Some Sins Are Worse Than Others

"All sins are equal in God's eyes," or so I've been told my entire life. On the surface, this idea seems absurd. How could cussing be the same as murder? How could stealing candy be the same as genocide? How could cheating on a test be equal to adultery? How is looking at a pretty girl the same as fornicating with her? Yet, the majority of American Christians seem to believe the idea that all sins are equal before God, and I too believed this for the majority of my life. 

BIBLE PASSAGES 

My former belief in the equality of sins, however, totally collapsed the moment I began researching this question with any seriousness. To my astonishment, the Bible clearly rejects the idea. The surface level human impulse, that sins have degrees of severity, is the correct way of seeing it. The equality claim is just as false as it seems. We should let our human instincts guide us in this situation, and if that's not enough there are two New Testament passages that totally debunk the idea that all sins are equal.

"Jesus answered [Pilot], 'You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above. Therefore he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin.'"

Jesus told Pilot in John 19:11 that the Jews were committing a greater sin by delivering him to be crucified than Pilot was committing by carrying out the destined sentence. He didn't exonerate Pilot, but he told him he was less guilty. Pilot's sin was smaller, and Jesus can be interpreted as encouraging him to allow the process to go through to its foregone conclusion. Jesus perceived a hierarchy of sin based on intent and agency.

"If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life - to those who commit sins that do not lead to death. There is sin that leads to death; I do not say that one should pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is a sin that does not lead to death."

The Apostle John wrote that some sins lead to death and some do not. How can we interpret 1 John 5:16-17 in a way that does not mean some sins cause spiritual damnation and others do not? The passage seems to dismantle the popular idea that committing a single tiny sin is enough to send one to Hell. 

Some commentators have suggested John was talking about physical death rather than spiritual death. If he was only talking physical death then the equality of sins could be maintained on the spiritual level while allowing for differences in worldly damage. The problem with this idea, however, is that it makes absolutely no sense within the context. Why would John tell Christians not to pray for someone who was literally killing themselves with sin? He would be restraining us from praying for those addicted to drugs, struggling with eating disorders, or cutting themselves. We wouldn't be able to pray for a gluttonous family member with diabetes.

The Old Testament confirms the New Testament's hierarchy of sins. The Mosaic law didn't mandate the death penalty for every offense. Stealing wasn't punished by stoning as homosexuality was. Every human society recognizes some hierarchy of sin. We don't usually think our preacher deserves to be fired for making an angry comment to his wife, but we'd fire him for fathering an illegitimate child with another woman. 

DOES ALL SIN SEPARATE US FROM GOD? 

I've heard people argue that if all sins separate us from God than all sins are equal, "case closed," but do all sins separate us from God equally? Do some sins take us further from him than other? There can be no doubt that some sins are more damaging to the soul. Trolling a younger sibling into getting angry for entertainment isn't going to drag one away from God in the same way that murdering a younger sibling will. The "soul damage" isn't the same.

Many soldiers and murderers have talked about how the act of killing someone creates a deep spiritual scar that never completely heals. They say they can't stop thinking about how the person died, the look in their eyes, or how their family members must have felt after realizing they'd never see their loved one again. Both the physical and spiritual consequences of killing someone are more severe. 

DOES GOD HAVE A DIFFERENT STANDARD THAN US? 

Some Christians have told me that God's standard of sin is different than our own, and thus we can't talk about different degrees of sin because in God's eyes cussing is the same as genocide. The problem with this objection, however, is that it's nonsensical and meaningless. If it's true, in some heavenly mystical sense we can never fully understand, that all sins are the same then why would we even talk about it as a theological reality? If the Bible never gives us any textual reason to believe this, and it doesn't make any practical sense, then why would we talk about it like it's some cherished notion of Christian belief? 

WHAT ABOUT JAMES 2:10?

"For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it."

Some have pointed to James 2:10 as evidence that committing any one sin is equal to having violated the entire law and thus the worst possible sin. This was not, however, James' intended meaning nor an implication of what he said. James' point was that we shouldn't judge each other harshly because we're all guilty before God and in need of his mercy. The person who stole a candy bar is just as guilty before the law as the person who murdered someone, but their sins against the law aren't equal in severity. It seems foolish for a thief to judge a murderer while they're both in prison.

Another commentator interprets James 2 like this: "On Judgment Day, we cannot say, 'But I loved over six billion people as I love myself, Lord! I only hated that one guy!' It is an all or nothing proposition. In the same way, we cannot say to God on Judgment Day, 'But I kept the other nine commandments, Lord!'" The point was not that all sins are equal, but that we must keep all the commandments. 

