Are All Sins Really Equal in God’s Sight?
During my ordination, one of the questions that I was asked by a seminary professor was “Are all sins equal in the sight of God?” I hesitated. Not because I did not have a strong opinion on this, but because I was not sure what the answer was that he was looking for. Are all sins equal in the sight of God? My ordination may have depended on the answer.
Although I posted on this before, it would seem that many remain unconvinced about this issue. Therefore, I thought that I advance my “thesis” a bit further with some more evidence.
It is very common within popular evangelicalism to answer this question in the affirmative. This was one of the main assumptions in a book that I just recommended last week. Most find this theological concept very appealing and accept it, I am afraid to say, without doing much homework.
I think this tendency to assume that all sins are equal in the sight of God comes by means of three influences.
1) A reaction by Protestants against the Roman Catholic distinction between mortal sins (sins that kill justifying grace) and venial sin (sins of a lesser nature that do not kill justifying grace).
2) A tendency within our evangelistic church culture to express common ground with unbelievers—i.e. if all sins are equal in God’s sight then your sin is not worse than any other. This way we are not coming across as judgmental or condescending.
3) Some biblical passages that have been interpreted in such a way (discussed below).
However, I don’t believe that all sin is equal in God’s sight. I also believe that telling people that it is does great damage to the character of God and the seriousness of certain sins. There are many reasons for this, but let me start with a reductio ad absurdum and them move to a biblical argument.
I often ask people who say that all sin is equal in the sight of God if they live according to their theology. Think about this. If all sin is really equal in the sight of God, and one really believes this, then God’s consternation and anger will be equal for whatever sin we commit. Equally important is the fact that our relational disposition before God should suffer from the conviction of the Holy Spirit for all sins equally. Most Christians understand what it means to have a conscience weighed down by unrepentant sin. But this weighing down normally only comes from those sins that we perceive to be more severe. However, if it is true that all sin is equal in the sight of God and one actually lived according to that theology, they should be just as troubled spiritually and just as repentant before God when they break the speed limit as when they commit adultery. After all, breaking the speed limit, even by 1mph, is breaking the law and breaking the law is sin (Rom 13).
This, of course, nobody does. We all see speeding down the road as water under the bridge of God. Apparently our conscious bears us witness that it is not as bad as other things, even if we confess differently.
Next (and more importantly) I think that it is biblical and necessary to say that some sins are more grievous in the sight of God than others. This also translates into the non-politically correct assumption that some people are sinners to a greater degree than others. Even though Protestants may not agree with the theology behind the Roman Catholic distinction between mortal and venial sins, there are many instances in the Scriptures where degrees of sin are distinguished.
1. Christ tells Pilate that the Jewish leaders have committed a worse sin than him, saying “he who has handed me over to you has committed the greater sin†(Jn. 19:11).
2. Certain sins in the law are distinguished in a particular context as an abomination to God, implying that others are not as severe (e.g. Lev. 18:22; Deut. 7:25, Deut. 23:18, Isa. 41:24).
3. Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is set apart as a more severe sin than blasphemy of the Son (Matt. 12:31)
4. Proverbs 6:16-19 lists particular sins in such a way as to single them out because of their depraved nature, separating them from others.
5. There are degrees of punishment in Hell depending on the severity of the offense (Lk. 12:47-48).
6. Christ often evaluates the sin of the Pharisees as greater than the sins of others. “You strain out a gnat while you swallow a camel†(Matt. 23:24). If all sins are equal, Christ’s rebuke does not make any sense. (See also Lk. 20:46-47)
7. Related to the last, Christ also talked about the “weighter things of the law†(Matt. 23:23). If all sins are equal, there is no law (or violation of that law) that is “weightier than others.” They are all the same weight.
8. Unforgiveness is continually referred to as a particularly heinous sin (Matt. 6:14-15; 18:23-35).
So where does this folk theology come from? Well, most people would refer to Christ’s comments in the Sermon on the Mount. Most particularly, reference is made to Matt. 5:27-28 as justification for this way of thinking.
“You have heard that it was said, ‘you shall not commit adultery’” but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart (Matt. 5:27-28 27).
