No one likes discrimination, especially when they are the victim. Yet can it be shown that God himself, in a way, discriminates?

Some say that every sin is the same in the sight of God. "Whether you hate or murder someone, or lust after or sleep with someone, it's all the same to God. He does not discriminate, or differentiate, between one and the other." This is said in order to avoid any tone of judgment, and in some cases it's an attempt to express common ground with an unbeliever: "My sins are as worthy of God's wrath as yours. So I can't pass judgment on your sins."

Is this what the will of God reveals as true? A remark I cited in a previous article remains apt: "A half-truth masquerading as the whole truth becomes a complete untruth."^[1]

In conversation we can advance one aspect of the truth over another. And in a case like this, that's somewhat understandable. After all, God's Word pulls no punches when it comments on the seriousness of sin: it offends and angers our holy God. Both Paul and James, for example, testify to the gravity of sin. Says Paul, "Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them" (Gal 3:10). James writes, "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it" (James 2:10). Every sin violates God's holy law.

But that's not the whole truth. So we turn to Scripture to see how exactly God views sin in its various forms.

Moses⤒🔗

A place to start is the Law of Moses, at a text that describes two different kinds of sin as well as their corresponding punishments. In Numbers 15:22-31, we find a distinction between sin of weakness^[2] and sin committed with deliberate intent. This latter sin is called a sin "with a high hand." It is a sin committed in defiant rebellion against God, in contrast to a sin of weakness, committed by a righteous man struggling to live according to the demands of God. What are the consequences of these two types of sin? A sin of weakness is forgivable through offering (vv. 25­26), but the fallout from a sin with a high hand is a different story. Such a sinner "reviles the LORD, and that person shall be cut off from among his people" (v. 30). Why? He shows a hatred for the word of the LORD (v. 31); hence, the extreme punishment of excommunication.^[3] Indeed, for such a sin of open rebellion against God, no forgiveness, no offering of atonement is possible.

From this example alone we see that the intent behind a sin was decisive for the extent of the punishment. Not all sins were considered equal, and therefore not all punishments were equal. Beside excommunication was the death penalty, and that for sins like premeditated murder and adultery (Exod 21:12-14; Lev 20:10). For sins less heinous, such as theft, negligence, or disputes, fines or beatings could be punishments of choice (Exod 22:3-7; Deut 25:1-3). Now if all sin were the same, then all punishment ought to be the same. Or at least the LORD ought not to have reserved the word "abomination" for some sins over others!^[4] But indeed, his grace, mercy, and forgiveness could be exhausted; he bears with sin and rebellion only for so long.

Prophets←⤒🔗

We see in God's instructions to some of the prophets an ultimate display of his justice toward defiance. He told Jeremiah no less than three times to stop praying for his people's forgiveness, because their sins had reached their full measure (7:16; 11:14; 14:11). No amount of sacrifices or prayers, or even the righteousness of Noah, Daniel, or Job, would be enough to deliver God's people from imminent exile (Ezek 14:14, 20). Their sins were not those of weakness; they had been committing haughty, defiant sins for centuries. As such, there was no room for God to forgive, and so the punishment of exile had to fit the crime of Israel exiling God and his Word from her life.

The Lord Jesus←⤒🔗

Typically, we gain (even) greater clarity on any given scriptural motif when we turn the page from the Old to New Testament. When it comes to this question of how God regards sin, however, does the NT data upset conclusions derived from the OT? For what does Christ say in his Sermon on the Mount? Matthew 5:27-28: "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." This is a key text used to support equality of all sins.

But what is the Lord really saying? He is not distinguishing between minor and major sins. When he says that to lust is to transgress the seventh commandment, he is not suggesting that it is as sinful as outright adultery. Rather, he is declaring that both actions violate the same commandment. He says this over against the Pharisees who thought that only the deed made a person subject to judgment. The Lord teaches that not just the deed itself but already the intent made someone liable to judgment. He wants to highlight the depth of God's law, not the degrees to which it can be broken. Even the slightest violation of God's law is lawlessness. And that speaks also to the aforementioned remark of James, that "whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it." James needs to redress the view that certain laws were non-essential, or "light," and therefore to break them was alright. So he says, God shows no partiality: the law is a unit, so breaking any one law is considered disobedience and actually a breach of the whole of God's law.

