A popular belief within Christianity is that all sins are equal. Those who hold this view will say confidently that in God’s view, sins like adultery, murder, and child abuse are no better or worse than any other sin, including tardiness, carelessness, and eating too much Tofutti ice-cream.

Although this doctrine seems egalitarian and scores high on political correctness, it fails the test of biblical accuracy. It is also an avenue through which unbiblical attitudes and policies are drawn into the church.

Why It Matters

The false claim that all sins are equal is one of the prime directives of those who oppose church discipline. It is one of the first objections offered to any move toward corrective action. It is virtually implied by those who advocate this error that either “everyone should be punished all the time,” or “no one should be punished at any time” — with a definite nod toward the latter. However, the obvious practical implications of this view are contrary to the obvious teachings of Scripture, which tell us that church discipline is not a human invention, but instead is a sacred responsibility.

A true understanding of the degrees of sin is also useful to our own self-discipline, when we think about our personal responsibilities and priorities.

What the Bible Says

The primary scriptural argument — often the only one cited — for the belief that all sins are equal is James 2:10–11: “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.”

At first glance, that verse could be understood to mean that all sins are equal. Indeed, it does teach that all sins are equal in principle: They are all violations of the same law.

Nevertheless, we do not build doctrines from a single verse. Neither James 2:10–11 nor any other passage tells us that all sins are equal in degree. Other verses plainly tell us that sins are not equal; sins are diverse in their punishments and consequences, and guilt for sins varies between individuals.

• During His trial, Jesus said to Pilate, “He that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.” John 19:11. Jesus did not say Pilate was guiltless; however, he said that the one responsible for his arrest had the “greater sin.” Thus Jesus Himself did not see all sins as equal.
• Jesus’ words to the Jewish leaders contain several examples of degrees of sin. In Matthew 23:13–33, we find expressions such as “therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation,” “ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves,” and “[ye] have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith.” These phrases suggest degrees of guilt, degrees of sin, degrees of importance. Note: One might argue that degrees of punishment are tied only to the quantity of sin (the number of sins committed), but this is not consistent with what Jesus is saying in this passage. If you read the full passage, it is clear that the types of sins the Pharisees and scribes were committing was the reason for their greater guilt, not the number. This is especially clear from verse 14, where Jesus condemns the practices of “devouring widows’ houses” and pretentiously making long prayers; for these the Pharisees would receive “the greater damnation.”
• In Matthew 11:20–24, Jesus compares the judgment awaiting the Jewish nation of His day with that of various pagan cities of the past that were destroyed by judgments of God. His words imply that increased light means increased responsibility, which in turn carries greater guilt if neglected.
• The expression “great sin” occurs several times in the Old Testament. One example is Exodus 32:30–31, where Moses pleads for the Israelite’s sin of making the idol at Mt. Sinai. This usage (“great sin”) itself implies degrees of sin.
• In Leviticus 4, we find a detailed description of the sacrifices for various classes of people. If a priest or the whole community of people sinned, the sacrifice was to be “a young bullock” (the young of a cow or ox). See verses 3–21. If a ruler sinned, he was to offer a young male goat (verse 23). If “any one of the common people” sinned, he or she was to bring a young female goat (verse 28). In an agricultural society, each of these animals had a different value. This value was based on how much work the respective animal could do, its procreative ability (males were seen as more valuable), and how much meat was on its bones; and the animals are listed in order from highest value to lowest. The implication is that a sin of a priest was just as serious as a sin of the whole camp, and these sins required a costlier sacrifice. A secular ruler’s sin carried a lesser penalty, and a common person’s sin carried the least penalty.

Other Commentary

I think these two quotations provide a good summary:

• “God does not regard all sins as of equal magnitude; there are degrees of guilt in His estimation, as well as in that of man; but however trifling this or that wrong act may seem in the eyes of men, no sin is small in the sight of God. Man’s judgment is partial, imperfect; but God estimates all things as they really are. The drunkard is despised and is told that his sin will exclude him from heaven; while pride, selfishness, and covetousness too often go unrebuked. But these are sins that are especially offensive to God; for they are contrary to the benevolence of His character, to that unselfish love which is the very atmosphere of the unfallen universe. He who falls into some of the grosser sins may feel a sense of his shame and poverty and his need of the grace of Christ; but pride feels no need, and so it closes the heart against Christ and the infinite blessings He came to give.” Ellen White, Steps to Christ, 30.
• “[God] would assure sinners that sins of the greatest magnitude can be forgiven if the transgressor seeks for pardon, surrendering himself, body, soul, and spirit, to be transformed by the grace of God, and changed into His likeness.” Ellen White, Signs of the Times, October 10, 1900.

Conclusions

There are no “small” (insignificant) sins in God’s eyes. All sins are violations of the same principle of love — love to God, and love to our fellow humans.

But not all sins are of equal magnitude or degree. Factors in the degrees of sin include:

• how much knowledge/experience the sinner had in the truth and ways of God
• how much influence/responsibility the person had in the eyes of others
• their calling as pastor, teacher, priest, leader, king, etc.
• the actual effects of the sin (how much damage, hurt, and/or rebellion resulted)
• the sin’s effect of the sinner’s own spiritual nature

Many sins that we tend to regard as greater sins — prostitution, theft, etc. — are often only greater in terms of the immediate physical, psychological, and interpersonal consequences (as opposed to immediate or long-term spiritual consequences). From a spiritual standpoint, the greater sins are often the ones we think of as lesser offenses — pride, covetousness, hypocrisy. So while the Bible does not teach that all sins are equal, its valuation of sins may be the opposite of our intuition.

On the other hand, neither civil law nor church discipline is based on inner spiritual ills. It is only outward acts, with outward consequences, that must be dealt with. For example, pride is spiritually a great evil — but one doesn’t get pregnancy or syphilis from pride itself. Hate bottled up inside may be equal to the spirit of murder (1 John 3:15), but it’s the act of murder that will put someone in prison.

In both the Old and New Testament, people were never punished for inner feelings or hidden attitudes. The basis for punishment in the Old Testament theocracy, or for discipline in the New Testament church, was always behavior. Indeed, it should be obvious that this can be the only basis for punishment of any kind that is administered by human agencies, since no human can read the heart (1 Samuel 16:7). Even when God was directly involved in the punishment or sentence, it was always on the basis of behavior. Very likely this was because the punishment had to make sense to third parties. The fact that behaviors are punished, and not mere attitudes, does not mean the behaviors are worse; it simply reflects the limitations of human judgment.

Despite the degree of the sin a person has done, no one should be treated in an unloving manner. “Treat others as you would want to be treated, if you were in their place,” remains the Golden Rule (although it requires a great deal of maturity to apply this rule in a disciplinary way). And remember that no sin is too big for God or man to forgive when it is confessed.

Finally, the more we know, the more accountable we are. And this subject also helps remind us that the “weightier matters” are not dress, music, and soy, but the spiritual virtues that should adorn the human life.