JESUS, LUST, & ADULTERY 

Some have found in Jesus' proclamations against lust and hatred in Matthew 5 a claim that all sins are equal.

"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 lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

Firstly, the context of the passage has nothing to do with the equality of sins. Secondly, how can this interpretation be reconciled with Jesus' clearer statement on the inequality of sins before Pilot?

Thirdly, Jesus wasn't speaking literally. Obviously, lusting after a women isn't the same as actually committing adultery with her. If that were true, everyone would have the right to divorce their spouse at any time by claiming they'd committed adultery via lust at some point in their marriage, and thus Jesus' words in Matthew 5:31-32 would cover every desire for divorce. Why would Jesus bother talking about adultery being the only grounds for divorce right after he'd nullified any opposition to divorce by claiming all lust was literally adultery?

Jesus wasn't saying lust was equal to adultery, he was repudiating the claim that external works were more important than people's hearts. The Sermon on the Mount emphasized that spirituality must be deeply internalized. The most important part of being religious isn't doing external works, like hand washing and public fasting, but purifying one's heart and disciplining one's body. 

HISTORIC CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY  

Christians haven't historically believed all sins to be equal. There's been a distinction between "mortal" sins that lead to death and "venial" sins that may create scenarios leading to mortal sins but are not themselves mortal sins. This distinction is directly based on the text of 1 John 5:16-17.

While the Catholic Catechism shouldn't be taken as authoritative, I think it does a good job summarizing the historic Christian position on the differences between sins.

"Mortal Sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God… Venial sin allows charity to subsist, though it offends and wounds it."

"One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law, or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or complete consent."

"Deliberate and unrepented venial sin disposes us little by little to commit mortal sin. However, venial sin does not break the covenant with God. With God’s grace, it is humanly reparable. 'Venial sin does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity, and consequently, eternal happiness."

WHY DO PEOPLE THINK ALL SINS ARE EQUAL? 

This brings us to the question of why people began thinking all sins are equal. If neither the Bible nor church history supports the idea then why do many modern Christians cherish and repeat it?

It's difficult to trace this ideas' history. There are several possible origins. I personally think growing biblical illiteracy has produced a climate in which this kind of idea can spread without opposition. A quick Google search reveals pages of links to blogs and videos in which the idea is totally repudiated. Everyone from John Piper to Catholic Answers to random Redditors have debunked the myth that sins are equal, and yet the idea persists. I've yet to find a credible source supporting the idea.

What are the motivations driving people to accept this misunderstanding? It seems to me that the most avid supporters of this idea are often Christians with sordid pasts looking to assert their equality with Christians who've lived comparatively holy lives. It might have something to do with status signaling one's credibility. If the prodigal Christian can argue that all sins are equal then they can claim that while they were mired in godless debauchery the lifelong Christian was sinning just as often in less visible ways, therefore, the two should be regarded as equally credible on a spiritual level. The idea that all sins are equal is a way of denying that spiritual development is possible, holy lifestyles are therefore morally equivalent to hedonistic ones, and thus all Christians are equally mired in horrible sin. In other words, the equality of sins is often a power play by those with the least credibility.

An example of this phenomenon could be a woman with many previous sexual partners who reforms herself and returns to the church. If any young man dares admit he wants to marry a virgin, as almost every man in history has, the woman claims this is a sinful attitude because non-virgin women are morally equivalent to virgins. The virgin may have lusted after a man, she says, which allegedly means she's just as guilty as if she'd fornicated. Virginity, then, is neutralized or reinterpreted as arrogant pride. 

Of course, this is a vast oversimplification. By now almost all Christians have internalized this idea despite their lifestyle choices, but I think the above outline is a helpful starting point for thinking about this issue's sociological and psychological origins. 

CONCLUSION 

The clearest biblical passages demonstrate that there are different degrees of sin. Not all sins are equal, some are worse than others. This is true on both a spiritual and physical level. Jesus and John both made clear statements on the topic. Human instinct and legal precedent across all civilizations recognize this fundamental ethical truth. No one actually believes all sins are equal even if they claim to. No one actually believes a kid saying a cuss word is equal to Joseph Stalin's mass murders. It's important for us to challenge the weak spots in our theology because these kinds of oft repeated falsehoods can become so ingrained in our psychologies that they distort our ethical judgement and understanding of God.