Are All Sins Equal?

Jennifer Knapp was a contemporary Christian music artist who had been away from the music scene for several years when she did an interview on Larry King Live about her self-imposed hiatus and her new album she had just recorded. During the discussion she made a statement that I think many Evangelical Christians probably believe, but really needs some careful biblical analysis.

Jennifer discussed in the interview her long-term relationship with her lesbian partner. Though she didn’t share any identifying details about the other woman, what caught my attention during her interview was how she tried to justify her sinful behavior. While answering a question posed to her about her homosexuality, she stated that if her conduct was sinful (and she believed it was not), that it should not be viewed as any worse than other sins. From her perspective, things such as being overweight, speeding, gossipping, etc., would all be equally wrong before God because “all sins are equal with God.” It seemed clear to me that her reasoning was a means of deflecting attention from herself in an effort to escape criticism for her behavior. But, is it really true that all sins are “equal with God?”

Please understand that my purpose here is not to excuse any sin or to make less of any offense against a holy God. However, if her assumption is true, then shouldn't we be teaching our children that disobeying parental instructions is just as bad as killing a friend? Going one mile over the speed limit is just as bad as taking illegal drugs? And, overeating is just as heinous as an Islamic terrorist blowing up innocent people? I think most would agree that at least in practical/temporal terms we don’t view all sin as being equal. Even in the criminal justice system there are varying degrees of penalties for varying levels of offenses. Is it really true that God’s system of justice makes no distinctions in the sins we commit?

Sometimes we arrive at our conclusions based on incomplete and/or inaccurate data. The “all sins are equal” defense is one of those examples that I think has arisen in part because of the misinterpretation of some key scripture passages. For instance, Matthew 5:27-28 says, “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

At first glance it appears that the text treats lust and the act of adultery equally, but is that what we should take away from the passage? Practically speaking, there is a difference in degree of violation between lusting after someone and committing the act of adultery. I know from many years of dealing with people that the act of adultery usually results in worse consequences than lust alone (though lust can lead to adultery). Then what does this passage mean, if the two sins are not “equal before God?” It is not that lust and adultery are equal in degree of violation, but that they are both violations of the same commandment (the seventh commandment). In a similar fashion, hatred is not equal in degree of violation to murder (Matthew 5:21-22; 1 John 3:15), but both are violations of the sixth commandment. Jesus is making the point in this context that a person cannot boast of personal righteousness on the basis of keeping the “letter of the law” (something the Pharisees professed for themselves), because there is also the “spirit of the law” to be considered. Any violation, whether of the “letter of the law” (acts of adultery/murder) or the “spirit of the law” (lust/hatred), makes you guilty before God. In other words, all sins are equally against God, but not all sins are equal in the degree of violation and/or consequences.

Even in 1 John 3:15 where John speaks unambiguously about the sin of hatred, I think we have to assume there is still some distinction to be made in degree of violation between hatred and murder. While both belong to the same sphere of “death,” they are not equal in harm caused. Prolific author, Warren Wiersbe, says it well, “This does not mean, of course, that hatred in the heart does the same amount of damage, or involves the same degree of guilt, as actual murder. Your neighbor would rather you hate him than kill him! But in God’s sight, hatred is the moral equivalent of murder, and if left unbridled it leads to murder.”1 I think many would agree that hatred is the “moral equivalent” of murder, but we certainly wouldn’t punish it to the same degree that we would murder. If this is true then it stands to reason that the two sins are not equal in every way, though they are both violations of God’s law and deserving of punishment.