Is there a difference in the eyes of God between thinking about adultery and actually doing it? Absolutely. If we say anything other than this, I believe we do damage to God’s character and encourage the act based upon its premonition. The point Christ makes in Matt. 5:28 is not that lust and the actual act are equal, but that they both violate the same commandment, even if the degrees of this violation differ. This way, Christ was telling all people (particularly the religious establishment of the day) that thought they were safe because they had fulfilled the letter of the law that the law runs much deeper. The spirit of the law is what matters. Therefore, if you have ever lusted, you have broken the sixth commandment. If you have ever hated your brother, you have broken the fifth commandment (Matt. 5:22). But, again, the breaking of the principles of the commandment is the issue, not the degree to which it is broken.
This is the same argument that James makes in Jam. 2:10 when he says “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.” He is not equating all sin, but showing how any violation of the law, no matter how small, is still breaking the whole of the law because the law is connected to such a degree.
Think about this (another reductio), if you believe that adultery and lust are equal in the sight of God, then here are the results: Any man or woman can justify divorce based upon the fact that in Matt. 5:32 Christ condemns divorce except for marital infidelity. All they need to do is make the safe assumption that their spouse has lusted to some degree during their marriage. This will make their divorce justified and biblical. As well, if a man were to lust after a woman on the Internet, he might as well commit the actual act, since in God’s eyes he already has. As well (I am rolling), if you have ever lusted after a girl, then you are under God’s mandate to marry her since in God’s eyes you are one with her (1 Cor. 6:16).
Again, I think that this way of thinking is not only wrong biblically, but it also has repercussions that lead to a distorted worldview and a discrediting of the integrity of God and the Gospel of Christ.
It is true. All people are sinners (Rom. 3:23). All people are sinners from birth. But not all sin is equal.
I think that it is safe to say that while not all people sin to the same degree, we all share in an equally depraved nature. In other words, no one is less of a sinner because of an innate righteousness about which they can boast. All people have equal potential for depravity because we are all sons of Adam and share in the same depravity, even if we don’t, due to God’s grace, act out our sinfulness to the same degree.
I answered with the above answer during my ordination. I was relieved when I saw the approval of the ordination committee. I have often wondered whether or not they would have passed me if I had answered according to the traditional Evangelical folk-lore, saying that all sins are equal in the sight of God.
Our ministry is a partner based ministry. This means that the majority of our support comes from people like you. Please consider supporting Reclaiming the Mind Ministries as we make theology accessible. Donate today.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
- Are All Sins Really Equal in God’s Sight?
- Taking the Lord’s Name in Vain: What Does it Really Mean?
- Is Divorce Ever Biblical?
- Things I used to believe, but now I am not so sure
- A Primer on the Christian Understanding of Capital Punishment
Truth Unites... and Divides on 08 Jan 2008 at 1:04 am #
I would have answered the same way. Good job!
vangelicmonk on 08 Jan 2008 at 1:12 am #
I admit I have thought this way and said this before without much thought as to the Biblical basis. However, it seemed logical to me since any sin makes it so that we fall short of God without Christ so any sin is seen as unholy in the sight of God. I haven’t really thought about it. Moreover, I think what you said makes sense to the believer. Nevertheless, I have to wonder how we put that in layman’s terms to the unbeliever? If I said what you just said to the unbeliever I have serious doubt they would understand it or have the patients to hear the whole explanation. That is why I think most Christians think it easier and more logical to say “all sins are equal in the sight of God†in that no one sinner is closer to God than any other absent of Christ.â€
Would it be safe to say that God is more concerned about certain sins because of the consequences (spiritual and/or physical) rather than Him arbitrarily picking “really bad†sins to make a distinction? Therefore, can we say we are already making such a distinction by the apparent consequences of sin in our lives and other’s lives of certain sins and also the spiritual consequences we know of due to scripture?
TonyF on 08 Jan 2008 at 4:25 am #
One could say that all sins are equal in their effect of moving us into the category of “sinner” under God’s just condemnation and in need of his salvation in Jesus. Positively, apart from the sin against the Holy Spirit, all sins can be equally forgiven by God in our salvation.
For those who die in their sins and suffer God’s punishment after judgment day, one would hope that mass murderers receive more than mild-mannered folk who were kind and peaceable but refused the Gospel. Likewise in glory, many others will receive more than I will, for sure!
I enjoy your blog–thanks!
Daniel Eaton on 08 Jan 2008 at 11:49 am #
Great piece. I have to confess that I’d fallen into folk theology on this one. How bad of a sin is that?
