The scriptures give us a guide. There is the unpardonable sin which would make us a son of perdition - which most of us will not have to worry about. The Book of Mormon tells us that violations of the law of chastity are second only to murder in seriousness. So I think these give us a clue as to what is in the top three.

I do think the temple recommend is a good guide also.

In addition, I think consciense is a good thing to go by as well.

But mostly I try and go by the scriptures, and what church leaders say.

I work it out with the Spirit...

Something that really helped me recently was listening to Elder Bednar's talk about having Clean Hands AND a Pure Heart. I need to do a lot more than avoid the bad stuff. I need to develop a meaningful relationship with my Savior and learn to truly love well. Rather than lining up sins according to size or shape to stay away from, my goal must be to allow the Lord to work in my heart in whatever way He chooses. I cannot obey my way into the kingdom of heaven.

Sin is sin is sin is sin.

The earthly consequences differ but that doesn't change the eternal nature of every sin. There isn't such a thing as "little white sins", I think it's something we construct based on the varied effects of sins. Christ's atonement is needed to cover them all, so it stands to reason that any sin is serious enough.

Not every stupid thing we do is a sin, though, so maybe that's where some of the trivial labeling comes into play...

Stady;

You make a good point. I used to think to myself that I could understand how God & Christ could forgive me for my lapses of judgement, and for the things that I did without knowing any better - the dumb mistakes of life. But I struggled to comprehend how I could be forgiven for blatant sins I did with my eyes wide open full KNOWING they were wrong. Then it finally hit me - the ONLY things that are SIN are those things we do against knowledge. Sure, lots of things are wrong and will bring natural consequences whether we understand their ramification or not. But what makes sin separate us from God is the choice we make to use our will against what we know is true. And THAT is exactly what we are forgiven for.

Stady:

But are some sins not much easier to gain forgiveness for than others?

In what sense, Eric? Forgiveness from God, from the Church, from others, from ourselves? Or are you referring to the 'ease' of repentance?

In any sense. One of the main points of this post (as I understand it) is whether there is a difference between big or little sins. I am suggesting that perhaps the real measure of the 'bigness' of a sin is how difficult it is to gain forgiveness. So I might say 'total' forgiveness.

I don't think sin can be ranked. YES, there are gradations in consequence. But what is a true thorn in my flesh that feels nearly impossible to overcome might be trivial to someone else. For example, Word of Wisdom has NEVER been an issue for my husband. It's just not an area where he is is tempted. I have to choose every single day to honor that law. On the other hand. paying tithing is very easy for me. I paid on my gross income when I was poor as a churchmouse and I pay it that way still now that I have more abundance. I don't gripe or begrudge...even though these days taxes takes a MUCH heftier bite than in my earlier days. I'm just grateful to have a job that pays me well eough to put me in the tax bracket I'm in. I know others who really struggle with this...quibbling over whether or ot the portion of their pay that goes to taxes can legitimately be considered "increase." It may be that for some gossip and backbiting is a hard trap to overcome, tough as nails to repent from because the habit keeps resurfacing time and time again even when they vow to quit. How can I say that is a lesser sin than immorality if the same person who keeps backsliding into trash talking their neighbors feels no particular temptation to break the law of chastity? The sin that is biggest, in my mind, is whatever one you are struggling with at that moment. The forgiveness that is greatest is the one that you truly allow to work a miracle in your soul. I'm just glad it is the LORD who will judge us in the end with full understanding for our weakensses and strengths and total awareness of every extenuating circumstance.

So, if there is no ranking to sin, then why three degrees of glory? Why not just heaven and hell? What will differentiate those in the telestial from those in the terrestrial if not some type of merit based on behavior?

In addition, are you saying that Murder and adultry would be ranked tight along side of ..... I don't know .... drinking coffee or shopping on Sunday?

Eric,

What I am saying is the whole concept of RANKING of sin is irrelevant.

Our puny, finite, mortal brains have a difficult time comprehending the way the Lord sees us, sees our potential, sees our challenges. But I trust that He DOES know us at a deeply individual, personal level. He knows what's hard for me and He knows what's easy.