A similar line of thinking is followed in James 2:10, “For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.” James is teaching that no matter how small the violation of God’s law may seem to you, it still makes the person guilty before God. God’s law is viewed as a unit and any violation makes the person a sinner. John MacAurthur writes, “Although all sins are not equally damaging or heinous, they all shatter that unity [of the law] and render men transgressors, much like hitting a window with a hammer at only one point will shatter and destroy the whole window.” He further comments that being “guilty of all” is not to be understood “in the sense of having violated every command, but in the sense of having violated the law’s unity. One transgression makes fulfilling the law’s most basic commands—to love God perfectly and to love one’s neighbor as oneself—impossible.”2 A similar thought is conveyed by author T.D. Lea, “The Bible does not say all sins are equal. Stealing a candy bar is not the same as committing adultery. Thinking about murder is not as bad as committing the act. Every sin does bring guilt. It takes only a single sin to make a person a sinner. No act of obedience can compensate for acts of disobedience.”3

What I’m trying to demonstrate is that you cannot necessarily argue that “all sin is equal with God.” It’s not really accurate to say that going one mile over the speed limit is equally as egregious as living in a homosexual relationship. Both are sins against God and deserving of punishment, but they don’t result in the same degree of “damage,” “guilt,” and/or punishment.

Even more telling for this discussion is the fact that numerous scriptures indicate that not “all sins are equal with God.” The following texts are hard to explain, if they are teaching the “all sins are equal” doctrine.

1. When Christ was before Pilate He said that Israel had committed a worse sin by rejecting Him. “Jesus answered, “You could have no power at all against Me unless it had been given you from above. Therefore the one who delivered Me to you has the greater sin.” (John 19:11, emphasis mine)
2. Sins in the Old Testament were not all punished to the same degree. Under the Mosaic law, a thief paid restitution; an occult practitioner was cut off from Israel; one who committed adultery or a homosexual act was put to death (cf., Exodus 22 & Leviticus 20).
3. Some sins in the Old Testament were labeled as abominations to God, which meant they were especially damaging violations (e.g. Leviticus 18:22; Deuteronomy 7:25; 23:18; Isaiah 41:24, etc.).
4. Solomon listed seven specific sins that he said were notably egregious to God (Proverbs 6:16-19).
5. Jesus said that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit was more consequential than blasphemy against the Father or Himself (Matthew 12:31).
6. The scriptures seem to indicate that there will be varying degrees of punishment in hell, reflecting the severity of the offenses committed (Luke 12:47-48).
7. At times Christ distinguished the sins of the Pharisees as greater than the sins of others. For instance, He said that they would strain out a gnat while swallowing a camel (Matthew 23:24). He also said they would receive “greater condemnation” (Luke 20:46-47). To me, that is a statement that makes no sense, if all sins are equal with God.
8. If all sins are equal then it seems difficult to understand how there could be parts of the law that are“weightier” (Matthew 23:23) than other parts. If all sins are equal with God then all parts of the law should be equal in weight.
9. God classifies unforgivenenss as a particularly offensive sin, elevating it above other sins in some passages (Matthew 6:14-15; 18:23-35).
10. Paul says that immorality is a worse sin than others because it is “against” the body while other sins are “outside the body” (1 Corinthians 6:18).
11. Jesus rebuked some of the cities where He had done His mighty works and warned them that it would be “more tolerable for the land of Sodom” (Matthew 10:15; 11:24) than for them. Certainly this implies that some sins are worse than others, if for no other reason than the fact that greater opportunities result in greater culpability.
12. Jesus said that before you can help your brother remove the speck from his eye, you first have to remove the mote from your own eye (Matthew 7:3). Christ is making some kind of distinction between two sins of varying degree.
13. John the apostle distinguished between sins that didn’t lead to death and “a sin” that brought death without remedy. (1 John 5:16-17).

It just seems impossible in light of the aforementioned scriptures to argue, as Jennifer Knapp did, that “all sins are equal to God.” We at least have to acknowledge that there are varying degrees of offenses, as well as consequences, that result. Jennifer is wrong to excuse her sin as though it’s no worse than any other sin. Actually, homosexuality is worse in some ways than other sins. Homosexuality can lead to God giving the person up to their vile affections so that they can no longer discern good from evil (Romans 1:26-32). It does greater damage to the persons involved, the society around them, and the children that may be affected. It violates several direct commands concerning biblical morality, as well as God’s creation order in Genesis. As much as we should hate all sins, I don’t see how homosexuality can be equal to all of them, if you are considering the degree of the violation or its consequences.

