How Much More Severe?

“Anyone who has ignored the Law of Moses is put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severe punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?” (Hebrews 10:28-29)

How can a Witness affirm what this passage says when he also maintains that all sinners fully pay for their sins simply by being dead? Since the Witness view seems to affirm the equality of all punishment for sin, this passage presents a problem for Witness theology. But it is one for which Witnesses seem to have an answer. A Witness would respond by saying that those who have “insulted the Spirit of grace” will, in fact, be punished more severely than those who have “ignored the Law of Moses.” Such persons will be punished with everlasting annihilation, which is a more severe punishment than the merely temporary annihilation suffered by those who merely transgressed the Law of Moses. (December 15, 1985 Watchtower, p. 7; Insight on the Scriptures Vol. II, “Sleep” para. 9)

The Witness response has superficial plausibility. However, we argue that this explanation does not suffice to render the Witness position consistent with this passage from Hebrews. First, Witnesses cannot coherently say that some sinners will receive “more severe punishment” than others. Second, even if they could coherently claim that some sinners will receive more severe punishment, they cannot coherently claim that such sinners deserve more severe punishment than those who do not suffer such punishment. Third, even if they can claim that all those suffer the second death deserve more severe punishment than those who suffer only the first death, they are not necessarily able to affirm that the claim that those who “insulted the Spirit of grace” in the particular way described in Hebrews deserve a more severe punishment than all of those who merely “ignored the Law of Moses.”

According to Witness theology the second death, which is what the sinner who has “insulted the Spirit of grace” will receive, is (endlessly) longer than the temporary state of nonexistence that they say those who die the first death experience. It seems to be clearly worse. Why, then, do we object to Witnesses referring to the second death as a “more severe punishment” than the first death? Because elsewhere Witness theology considers how long a man has been dead or nonexistent to be irrelevant to whether he has been fully punished for his sin. So, the length of time that a person remains dead is a non-factor in determining how severe a punishment his being dead is.

That the duration of one’s state of death is irrelevant to whether it is the full payment for sin can be seen by the fact that Witnesses teach that everyone who is resurrected will have fully paid for their sins by being dead, irrespective of how long they have been dead. (September, 2022 Watchtower, pp. 18-19) How long one remains dead adds nothing to the full payment for sin that their being dead for even just a moment has already provided. This can be seen by considering the suggestion that the resurrection will progress in the reverse order of how men died: those who died most recently will be resurrected the soonest and those who died first will be resurrected last. While avoiding a definitive position on this suggestion, their publications consider it to be at least a reasonable possibility. (September, 2022 Watchtower, p. 20; December, 2017 Watchtower, p. 12; July 1, 1998 Watchtower, p. 23) And for our purposes, this suffices. Never did the thought that someone must be dead for a certain period of time, say, several centuries, before he can be resurrected lest he not fully pay for his sins cross the minds of those who wrote these articles. Such a thought would be alien to Witness theology. Merely having died, having passed into nonexistence, is what pays for one’s sins. How long one “is” nonexistent, while perhaps interesting or significant in other ways, does not have any bearing on whether one has been punished fully or given the full payment for his sins. 

And it is for this reason that we argue that Witness theology cannot consider being dead for say ten years instead of ten weeks, or for the rest of time instead of ten thousand years, to be a more severe punishment. One may be different from the other in duration. One may be more or less desirable than the other. But considered as punishment neither is worse than the other.

Notice what their 2019 study notes on Romans 6:7 says. “Paul reasons that one who has died has been acquitted from sin because by means of his death, he has paid the full penalty for sin. . . . When a person has died, his sinful record no longer stands against him. And if it were not for Jesus’ sacrifice and God’s purpose to resurrect the person, he would never live again. Still, he would remain acquitted from sin.” (New World Translation: Study Edition, Romans 6:7; Cf. October 1, 1974 Watchtower, p. 607) Notice that it is said that such a person, even if he were not to be resurrected, “would remain acquitted from sin” because he has already “paid the full penalty for sin,” “when [he] has died.”