Later on in the same sermon, Christ considers the sin of unforgiveness a particularly serious sin, since it prevents the sinner from receiving God's forgiveness (Matt 6:14-15; 18:23-35). Still further in Matthew's account, Christ sets apart blasphemy of the Holy Spirit as more severe than blasphemy of the Son; indeed, such a sin makes it impossible for a sinner to receive forgiveness (Matt 12:31-32). Sounds something like Numbers 15! God will treat certain sins more harshly than others. Christ says this to his disciples. He says it to the scribes and Pharisees, who "neglected the weightier matters of the law" (Matt 23:23). He even tells it to Pilate. Referring to the high priest Caiaphas, Jesus says, "He who has delivered me over to you has the greater sin" (John 19:11). Thus, in the mind of the Son of God, there are degrees of sin.

And with greater guilt comes greater punishment. Christ said about any Israelite city that refuses to listen to the words of the disciples, "It will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town" (Matt 10:15; see also 11:22). Or consider "that servant who knew his master's will and did not get ready or act according to his will." That one "will receive a severe beating," in contrast to the one who did not know and did things worthy of punishment, but will receive a light beating (Luke 12:47-48). The greater the knowledge, the greater the accountability. God will render to each according to what he has done and known.^[5] That's only just.

Paul←⤒🔗

And this teaching is taken over by his apostles. In Ro­mans 1, Paul speaks of those who "by their unrighteousness suppress the truth" to the point where "God gave them up to a debased mind." After detailing their various acts of unrighteousness, Paul points to "God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die" (vv. 18, 28-32). Such acts are clearly treated as worse than other sins. Indeed, Paul more often links various sins with the punishment of death or exclusion from God's kingdom; consider the lists of sins in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:19-21, and Revelation 21:8.

Roman Catholic Church←⤒🔗

A discussion on degrees of sin would be incomplete without at least a brief glance down the halls of church history. In medieval theology there emerged the distinction between venial and mortal sins, which were officially defined at the very important Roman Catholic council, the Council of Trent (1545-1563). Venial sins are those we commit regularly, yet they do not mean we have lost God's saving grace. These sins, such as "an idle word, overly boisterous laughter, spontaneously arising desire, outbursts of temper or anger, a very small theft, and so on," are forgivable, even without confession.^[6] On the other hand, mortal sins are those so serious that they kill the saving grace of the soul (hence, "mortal"). One can think here of idolatry, murder, and adultery. When the faithful of Christ commit these mortal sins they are considered children of wrath, enemies of God. Mortal sin entails the loss of God's sanctifying grace, and it severs the bond of love between God and the sinner. Therefore, of these sins confession must be made, and that only by the sacrament of penance.

As biblical support for this distinction, Catholic scholars appeal to a text like 1 John 5:16, where the Apostle John presented two categories of sin, "a sin not leading to death" and "sin that leads to death."

Reformers←⤒🔗

It's a distinction that didn't wash with the sixteenth century Reformers. John Calvin did not deny that there are degrees of sin; in his Institutes (IV.12.3-4) he made a distinc­tion between private and public sins, "mere delinquencies" and "flagrant iniquities," observing that the New Testament deems some sins more serious than others.^[7] But he said that all sin is mortal in the sense that all and any sin deserves death. The smallest sin is an affront to God's holiness, and so is worthy of death. At the same time, Calvin maintained that no sin is mortal except for the blasphemy of the Spirit, the only unforgivable sin. Thus, he and other Reformers rejected the distinctions Roman Catholics made, but still took the position that some sins are worse than others.