Let me be clear that I am not trying to categorize sins so that we might excuse some of them while decrying the evil of others. That was the error some first century Rabbis made. Neither am I in agreement with the Catholic doctrine that distinguishes between venial sins (those that do not separate you from God) and mortal sins (those that separate you from God). The Bible teaches that all sin is against God and offensive to Him. Any sin, no matter its degree of violation, separates the sinner from God. And, all sin is deserving of God’s divine wrath. That’s why Jesus had to come. There are none of us that are guiltless before God and only the sinless One, Jesus Christ, could pay our sin penalty.

But, trying to make the sin of homosexuality the same as another sin is nothing more than a veiled attempt to lessen the evil of your own behavior and its consequences. A child’s sin in disobeying his/her parent just isn’t the same as the flagrantly immoral sin of homosexuality, either in it’s degree of violation or its severity of judgment.


1. Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (1 Jn 3:13). Wheaton, III.: Victor Books.
2. MacArthur, J. J. (1997, c1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed.) (Jas 2:10). Nashville: Word Pub.
3. Lea, T. D. (1999). Vol. 10: Hebrews, James. Holman New Testament Commentary; Holman Reference (284). Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

When depression pays you a visit

I read this article by Clayton King and thought of some of my ministry friends. It may be that the article will help people beyond those in ministry, but it's especially applicable to my fellow ministers. It's a wonderful life serving Jesus full-time, but it is demanding and requires your all. Pastors need rest and time away, too. Never complain about your pastor being gone for vacation or taking some time off. Most ministers will find it difficult to have a vacation at home and will need to get out of town to rest. It would be nice if more people encouraged their pastors to do this and offered them ways to make it happen. It would be an investment in their good health and future effective ministry. Your pastor may be God's man, but he still has feet of clay.

----------

Clayton King writes...

About a year ago, I experienced something brand new. I had heard about it. Several of my friends and family members had dealt with it. Lots of people were talking about it but it had never been more than a conversation piece or an "issue" in my mind. It was something that affected other people, but not me. But when it showed up in my life, it became immediately clear to me that it was real, not a fabrication or a farce.

Depression.

I didn't know what was wrong at first. I tried to shake it by doing all the things I usually did when I would get down for a few days. Running. Basketball. Movies. Books. Strong coffee. Nothing worked. I felt tight in my chest, short of breath, and sleep became nearly impossible. I survived the busiest part of my summer by praying, fasting, talking to some friends, and as silly as it may sound, listening to lots of classical music in my study.

At about the 2 month point, in desperation I called a friend who had struggled with depression and he hooked me up with a fantastic Christian counselor who diagnosed me in about 3 minutes. I was relieved to hear that my depression was not clinical, but more "situational." It simply meant that I didn't need medication. I needed a reality check and a lifestyle change. Thankfully, I caught it and dealt with it early on before it got worse. The bullet points were fairly simple and straightforward.

1. My depression was a result of my hectic, busy, go-go-go lifestyle. My body was depleted of the chemicals that it needed to feel balanced, happy, and at peace.

2. I would not get better until I slowed down, simplified my life, connected more regularly with God and my family, and unplugged from all the wonderful things (all of them ministry related) that kept me ramped up mentally and emotionally.

3. I had to stop drinking coffee. It was my crutch. It kept me "in the game" when I had lots to do by helping my mind ignore my body's fatigue. Yet the caffeine stayed with me and wouldn't allow me to ever get good rest.

So the big take-away for me was the word UNPLUG. That was what I had to do. Less noise, fewer phone calls, shorter to-do lists, and more time doing things I enjoyed. But how was I supposed to do that? I hadn't lived a life like that since middle school.

I started with a few small things.

