QQ 83-84. Are all transgressions of the law equally heinous and what doth every sin deserve?

A (83). Some sins in themselves, and by reason of several aggravations, are more heinous in the sight of God than others.

A (84). Every sin deserveth God’s wrath and curse, both in this life, and that which is to come.

Our first difficulty about these two questions might understandably be: How can both of these answers be true? If “EVERY sin deserves God’s wrath and curse, both in this life, and that which is to come,” then how can “SOME sins” be “more heinous in the sight of God than others”? Now if we use the words “veritcal” and “horizontal” to describe aspects of how these sins differ (as I often do), that can be a legitimate category; however, it cannot be the ultimate category. Here is the main reason why. Notice even about the many different ways that a sin is sinful, and so admits of different degrees of guilt, that the ultimate focus of guilt is still before God. It says that these “some … are more heinous in the sight of God than others.” It is always in the sight of God that determines the sinfulness of sin. In other words, how does God view our sin? 

The Diversity in the Sinfulness of Sin 

We must first deal with the fact of there being degrees of sin. This is something of a shock to Evangelicals today, whether because they are coming out of Rome, and blame the wrong culprit in the breakdown between mortal and venial sin, or because they have been taught to de-emphasize the diversities or intensities of sin out of a false fear of praying the prayer of the Pharisee in Luke 18.

Nevertheless, there are degrees of sin. It is true that all sin is guilty of an infinite crime and therefore deserves God’s eternal, just sentence. However, the two truths are not in conflict.

There are several different ways of showing degrees of sin from Scripture. First, turn to the words of Jesus.

“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire … 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” (Mat. 5:21-22, 27-28).

Paul’s language of “storing up wrath” in Romans 2:5 is another place we have already looked at. Consider also John 19:11, where Jesus tells Pilate, “he who delivered me over to you has the greater sin.” Or the oracles of woe by Jesus to Capernaum, Bethsaida, and Chorazin, to whom He says, “that it will be more tolerable on the day of judgment for Tyre and Sidon [and the land of Sodom] than for you” (Mat. 11:22, 24).

But then we must ask, what is the rationale of there being degrees of sin, and is this rationale taught in Scripture? Consider how Scripture in many places teaches that degrees of evil increase when the one who sins does so with greater knowledge of truth, as in those passages from Matthew 11:22, 24 and John 19:11.

Degrees of evil increase also when the distance between standard and despising the standard is increased, as when a religious officer defiles the holy things of God. This can be seen in the case of Nadab and Abihu in Leviticus 10, with the sons of Eli in 1 Samuel 1, and the priests who were called out by Malachi. But also the vision of the old temple given to Ezekiel,

“And he said to me, ‘Son of man, do you see what they are doing, the great abominations that the house of Israel are committing here, to drive me far from my sanctuary? But you will see still greater abominations” (Ezek. 8:6, cf. 13, 15).

Degrees of evil increase when the degree of harm caused to others increases, and especially relative to their innocence, as when Jesus says,

“whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea” (Mat. 18:6).

Degrees of evil increase when the sin is committed in the face of more grace, and especially over time and manner of previous mercies. 

“Yet they sinned still more against him, rebelling against the Most High in the desert … In spite of all this, they still sinned; despite his wonders, they did not believe” (Ps. 78:17, 32)

“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 sin that does not lead to death” (1 John 5:16-17).

Degrees of evil increase when the sins of even the reprobate are not punished as swiftly as justice would ordinarily demand. We see the same thing in the prophet Amos, in the repetition of the formula, “For three transgressions of Damascus [Gaza … Tyre … Edom … Ammonites … Moab … Judah … Israel], and for four,” (1:3, 6, 9, 11, 13; 2:1, 4, 5). What is meant by this expression?

In those last two reasons especially, consider why this is. If I sin the same sin tomorrow that I commit today—the same sin in every respect except for one—that the sun of God’s mercy rises on me tomorrow when He would have been just to punish overnight; therefore tomorrow’s same sin is in fact not entirely the same sin. It is worse. I have added ingratitude and presumption. 

The Unity in the Sinfulness of Sin

Now from the universality of sin’s presence we rightly infer a consequence that is one.

This just follows from what we saw last time about the universality of sin. If all men sin everyday, then those same “all men” should expect something of a universal consequence: “Why should a living man complain, a man, about the punishment of his sins?” (Lam. 3:39)

“For all who rely on works of the law are munder a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed be everyone who does not abide by all things written in the Book of the Law, and do them’” (Gal. 3:10).

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels’” (Matt. 25:41).

Here in the latter passage, Jesus singles out one group and the whole of that group, simply called THOSE ON HIS LEFT. But who all is on His left? It is every single sinner that has not put their trust in Jesus Christ. So these words of Jesus plainly teach that all of the wicked will receive at least the same main punishment, that of eternal damnation.

