Is Every Sin the Same in God’s Eyes? - by Kevin DeYoung

Found here. Our comments in bold.
-------------------------

The reason the author writes this (we think) is because a statement of faith he agrees with makes the issue important. So he teaches to the statement of faith, looking for biblical support for this view of the doctrine.

So from this he considers the nature of sin in an interesting way, and we might in some sense agree, except for several critical errors:

1. He never defines what sin is
2. He thinks sin is the issue when it's the sinner
3. He mistakes the severity of punishment for the severity of sin  
4. He doesn't quote a single Scripture. 

We will define sin. Sin is hamartia, missing the mark, offense, a state or status: 

Ro. 3:9 ...Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.

The condition of the sinner is at stake, not the relative severity of various sins.

---------------------

Many Christians hold to the mistaken notion that every sin is the same in God’s eyes. (Item #2 of our list. The Bible is clear that every sinner is the same in God's eyes:

Ro. 3:10 As it is written: “There is no-one righteous, not even one...

This is the key issue for us, the sinner. James tells us that one broken law is enough: 

Ja. 2:10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it.

The issue is the lawbreaker [sinner], not if one sin is worse than another.)

Some Christians embrace this conviction by way of a misguided theological calculation: “If every sin deserves eternal judgment, then every sin must be equally heinous.” Others promote the idea for apologetic reasons: “Don’t worry, friend, your sins are no worse than anyone else’s sins.” Still others believe in the equality of every sin out of a genuine sense of humility: “Who am I to think that my sins are less vile than anyone else’s sins?”

While these reasons are understandable, and in some sense commendable, the witness of Scripture tells a different story. Consider several examples:

• The Mosaic law prescribed different penalties for different infractions and required different sacrifices and payments to make restitution.
• The Mosaic law also distinguished between unintentional sins and highhanded sins (Num. 15:29–30).
• Sins of rank idolatry and willful rebellion were more serious indictments on the kings of Israel and Judah than was the sin of failing to remove the easy-to-overlook “high places” in the land.
• God’s anger was often specifically directed against the leaders of the people. The sins of the king or the priests or the elders meant greater judgment than the sins of the laity.
• Jesus warned that cities in which he performed his miracles would be more severely judged than Sodom and Gomorrah (Matt. 10:15).
• Jesus considered Judas’s betrayal to be a sin worse than others (Matt. 26:24).
• God’s anger is especially roused by sins against children, the weak, or the helpless (Jer. 32:35; Matt. 18:6; Luke 20:47).
• Excommunication seems to have been reserved for only the most flagrant sins (1 Cor. 5:1–13).
• Cornelius, though not yet saved, was considered a devout man who feared God (Acts 10:2). Even among non-Christians there is a difference between being a decent person and being a dirty, rotten scoundrel.
• There is a sin that leads to death, but not all sins are unto death (1 John 5:16).

(Our item #3 above. It is quite true that some sins were more severely punished, just as crimes are punished differently, but that does not speak to sin as a quality in people.  Similarly, a crime is an act, a criminal is a status.

It's important to note that the Mosaic law prescribed various punishments because it was, well, the law. That's how sin was dealt with in ancient Israel. But how is sin dealt with in the new covenant? Not by following rules, but by the one sacrifice of the Lamb of God. 

The legal issues of sin is not on the radar anymore. 

Church discipline is a separate [though related] issue. 

Check the author's above provided N.T. examples, dear reader. Notice there isn't a single example of sin being quantified as worse than another. That's because sin is not the issue, the sinner is. And the sinner's problem is not severity of punishment, but rather, death [Ro. 6:23].)

The Bible simply doesn’t make sense—not the Mosaic law, not the exile, not church discipline, not the frequent warnings of judgment for specific transgressions—if all sins are equally vile in God’s eyes.

In fact, life doesn’t make sense if every sin is the same. Parents do not discipline their children the same for every act of disobedience. Employers do not inflict the same punitive measures for every violation of company policy. Law enforcement officers do not treat every offense the same. Our judicial system does not hand down the same punishments for every infraction. What we know to be true in ordinary life we must not forget in our spiritual lives. As much as it shows admirable humility or apologetic concern, we must not act or teach as if every sin is the same in God’s eyes.