• I began going to bed earlier, as in when I got sleepy (usually before 10 PM)
• I immediatly switched to decaf. The results were astonishing.
• I began exercising more regulary and moderately instead of the 3 hour intensive workout twice a week.
• I started journaling again, writing about my feelings and emotions and thoughts.
• I began reading books again for pleasure, not just for theology or sermon material.
• I talked openly and honestly with my closest friends about my struggle.
• I took fewer events which allowed me to stay home more and travel less, giving me more time with my family.
• I read everything I could about adrenaline fatigue and pastoral burnout.
• I spent more time in prayer, worship, and God's word.
• I cut back on writing, blogging, emailing, Tweeting, Facebooking, and surfing the pages and blogs I would frequent constantly.

A funny thing happened. I got better. The fog lifted and the skies cleared and my mind began working correctly again. I began to sleep and enjoy time away from ministry. I became happy and less irritable. And I realized that the only way I could pre-empt the future bouts of depression that would certainly come would be to repeat these steps until they became natural and habitual. That is why I have not blogged in a while and did very little social networking last week. I was on vacation at the beach with my family which meant I didn't need to be tethered to technology.

I thought I was going crazy. If I hadn't talked to people about it, the isolation would have exasperated the situation and I may have lost my mind wondering what in the world was wrong with me. But by dealing with it head on and quickly, I gained understanding and perspective. Now I am poised to respond when the feelings of doom encroach upon my life. I pray this can be an encouragment to you.

http://claytonking.com/blog/when-depression-pays-you-a-visit/

Vacation 2010 - various clips

Family Vacation 2010

(My last beach picture of my dad standing on our condo deck.)

For as long as I can remember I have gone to the beach with my family for summer vacation. I can count on one hand the number of times we did not follow this tradition and those were because of lean financial times. Now, nearly fifty-three years later I’m still following the tradition my dad and mom taught us as our family gathers again for our summer fun in the sun.

This year is different, however. Until this summer my dad has always been with us for every family celebration like this one. In December of last year my beloved dad and patriarch of our family graduated to Heaven. I sat tonight on the deck of our condo listening to the ocean waves crashing on shore and it really struck me just how much I miss him.

The summer before his passing we had to change rooms because of a plumbing problem in the condo we rented. At first this was a huge inconvenience, but it ultimately worked out really nice for our family. Our new condo had a deck the full length of the room that overlooked the ocean with views of the ocean from all three bedrooms. It was the nicest room my two children and their families had ever enjoyed together. Because the room was so much more roomy, we invited the rest of my family (parents, sisters and their families) to join us for supper in our condo for several of the remaining nights. Dad and I sat on our porch on at least three of these occasions while we ate meals together and talked about things. Most of them were trivial in nature, but it’s not always the subject matter of your conversation that’s important as much as it is about being in the presence of someone you love. I can still see him as he looked out at the sea, listening to it’s powerful, but calming sounds. Children played on the sand, while their parents rested in their beach chairs. The sun was beautiful and the wind blew just enough to keep us from being too hot. And the food was delicious, too.

I can still hear my dad’s voice and see his gaze into the seemingly endless distance. His memory had begun to lapse some, but it was still very good. And, he was struggling physically with pain, which made his presence all the more precious. This was his tradition that he had taught us and none of us believed that he was going to let anything keep him away. Family gatherings at the beach were a priority for him and my mom. That’s why all of his children and grandchildren have made it a priority for our families.

This year is no exception. Since early this year we have been planning and anticipating this year’s family vacation. Being able to spend an entire week together is still an immense joy and a tradition we intend on preserving. Some of my fondest memories are of the times we’ve spent together at the beach laughing and playing in the sand. Dad had an old Brownie movie camera that he used to record many of those memories when we were kids and we can still watch them today. We’re making new memories this year, but it’s different without my dad being here. I miss him. I miss his love, his encouragement, his wisdom, and most of all...his presence.

Dad, we are going to carry on with our tradition you started a long time ago. The truth is, it doesn’t really matter where we gather to spend a week together. It’s about being a family! Thanks, dad, for making our family your priority!! And, I’ll always love the beach because of you.