Seriously though, I think that a lot of the confusion comes in the fact that while some sins may be more disturbing or heinous than others, all sin is equally sin. In other words, there aren’t some actions that are only *partial* sins. It is either sin or it isn’t. That is what I always thought of when I said all sins were equal. It’s like being pregnant. You either are or you are not. But, if you *are*, you could possible be “more” pregnant than another in the sense that you may be further along, bigger, have twins, or whatever.
Your post brought up a question though. God is love. It’s His very nature. If He hates some things more than others, does that mean that He can (or does) love some people or things more than others? Does His nature become relative?
D.
Josh on 08 Jan 2008 at 11:52 am #
vangelicmonk,
rather than saying that all sins are equal in the eyes of God, can we say that all SINNERS are equal in His sight?
Just using the classic Romans 3:23 we can say that EVERYBODY has fallen short of achieving His glory, and everybody is in need of redemption. Therefore, we are all equal in the fact that we must seek him, whether our sins are tiny or terrible.
Peter G. on 08 Jan 2008 at 2:07 pm #
Your article said that if adultery and lust are the same at every level then Jesus allowed for divorce on the grounds of lust—which everyone is guilty of at some point in marriage. As crazy as that sounds (and it does) I have actually heard someone make exactly that argument. They said that since adultery and lust are completely the same, every marriage has grounds for divorce since everyone has lusted at some point. Very strange (and scary).
Peter G. on 08 Jan 2008 at 2:19 pm #
While I do think that the equality of sins needs addressing in current evangelical folk theology, I also think the severity of sins needs addressing. It seems that most people like to say all sins are equal right at the point where someone has admitted to struggling with sin. Wanting to ease the tension, someone jumps in and says, “It’s okay, all sins are equal.” By which they mean, “You’re sin isn’t all that bad. After all, we’re all sinners!” The idea seems to be that because sinfulness is a shared condition, it must not be so bad. The prevalence of sin must imply a mildness of sin right? Ironically, when you start to poke at the logic of this position you start to sound like you’re the one taking sin less seriously.
Just an observation.
Eduardo on 08 Jan 2008 at 5:00 pm #
Michael,
I agree with you on the matter regarding the difference between the gravity of sins. I just have a question regarding what you said about divorce. You said that Jesus accepted divorce on the basis of adultery, and since lust is adultery, then anybody would have grounds for divorce (paraphrase). Right?
My question arises because I am not a theologian, but studies theology on his own. In Mathew 5:32 and Mathew 19:9 Jesus clearly states that fornication is the only valid cause for divorce. He uses the word porneia (fornication) instead of the word maichao (adultery). Now…my question is this: Is adultery and fornication the same in Jesus mind as it is in ours? I mean, we think that if our spouse has an extramarital relationship, that would be adultery and so we could divorce her. But I think Jesus thought different. I think Jesus thought that repeated fornication was the cause for divorce, not just one act of adultery. How do I come up with this conclusion? Well in Mathew 19, Jesus had just talked about how we should forgive others. So my thought is that Jesus thinks porneia is the cause for divorce and not moichao.
Are my thoughts on this correct? Just an honest question.
C Michael Patton on 08 Jan 2008 at 5:35 pm #
Eduardo,
Thanks for the response. Porneia can be used generally of sexual infidelity. I believe that the context has to decide what it means in each circumstance. It can be specific to adultery when in a marital context. I think that is what Christ meant here. BDAG has it listed here as such.
The most general definition for porneia is “Unlawful sexual intercourse” (BDAG). What was unlawful in the Jewish community of the first century involves many practices besides just adultery. Christ may have had this in mind, but this certainly includes adultery.
Hope that helps.
Eduardo on 08 Jan 2008 at 5:40 pm #
Thanks Michael…Appreciate it!
bethyada on 08 Jan 2008 at 7:07 pm #
Michael, you are so correct on this. I think Jesus’ comments in John that you referenced say a lot to this issue.
vangelicmonk, I don’t think that this is difficult for unbelievers, they are more likely to think some things are “badder” than others anyway; their struggle may be more to see their own sin as bad or bad enough, or why Jesus’ atonement should “work” I would imagine.
bethyada on 08 Jan 2008 at 7:11 pm #
Michael, you raise the issue of degrees of punishment in hell. While I think this (based on a parallel of degrees of reward), a related question I have thought of but have never seen addressed anywhere (perhaps I’ll blog on it sometime) is:
Does temporal punishment ameliorate eternal punishment?