From the unity of sin’s nature, we infer that which is infinitely evil in all cases. This is perhaps the most difficult point when considered in isolation. The first step is to stop thinking of it in isolation.

Implicit in this nature of sin is the great evil of the first sin. We have already covered original sin; but it is worth remembering that God furnished Adam and Eve with all good things, and thus the memory of such spite in the face of blessing sends an echo down through all our sin. Although we cannot have what Adam had, yet we are promised far greater in Christ. Therefore to sin in the covenant of grace, because of its clear end, is to despise a far greater Eden. 

Now, as to the Scriptures, the rationale starts with God. What we say about God when we sin is the root of the evil. So James says,

“For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. For he who said, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Do not murder.’ If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law” (Jas. 2:10).

Dabney wrote, “Note, that God’s perfections necessitate that He shall be the righteous enemy and punisher of transgression.”1

When we say that all sin, from the least evil looking to the most, deserves the wrath and curse of God, this demands that there is something in the least sin that is of the same kind as the supposedly greatest sin. This is really the theological key to the whole picture.

“Sins of thoughtlessness are as truly sinful as deliberate sins,” Shedd remarked, “Men generally are not self-conscious of the ‘secret sins’ (Ps. 19:12; 90:8) of feeling and desire which they are committing inwardly all the time. The purpose of preaching the law is to produce the self-consciousness of sin. The ‘darkness’ in which, according to St. Paul (Eph. 4:18), men walk is the thoughtless unconsciousness in which they live and act.”2

We can also discover this from the reality of guilt remaining in the sin less intentional.

“If anyone sins, doing any of the things that by the LORD’s commandments ought not to be done, though he did not know it, then realizes his guilt, he shall bear his iniquity. He shall bring to the priest a ram without blemish out of the flock, or its equivalent, for a guilt offering, and the priest shall make atonement for him for the mistake that he made unintentionally, and he shall be forgiven” (Lev. 5:17-18).

“You have set our iniquities before you, our secret sins in the light of your presence” (Ps. 90:8).

Though this is admittedly a tough pill to swallow, the person who does see it in Scripture is forced to abandon the notion that the ultimate (or sole) ground of sin’s guilt is this or that degree of knowledge, nearness, grace spurned, etc.

The Westminster divines drew from Paul’s word in Ephesians 5 which can well make both of our main points today.

“Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience” (Eph. 5:6).

The plurality of “these things” calls attention to the commonality of such sins and their equally common punishment; but the fact that one can be deceived about this, and that by different degrees, recalls everything just said about aggravation of sin. 

Likewise an application of a familiar principle of Jesus can teach both points: “But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more” (Lk. 12:48).

Dabney gives a good summary of the whole of the rationale, under five heads:

“But affirmatively the ill-desert of sin is infinite, because of the excellence, universality, and practical value of the law broken by it. Because of the natural mischievousness of sin to the sinner himself … Because of the majesty and perfection of the Law-giver assailed by transgression. Because sin is committed against mercies and blessings so great. Because it violates so perfect a title to our services, that of creation out of nothing. And last, because it is so continually multiplied by transgressions.”3

Uses of this Doctrine

First, putting these two truths together prevents us from two extreme kinds of arrogance. If I think of my sin as somehow more excusable in the sight of God than those of my neighbor’s, then I am well on my way to expanding my sin and never repenting of it. In short, I am hardening my heart in the very process of thinking that thought. I have neglected the sense in which “all have fallen short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23) and so I am not desperate to hear more of the gospel. That’s one extreme.

Now if I go the other way and think of all sin as the same in every which way, then I will tend to take a light view of arresting the development of sin, or of condemning gross evil out in the world. “We’re all sinners after all—let’s not haggle over the details!” “Who are any of us to judge—who among us is without sin!” And so at one extreme I excuse sin in my heart and on the other I excuse sin around me (which, of course, is now just another sin in my heart).  

Second, on both points, to study the sinfulness of sin is the business of Christians who desire to stop sinning. What is the first rule of war? It is to know your enemy. But our enemy here is as evil as it is precisely because of how it wars against the glory and honor of our King. We will not see the depths of sin’s evil if we never develop a sense of God’s holiness and care whether or not things tend to make God seem glorious. But if you know the real guilt of sin more—and to agree more and more with the justice of the sentence—you will come to treat sin more like the enemy that it is. 

Third, if that second point is true, then a growing appreciation for the law must follow, and a greater knowledge and skill in its use as well. To review those words of Paul,

“Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, ‘You shall not covet’” (Rom. 7:7).

_____________

1. Dabney, Systematic Theology, 312.

2. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, 563.

3. Dabney, Systematic Theology, 428