And so it was that also confessional statements of the Reformation followed suit. We can think of the Heidelberg Catechism's discussion on the third commandment. "Is the blaspheming of God's name by swearing and cursing such a grievous sin that God is angry also with those who do not prevent and forbid it as much as they can? Certainly, for no sin is greater or provokes God's wrath more than the blaspheming of his name" (LD 36, Q&A 100). Or think of the Canons of Dort. In the same chapter, you find an article entitled, "Daily Sins of Weakness" (V.2), and another, "Saints May Fall into Serious Sins." Our forefathers in the faith were not too timid to broach the matter of degrees of sin, even and especially as it concerns believers.

So what?←⤒🔗

Maybe this is then the right moment for us to reflect on why it's valuable for us to have clarity on the matter. For why bother giving much thought to the whole subject if I'm simply striving to hate sin altogether?

What's at stake when we say that all sin is equally abominable in God's sight? If God sees all sin as the same, then so should we. That means there should be no difference between our (and God's) response to a Mars bar thief and a murderer, to a driver going one kilometre over the speed limit and a rapist. To push the matter even further, consider the characteristic insight of Kevin DeYoung:

Here's the problem: when every sin is seen as the same, we are less likely to fight any sins at all. Why should I stop sleeping with my girlfriend when there will still be lust in my heart? Why pursue holiness when even one sin in my life means I'm Osama bin Hitler in God's eyes? Again, it seems humble to act as if no sin is worse than another, but we lose the impetus for striving and the ability to hold each other accountable when we tumble down the slip-n-slide of moral equivalence. All of a sudden the elder who battles the temptation to take a second look at the racy section of the Lands' End catalog shouldn't dare exercise church discipline on the young man fornicating with reckless abandon. When we can no longer see the different gradations among sin and sinners and sinful nations, we have not succeeded in respecting our own badness; we've cheapened God's goodness. If our own legal system does not treat all infractions in the same way, surely God knows that some sins are more heinous than others. If we can spot the difference, we'll be especially eager to put to death those sins which are most offensive to God.^[8]

DeYoung catches the thrust of the matter: by not acknowledging that some sins are more gross than others, we fail to think God's thoughts after him, we present his justice in a rather distorted way, we give a false sense of security, and thereby, we dishonour the God of righteousness, integrity, and wisdom. That's the bottom line.

Profit←⤒🔗

That bottom line propels us forward into understand­ing what is gained by acknowledging degrees of sin. We give greater honour to God, which is job one. His justice demands that the punishment fit the crime, and likewise that the reward (out of grace) fit the good work. Moreover, we come to see more and more like God that all people are sinners, but not all sinners sin to the same degree. Yet as DeYoung implies, we also preserve the holiness of the church by seeking after the repentance and salvation of the sinner, even one who falls into serious sin. It's this holiness that Jude instructed the leaders of the church to preserve: "And have mercy on those who doubt; save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh."

We refrain from providing anyone with a false sense of security, but look to speak the truth in love (Eph 4:15). To confront the neighbour with the weight of his sin is to confront him with the call of his Master to turn to him in faith. Yes, if God discriminates regarding sin, the same becomes our duty as his image-bearers, with humility, in light of what we see of the neighbour.

And oftentimes, that neighbour is the one you and I get to see in the mirror every day. For all who believe, we may be sure that our sins are forgiven, and therefore, this matter of degrees of sin does not threaten our salvation. But what if it calls for self-reflection? God takes our sin very seriously, no matter our standing with him. How earnest are we in hating more and more what God hates, and loving what he loves?

All sin is serious, yet not all sin is equally serious. In effect, all sin is damning, yet not all sin is equally damaging. But from the wreckage of our own sin and misery emerges the Redeemer, the one we so desperately need for every sin we commit. God sent his Son to this fallen, sinful world to ransom sinners. How great his grace, that he forgives all my sins, both great and small! It's my duty and privilege, then, to have the mind of Christ.