C Michael Patton on 08 Jan 2008 at 9:04 pm #
Bethyada,
If you are a Catholic it does! (But only in Purgatory)
Thomas Twitchell on 08 Jan 2008 at 9:48 pm #
Rewards: if you get 5 pieces of eternity and I get one, how much more eternity will you get than me? If my reward is Christ, what greater reward will there be for you?
Jesus said that Moses gave them the ordinance of divorce because of their sklerocardia. Unforgiveness is the only reason that divorce takes place, other than abandonment, which is defacto divorce. Beside that Jesus did not say that a person could legitimately divorce for adultery in the past, but the current state of sexual immorality, which would be abandonment, defacto.
Anyway the confusion is one of semantics. Sin is equated with nature, as was said. It is Adam’s guilt and his nature that we inherit. Two things. A Hereford and and Angus are both cows. One is breed the other, specie. Sin is nature, and sins are its actions.
Are there gradations, well yes, that is clearly stated by Christ. Are there diverse punishments? Yes that is also clearly stated by Him. However punishment eternal is like my first statement. If a sinner is punished in hell with a few stripes eternally, how much more punishment is that, than if he is beaten with many eternally?
It simply turns into vain argument. Sin, or sins are anything that exalts itself against the knowledge of God. To say anything more about it is not wisdom, which comes from above but is from below and results in envy and strife.
To one much is given and much required. If a man is given legs to walk, he is required to walk, but if not, he cannot, but is required to all the same. But, grace is given to the humble, therefore humble yourself in the presence of God and he will lift you up. Who then has the greater sin, he who can walk and does not, or he who cannot walk, yet does at the bidding of another? It was mentioned that some are weak and others strong. If the strong man climbs a wall and gets over and so also the weak man, who attains the prize? Who should be awarded the greater? Who do we afford more honor too, the weaker and less comely, or those dressed in fine clothing and jewlery? Who is the more righteous, the one who says I will and does not, or the one who say I will not and later does? These questions Christ repeatedly asked. Which one was justified, they were both equally sinners, yet the Pharisee, could not see his sin, only another’s. Which one had eyes to see? We can go on with this and gather this, that God alone is Judge, and one man’s sin is insignificant next to another’s though they both act in one accord, because to one, the ability to see was given, but to the other it was not. Upon whom do you have the greater compassion, the Pharisee, or the sinner? Which one was which? Upon whom do you have the greater compassion, the prodigal that strayed from home, or the prodigal that stayed at home?
No not all sins are the same, that is taught clearly, our problem is we do not know which sins are greater or lesser.
JFrances on 08 Jan 2008 at 11:39 pm #
Friendly neighborhood Catholic weighing in here. . . I am hoping that Michael was being facetious in his comment on Purgatory, but I thought I would make some clarifications just in case.
The questions was: Does temporal punishment ameliorate eternal punishment?
Michael answered: If you are a Catholic it does! (But only in Purgatory)
To clarify: The Catholic Church does not teach that temporal punishment alleviates or lessens eternal punishment. Temporal and eternal punishments are two separate consequences for sin.
This from the Catechism (paragraph 1473) should help: “The forgiveness of sin and restoration of communion with God entail the remission of the eternal punishment of sin, but temporal punishment of sin remains. While patiently bearing sufferings and trials of all kinds and, when the day comes, serenely facing death, the Christian must strive to accept this temporal punishment of sin as a grace. He should strive by works of mercy and charity, as well as by prayer and the various practices of penance, to put off completely the “old man” and to put on the “new man” (Eph. 4:22, 24).â€
Thus, Christ is the source of any remission of eternal punishment of sin. Christ’s obedience and redemptive sacrifice on the Cross alone is infinitely meritorious in remitting the eternal consequence for our sin and disobedience. Yet, even as Christ expiates the eternal punishment, we still experience the temporal effects (or punishment) for sin. Eternal forgiveness does not remove all temporal punishment. Like a stone thrown into a pond, sin (even forgiven sin) causes suffering, punishments, and effects us beyond our guilt.
