In the last post, I examined what I take to be a common false assumption in some Christian circles: namely, that all sins are equal in the sight of God.

While acknowledging the gravity and pervasiveness of sin, my reasons for rejecting the myth were fourfold:

1. Scripture never says it.
2. Scripture teaches the opposite.
3. Common sense and church tradition corroborate the Bible.
4. There’s a hidden danger in the myth, especially for victims.

Since the prior post focused on points 1 and 2, this one will move (eventually) to points 3 and 4.

But before that, let me aim for a bit more charity in understanding why the false assumption might arise.

TOWARD CHARITY

First, I suspect some folks gravitate to the myth partly because they have a rightful aversion to the religious impulse to create a “ranked” list of sins that (conveniently) focus on the faults of others while ignoring our own. That worry is understandable. Jesus takes aim at this hypocrisy in his parable about the Pharisee who is confident in his own righteousness while loudly condemning the sins of others, “God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector” (Luke 18:11).

Thankfully, to accept the biblical position that some sins are more serious in God’s sight than others (see part 1), need not lead to this self-righteous posture—in part, because (if anything) it is the sin of callous and exploitative self-righteousness that falls most under Christ’s condemnation. Nor should it lead to the fearful false assumption that God can’t forgive me because I have committed a particularly heinous or unpardonable sin. Though that’s a topic for another post, the worry of blaspheming of the Holy Spirit likely has more to do with a human unwillingness to repent rather than a divine unwillingness to save and forgive. As Charles Wesley put it, “His blood can make the foulest clean,” and “His blood availed for me.”

Second, I suspect another reason for the “all sins are equal” assumption involves passages like James 2 (mentioned last time), or Galatians 3:10, which claim the following:

“For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. For he who said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Do not murder.’ If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.” ~James 2:10-11

“For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them.'”
~Galatians 3:10 (citing Deuteronomy 27:26)

(As a side note: I love how these texts counteract the false assumption [set forth by Luther] that James and Paul stand in blatant contradiction with one another, especially in James 2 and Galatians. While that’s a conversation for another day, here we see two deeply Jewish Christ-followers making quite similar points with respect to Torah.)

But does that mean all sins are equal in severity before God?

No. Neither passage says that.

Rather, both teach that breaking any of God’s laws makes one a lawbreaker, which makes one liable to judgment. Hence, we cannot be saved by works of Law (Paul), nor should we fail to love our impoverished neighbors while showing favoritism to the rich and powerful (James). Both points are important. But both fit in the “all sin is sin,” “all sin is serious,” and “all sin is liable to judgment” bucket, not the “all sins are equal” one.

By analogy, if I boast in my perfect driving record because I have not been involved in a vehicular homicide; yet I conveniently forget that I have a DUI and thirteen speeding tickets, three truths follow: (1) My boasting is hypocritical, (2) I am a lawbreaker, and (3) I am liable to judgment. But these facts do not imply that the tickets, the DUI, and the vehicular homicide are equal in severity. All break the law. All are serious. And all make one liable to judgement apart from grace or mercy. But not all are equal before a judge who is just.

On these points, both common sense and church tradition concur with Scripture.

COMMON SENSE AND CHURCH TRADITION

It’s important to note that the false assumption we’ve been addressing is primarily a “pop-Christian saying,” not an official doctrinal position across most faith traditions.

As proof, it is rejected outright by Catholics, Calvinists, and Wesleyans alike.

Catholicism:

Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1992

CCC 1854: Sins are rightly evaluated according to their gravity. The distinction between mortal and venial sin, already evident in Scripture, became part of the tradition of the Church. It is corroborated by human experience.

CCC 1855: Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law… Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.

CCC 1856: Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us—that is, charity—necessitates a new initiative of God’s mercy and a conversion of heart which is normally accomplished within the setting of the sacrament of reconciliation.

The Reformed/Presbyterian Tradition:

The Westminster Larger Catechism (1648)
The Westminster Larger Catechism clearly teaches that some sins are more grievous than others:

Q. 150. Are all transgressions of the law of God equally heinous in themselves, and in the sight of God?

A. All transgressions of the law of God are not equally heinous; but some sins in themselves, and by reason of several aggravations, are more heinous in the sight of God than others (Jn 19:11; Ezk 8:6, 13, 15; 1 Jn 5:16; Ps 78:17, 32, 56).

Wesley:

For his own part, when John Wesley revised the Westminster Standards, he left the above Q/A unchanged to demonstrate his agreement.

Yet his position (as revealed by other statements on the topic) relied not only on Scripture or tradition, but also upon what he calls “reason” (or just plain common sense).

In other words, a God who weighs all sins as equally heinous would be manifestly unjust. He would stand in blatant contradiction to the LORD revealed within the Law of Israel (a problem that I never broached within the prior post, but which points in the same direction).

In sum, these examples (Catholic, Reformed, and Wesleyan) reveal that the assumption about all sins being equal in severity is just that: a “pop assumption,” and not a view that enjoys broad support across the centuries.

Now for a more practical concern.

ABUSE AND ANTINOMIANISM

One last reason to reject the myth has to do with the way it has been weaponized to do great harm, especially to victims of abuse.

You’d have to live under rock to miss that scandals, exploitation, and their coverup have plagued American evangelicalism in recent years.

To choose one example, just down the road from me in rural Oklahoma, the pastor of a Texas megachurch (one of the largest in the country) was just indicted on five counts of lewd or indecent acts to a child for offenses that took place decades earlier. To make matters worse, we now know numerous Christian leaders (in his own church and in others) knew of these heinous acts. Not only did they fail to report them, but they also continued to protect and elevate the pastor in his own church and in other churches all around the country.

Of course, it would be wrong to blame such acts of cowardice and injustice on a misguided assumption about all sins being equal. (I have no idea if that line was used in this particular case.)

Still, we need not look far to see how that saying has been used to silence victims, sweep abuse under rug, and move quickly to “restore” offenders to places of leadership without justice or accountability.

After all, if all sins are equal in God’s eyes, who are we to disagree?

More commonly, however, the myth leads to a form of antinomianism. Here, the logic runs as follows: “I’m going to sin no matter what, and all sins are equal, [insert whatever destructive tendency I’d like to excuse].”

In a weird way, the fact that the misguided view is not enshrined in Christian doctrine or affirmed in most church traditions may actually add to its power.

It’s a “pop-assumption,” which makes it more prevalent at a popular level.

CONCLUSION

Thankfully, the confluence of Scripture, tradition, and common sense give ample grounds to retire this false assumption.

In the end: God is just. Sin is serious. All are sinners. But not all sins are equal in their heinousness or consequences.

That said, it feels wrong to end there. Better to close with Charles Wesley on the good news of a grace that extends to any sin you have committed, regardless of its nature.

He breaks the power of cancelled sin,
he sets the prisoner free;
his blood can make the foulest clean;
his blood availed for me.

---

Hello friends. Please subscribe on the homepage to receive these posts by email. This is especially helpful since I’ve decided (mostly) to uncouple the blog from social media. Thanks for reading. ~JM