The reason taking a life or sexual sin are considered so serious is because they have such permanent consequences. That matters. But I think it is dangerous ground to treat other sins as trivial. I know a lot of people who claim to be committed to righteousness who easily dismiss "small lapses" as if they did not matter. I think it is important for me to fully recognize that ANY thought, behavior, or desire that puts me at greater distance from God puts me closer to Satan. I have to recognize every day that I am entirely dependant on the atonement of Christ and the influence of the Holy Ghost to help me overcome my weaknesses and my sins.

I once had a job in a women's prioson where I facillitated group activities between the inmates and their children. I met one woman who was smart, funny, kind and one of the most comitted, compassionate mothers I'd ever known. She was serving a life sentence because she murdered her husband, drained his body & drank his blood.

Now, the crime she was convicted of was horrible. Taking a life is serious, serious business. But how can I say that what she did was WORSE than other things people there had done? Or for that matter, how can I say it was truly WORSE than some of the things I have done? I do not know all the circumstances. God does. That's my point.

Now, I don't care how big of a jerk her husband may have been, nothing short of immediate self defense justifies killing. Still - I think INTENT does matter and whether any behavior we label as "sin" is seriously bad or just sorta bad has more to do with what is going on in an individual person's heart than it does in the behavior itself. And only God can fully know what another person's struggle or intent may be.

I am mindful of the scripture in Helaman about the Lord's mercy to the Lamanites that says:

"Therefore I say unto you, it shall be better for them than for you except ye repent. For behold, had the mighty works been shown unto them which have been shown unto you, yea, unto them who have dwindled in unbelief because of the traditions of their fathers, ye can see of yourselves that they never would again have dwindled in unbelief. Therefore, saith the Lord: I will not utterly destroy them, but I will cause that in the day of my wisdom they shall return again unto me, saith the Lord. " HEL 15:14-16

That tells me that God doesn't just judge people on what they DO. He judges them according to the big picture of all the extenuating circumstances and what they had the capacity to understand.

So for someone who really comprehends the sacred nature of virtue, the Law of Chastity means one thing. It could be totally different for someone else who does not have that same understanding.

That's why I can't rank sin as big or little. I can only consider the degree to which my own heart is willing to humbly submit to the Lord and look at the areas where I need to improve. It's going to be different for me than it is for you. And it is going to be different for me this year than it was last year. But every single day there will be something I have need to repent of. And THAT will be the sin that is biggest for me.

Well, I suppose you should be excommunicated from the church then, since your sins are just a serious as the sins of those who have been excommunicated.

Either that or nobody shoud be excommunicated under any circumstances, regardless of what they have done, since their sins are no more serious than anyone elses.

We should also do away with temple recommend interviews since any subset of sins questioned aboud would be no more releveant than any other set of sins.

And oh yes, we need to beat ourselves up much more about any little perceived weakness we can find, since these are just as bad as the vilest sinnners actions.

Well, all sarcasm aside I think that we SHOULD all have a more clear view of what Godly sorrow mean. From the "little perceived weakness" to the excommunication league crimes, I believe we need to feel LESS SHAME and more true Godly sorrow. Shame does no one any good, in my book. I think Satan is the father of shame. But sincere remorse, aching with one's whole heart to return to full fellowship with God - that is something most people too often skip over.
Each one of us must come to terms with our own attempts at righteousness in our own way. Is sloth worse than greed or visa versa? Doesn't matter. If it is counter to the will of God, then I need to put it behind me and I can only get serious about doing that when I quit trivializing my errors as no big deal simply because the specific penalties may be less severe than for something else.
If I never smoke, never drink, never do drugs but chronically over eat I am NOT following the word of wisdom as I understand it. Should there be a brownie limit to go to the temple? Of course not. And it does me no good to "beat myself up" when I splurge on refreshments. But dismissing it as irrelevant just because it's not breaking one of the big 10 or keeping me out of the temple also seems unwise to me.
There are people who have been through church courts for all sorts of reasons who have clearly committed SINS that cost them dearly who nevertheless have strong testimonies and sweet relationships with the Savior. There are individuals who by obeying the letter of the law may qualify for temple recommends who are nevertheless spiteful, judgmental, difficult people. How can I say their sins are less bad than those who fell into adultery? I can't. They are just DIFFERENT.
It's not about saying all sins are the same. Clearly they are not. It's about letting go of the idea of LESS THAN and MORE THAN. The nature of each thing is unique.
I've heard it said in church on several occasions that no calling in the church is more important or special in the eyes of God than any other, and how the most important calling is whatever one you have. Do we believe that?
OBVIOUSLY a Bishop or Stake President or Auxiliary President has a bigger responsibility in terms of time required and level of accountability than the person who presents a spiritual spotlight in RS each week or whoever is teaching the High Priests. The main issue here is recognizing we can make DISTINCTIONS - noticing same/different without having to place a stratified value hierarchy of BETTER/WORSE or IMPORTANT/NOT IMPORTANT.
Same goes for sin. We are ALL sinners. I think it is very presumptuous of me to feel like I am more righteous than someone who has done an excommunication type sin. I am trying the best I know how with what I have to work with. I cannot compare how that fares next to someone else. It's not about thinking I should beat myself up more for what I do. It's about putting the bat down and not beating up anyone else either. It's about recognizing we are all sinners and all need the atonement in a big, big way.
Which has more value, learning Spanish or learning Triogonometry? Depends on the context. Which is worse - committing adultery or stealing? I honestly can say without fully understanding all the factors involved. And only God in His infinite wisdom can possibly know every single thing that might influence.
Maybe, in the final analysis I DO believe there are big sins and small sins, but I believe only GOD can tell which is which. I sure know I can't.