Purgatory is indeed the Catholic doctrinal understanding of purification prior to entering the fullness of eternity with Christ at our death. But, contrary to the implications of Michael’s comment, Purgatory does not have a corner on the temporal punishment market. As Christians, who have faith in Christ and His saving gift of forgiveness, we experience daily temporal punishment for our sinfulness. And as Christians, we are given the unimaginable gift of offering these sufferings back to our Lord.
Rob Bowman on 09 Jan 2008 at 1:33 am #
Michael,
I have sometimes thought that I was the only one out here arguing against this bit of evangelical theological folklore. What a relief to see someone else make the same point! You even used many of the same arguments and biblical texts that I have used. As my mother likes to say, great minds think alike!
Seriously, nice job. You hit it out of the park.
Ted on 09 Jan 2008 at 8:41 am #
OK, time for me to confess too! I now officially change my mind. Thanks for laying out the evidence.
Francis Beckwith on 10 Jan 2008 at 1:02 pm #
Very nice work, Michael. At Summit Ministries (http://www.summit.org)–where I lecture every summer, and will do so again this summer–the kids who attend often hold this belief, what Rob correctly calls “evangelical folklore.” (I would call it “egalitiarian concupiscience,” but that’s just me :-)). Every time I hear a student say “sin is sin,” I respond, “it isn’t algebra. For if it were, you should say, `murder is stealing paper clips.’” Thus, in a weird way, by treating all sin as “equal,” one trivializes really heinous acts.
Daniel Eaton on 10 Jan 2008 at 2:17 pm #
I agree with you Frank. Summit is great! Perhaps you should have a special session on this topic this year though. My son, who has been to Summit at Bryan twice now, just told me that all sin is equal. The phrase “sins of the father” come to mind as, like I mentioned earlier, I too had fallen for this folk theology. He’s at that age where I can’t teach him anything and don’t know anything, so I’ll leave it to you to convince him otherwise.
Keith on 11 Jan 2008 at 12:03 am #
There must be a context - maybe its just late and I missed it. There is a sense in which “sin is sin.” That is, no matter how LARGE or small our sin is, it is sufficient enough to require death. If I live my entire life and only steal a paper clip, I am no less disqualified from God’s presence than the murderer. So in a sense, stealing a paperclip = murder.
There is also (as clearly shown by Michael) a sense in which sins differ.
Either way, I daily sin and am no less in need of grace than the “worst” sinner. I am no more a saint because I keep a tighter list of do’s and don’ts than anyone else who is forgiven, in that I am a saint IN CHRIST - period.
Quick Takes - 1/12/2008 at Ray Fowler .org on 12 Jan 2008 at 7:09 am #
[...] Michael Patton gives a thoughtful answer to the question: Are all sins really equal in God’s sight? “I think that it is biblical and necessary to say that some sins are more grievous in the [...]
the evangelical outpost on 14 Jan 2008 at 12:10 am #
Thirty Three Things (v. 45)
1. Peter Augustine Lawler, one of the most underrated public intellectuals in America, has an intriguing editorial about religion and politicians titled, “The Candidate’s Religion”: Religious appeals in American politics have generally been most ef…
All Sin Equal? « Shane Vander Hart on 14 Jan 2008 at 6:34 pm #
[...] Posted on January 14, 2008 by Shane Vander Hart Or is it equal depravity and unequal sin? Michael Patton posts on this topic. However, I don’t believe that all sin is equal in God’s sight. I also believe [...]
Think Christian » Blog Archive » Are all sins equal in God’s eyes? on 15 Jan 2008 at 4:29 pm #
[...] at the Parchment and Pen blog, C. Michael Patton argues that we’ve taken the “all sins are equal” concept too far, and that a closer look at the Bible shows that God does, in fact, take some sins more [...]
“Will One Sin Really Send You to Hell for All Eternity?” or “Why is Hell Eternal?” | Parchment and Pen on 24 May 2008 at 10:07 am #
[...] but I don’t believe this is true. Not only do I not buy it, I think this, like the idea that all sins are equal in the site of God, is damaging to the character of God, the significance of the cross, and I believe it trivializes [...]
Are all sins equal? « One Beggar’s Bread on 03 Jun 2008 at 9:31 pm #
[...] but I bookmarked him to come back and read more!). I followed a link from Bob’s blog over to Reclaiming the Mind, where C Michael Patton gives his answer to the question he was posed at an ordination interview, [...]