Missing Link "Found"

'Missing Link' Fossil Was Not Human Ancestor as Claimed, Anthropologists Say

Science Daily (Mar. 3, 2010) — A fossil that was celebrated last year as a possible "missing link" between humans and early primates is actually a forebearer of modern-day lemurs and lorises, according to two papers by scientists at The University of Texas at Austin, Duke University and the University of Chicago.

In an article now available online in the Journal of Human Evolution, four scientists present evidence that the 47-million-year-old Darwinius masillae is not a haplorhine primate like humans, apes and monkeys, as the 2009 research claimed.

They also note that the article on Darwinius published last year in the journal PLoS ONE ignores two decades of published research showing that similar fossils are actually strepsirrhines, the primate group that includes lemurs and lorises.

"Many lines of evidence indicate that Darwinius has nothing at all to do with human evolution," says Chris Kirk, associate professor of anthropology at The University of Texas at Austin. "Every year, scientists describe new fossils that contribute to our understanding of primate evolution. What's amazing about Darwinius is, despite the fact that it's nearly complete, it tells us very little that we didn't already know from fossils of closely related species."

His co-authors are anthropologists Blythe Williams and Richard Kay of Duke and evolutionary biologist Callum Ross of the University of Chicago. Williams, Kay and Kirk also collaborated on a related article about to be published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that reviews the early fossil record and anatomical features of anthropoids -- the primate group that includes monkeys, apes, and humans.

Last spring's much-publicized article on Darwinius was released in conjunction with a book, a History Channel documentary, and an exhibit in the American Museum of Natural History. At a news conference attended by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the authors unveiled the nearly complete fossil of a nine-month-old female primate that had been found at the site of Messel in Germany.
But other anthropologists were immediately skeptical of the conclusions and began writing the responses that are being published this month.

"Just because it's a complete and well-preserved fossil doesn't mean it's going to overthrow all our ideas," says Williams, the lead author. "There's this enormous body of literature that has built up over the years. The Darwinius research completely ignored that body of literature."

That literature centers on the evolution of primates, which include haplorhines (apes, monkeys, humans, tarsiers) and strepsirrhines (lemurs, lorises). The two groups split from each other nearly 70 million years ago.

The fossil group to which Darwinius belongs -- the adapiforms -- have been known since the early 1800s and includes dozens of primate species represented by thousands of fossils recovered in North America, Europe, Asia and Africa. Some adapiforms, like North American Notharctus, are known from nearly complete skeletons like that of Darwinius. Most analyses of primate evolution over the past two decades have concluded that adapiforms are strepsirrhines, and not direct ancestors of modern humans.
The most recent such analysis, published last year in the journal Nature, concluded that Darwinius is an early strepsirrhine and a close relative of the 39-million-year- old primate Mahgarita stevensi from West Texas.

Nevertheless, the scientists who last year formally described Darwinius concluded that it was an early haplorhine, and even suggested that Darwinius and other adapiform fossils "could represent a stem group from which later anthropoid primates evolved."

For example, they note that Darwinius has a short snout and a deep jaw -- two features that are found in monkeys, apes, and humans.

However, Kirk, Williams and their colleagues point out that short snouts and deep jaws are known to have evolved multiple times among primates, including several times within the lemur/loris lineage. They further argue that Darwinius lacks most of the key anatomical features that could demonstrate a close evolutionary relationship with living haplorhines (apes, monkeys, humans, and tarsiers).

For instance, haplorhines have a middle ear with two chambers and a plate of bone that shields the eyes from the chewing muscles.

"There is no evidence that Darwinius shared these features with living haplorhines," says Kirk. "And if you can't even make that case, you can forget about Darwinius being a close relative of humans or other anthropoids."

University of Texas at Austin. "'Missing Link' Fossil Was Not Human Ancestor as Claimed, Anthropologists Say." ScienceDaily 3 March 2010. 27 March 2010 <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100302131719.htm>.