Sins Made More Heinous

The Westminster Larger Catechism teaches, (Now comes a long explanation of the teachings of a statement of faith. The author can quote this, but not the Bible?)

“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” (WLC 150). The Larger Catechism goes on to provide a helpful analysis of what makes “some sins more heinous than others” (WLC 151). According to the Westminster divines, sins receive their aggravations from four different categories.

1) “From the persons offending.” Sins are worse when they come from pastors or parents or public figures, when they come from those who teach and write books, and when they come from Christians who should (and do) know better.

2) “From the parties offended.” Sins are worse when they expressly blaspheme God or demean Christ and the gospel, when they reject the work of the Spirit, when they show disrespect to parents and persons in authority, when they ignore our weaker brothers and sisters, and when they lead many astray.

3) “From the nature and quality of the offense.” Sins are worse when they deal with matters that are black or white instead of gray; when they break forth externally, not just internally; when they are frequent; when they are celebrated; when they cannot be undone; when they are against nature, against conscience, and against the warnings of others.

4) “From circumstances of time and place.” Sins are worse when they take place in connection with the gathering of God’s people for worship, when they could have been avoided, and when they are committed in public so as to be well known to others.

Why does any of this matter? (Good question...)

There are at least three benefits: public, pastoral, and personal.

When it comes to our public witness, we must have the courage to say that some sins are worse than others. (We wouldn't agree. In the eyes of non-Christians that puts Christians in the position of being referees for sins. Thus the creation of a sort of "sliding scale" governed largely by opinion. This in turn gives people permission to create their own sliding scale, which is how we now have abortion, homosexuality, legalized drugs, etc.. Someone, somewhere, will always have an attitude of "this isn't so bad," or even, "in my opinion what I'm doing is just fine."

The biblical solution is not to deem some sins worse than others, but rather to call every sinner to repentance.)

Sins by pastors are worse than sins by parishioners. Sins by public figures with many followers are worse than sins by private individuals. And although all sexual sins are serious, we should not shrink back from teaching that sins against the light of nature are especially heinous, particularly when these sins are committed with delight and to the detriment of the common good.

Pastorally, distinguishing among various degrees of sin can help us apply the comfort and the warnings of Scripture more judiciously. Some preachers are quick to pull the punch when the Bible would have us issue a stern warning, while others are ready to thunder judgment against our people for every offense. (How categorizing sins would assist undiscerning pastors is unknown.)

Likewise, when we learn to discern how “sins receive their aggravations,” we will have the proper categories to hold people responsible for their lesser sins even as we may sympathize with them for having been more grievously sinned against. (How categorizing sins would positively impact peoples' judgments against others is unknown.)

And finally, there are personal benefits. Too many Christians have flattened the moral contours of the Bible such that we no longer distinguish between falling into sin and running headlong into sin. This means that some of us are too hard on ourselves (seeing no moral space between fallen temptations and flagrant disobedience), some of us are too easy on ourselves (believing our heinous sins to be little more than “struggles” or “mistakes”), and many of us give up striving after holiness because we know we will always be sinners. (This sounds like a feature of the author's prescriptions, not a thing that would be solved.)

Let us keep fighting the good fight of faith, knowing that by God’s grace in Christ, sanctified sinners can put to death the deeds of the flesh, grow in godliness, and do what is pleasing in God’s sight.

This article is adapted from Daily Doctrine: A One-Year Guide to Systematic Theology by Kevin DeYoung.

Kevin DeYoung (PhD, University of Leicester) is the senior pastor at Christ Covenant Church in Matthews, North Carolina, and associate professor of systematic theology at Reformed Theological Seminary, Charlotte. He has written books for children, adults, and academics, including Just Do Something; Impossible Christianity; and The Biggest Story Bible Storybook. Kevin’s work can be found on clearlyreformed.org. Kevin and his wife, Trisha, have nine children.