God can tell which is which. And he has given us several glimpses through the scriptures and his chosen leaders, that some sins are more serious than others. What he has given us is not absolute, and it does not cover every case, but it is a general idea regarding the seriousness of sin.

The very fact that some sins must be confessed to a bishop, and may result in excommunication, and that others do not, is evidence of that fact. A bishop has the gift of discernment (and so can we) to know how to judge these matters.

We may not know the specifics of every case, but we have a revealed general idea. Both through the scriptures and 'processes' of the church.

Oh, and I should probably explain that I sometimes use extreme examples to try and sort this stuff out. I am not trying to be a jerk, just trying to express some of the most extreme examples I can think of to express what I think. I am not picking on you, it is just my occasional way of analyzing an issue.

Eric,

Oh, I don't feel the least bit picked on. I just look at this issue a bit differently than you do, and that's fine.

Belladonna-- I agree with you completely. What makes God God is the fact that He has perfect perspective. He gets the big picture. A blind woman once asked a friend of mine "How is it possible to see a tall tree through a small window?" It's a brilliant question. And I think it illustrates the gap in understanding that must exist between us and the Divine. We like categories. We like to have the this-sin-is-this-bad-and-warrants-this-level-of-punishment scale. Sin is all bad. Period. And, no matter how we--or even those called to be Judges in Israel-- may try, we never get it the way God does. We can't. So, to compensate for our lack of perspective, we categorize. In the hereafter, I bet we'll all finally figure out how it's possible to see a tall tree through a small window.

You just make sure the window is far enough away from the tree.

And I disagree completely. Some sins are simply more serious than others. The fact is obvious to me.

Some actions may be more serious than others, Eric, but the concept of mortal sins is erroneous. My dear friend, divorced for quite a while (with the best reasons out there) can no longer receive the sacraments as a Roman Catholic. Her baby, conceived in wedlock with her new husband, cannot be baptized. That's where mortal sins lead us, Eric, to a land of absolutes. Dangerous ground, as minimum sentencing laws in the criminal justice system show us...

As far as repentance/three kingdoms/forgiveness, I think it all comes down to how much we receive Christ's sacrifice in our hearts and our lives. Those who truly love to *knowingly* sin won't want to be that close to God anyway, right?

Whether or not it's intended to, the temple recomend questions can cover just about any sin out there. What seems to matter is our attitude towards repentance and accepting consequences of our actions.

I must be dumb. I have not heard the term mortal sins taught in the church. Do we have a definition for it - from the xcriptures or our prophets? We are not talking about catholic doctrines.

Those who commit minor sins are staying close to God than those who commit major sins right?

Those who commit minor sins are more likely to have the appropriate attitude than those who commit serious sins right?

People are sometimes counseled by their bishops to not take the sacrament for a time and such things for committing certain sin. All of this is directed through the spirit of discernment. It is not an absolute so long as bishops are being lead by the spirit.