn’t attempt to justify the latter on that basis.
May I hasten to add you are not sectarian to point out these matters of grave importance. For we all know sincerity is not the justifiable standard for the mother who feeds her child to a crocodile, nor for Sarah and Abraham’s substitution of Hagar, nor for Saul of Tarsus and his persecution of the church, nor for the addition of a mechanical instrument into New Testament worship. These stand or fall together.
-Winfred Clark
0 Comments