Let us use Adam as an example, since he is someone who Witnesses say will receive no resurrection. He is not still paying the full penalty for sin; he is not still working on becoming acquitted for his sins. Long ago, at the time when he died, he already paid for his sins and has been acquitted from them ever since. The over five thousand years since he died has contributed nothing to the already fully accomplished payment for sin. Since Adam has already fully paid for his sins, there is nothing left for God to punish. That does not mean God owes Adam a resurrection. But that God does not resurrect him but rather lets Adam remain nonexistent cannot coherently be considered part of the penalty for his already full payment for his now acquitted sins.

Another way of looking at this issue is by noting that Witness theology explicitly regards both the first death (reversible annihilation) and the second death (irrevocable annihilation) as “the wages that sin pays.” Thus, they are viewed as fundamentally equal as punishment since they are both regarded as the full penalty for sin. Notice how the following quotations apply Romans 6:23 (and other relevant passages) to both the first and second death.

“God has set death, not torment in a fiery hell, as the penalty for sin. God told the first man, Adam, that he penalty for breaking God’s law would be death. . . . God has not changed the punishment for defying his laws. . . . Death, not torment in hell, is the full penalty for sin.” (Bible Questions Answered, No. 66) 

“There is nothing we can do on our own to avoid suffering the death penalty for our sins.” (November 1, 1980 Watchtower, p. 7) 

“The apostle Paul stated: “The wages sin pays is death.” (Rom. 6:23) From Adam’s time until now, man has experienced the truth of that statement. He has been suffering imperfection, sickness and eventual death because of sin.” (November 8, 1978 Awake!, p. 27) 

“Death, not the dying process itself, is the full payment of sin. The Bible says: “The wages sin pays is death.” (Rom. 6:23) This means that when a person has died his sinful record no longer stands against him.” (October 1, 1974 Watchtower, p. 607) 

“But how does God punish the incorrigibly wicked? The Bible plainly tells us that “the wages sin pays is death,” and death is the absence of life.” (March 1, 1973 Watchtower, p. 133) 

“Thus, the death of all humans, infants included, can be traced initially to disobedience to God’s law, that is, to sin. . . . God’s unchangeable law is that the “wages sin pays is death.” (Rom. 6:23)” (December 8, 1971 Awake!, p. 28) 

“What is generally overlooked is that what God placed before Adam were not the alternatives of life in heaven and life in eternal torment, but life (existence) and death (nonexistence). . . . God used Moses to put the same alternatives before his people: “I have put life and death before you.” And so we also read that “the wages sin pays is death, but the gift God gives is everlasting life.” – Gen. 2:17; 3:19; Deut. 30:19; Rom. 6:23.” (March 1, 1961 Watchtower, p. 132)

Some of these quotations pertain specifically to “the incorrigibly wicked” (the second death). Others apply to mankind generally (the first death). In some, both groups are at least implicitly ini view. Altogether these quotations clearly teach that both the first death and second death fulfill the one, unchangeable law of God given in Eden and described in Romans 6:23. Thus both count as the full payment for any and all sins whatsoever. So, even if these deaths differ in some respects, such as duration, considered as punishment they are regarded as equal.

But even if Witness theology could coherently say that the second death is worse specifically as a penalty than the first death, Witness theology would not be out of the woods yet. Notice that Hebrews 10:28-29 says that he who has “insulted the Spirit of grace” deserves more severe punishment than one who has merely “ignored the Law of Moses.” It is not merely that he will receive worse punishment but that he deserves it. If you and I commit the same crime under the same circumstances, we deserve the same punishment, say, five years imprisonment. That remains the same even if I am pardoned after a year and you serve the full sentence. You received a more severe punishment than I did, but it would be false to say that you deserved a more severe sentence than I did.

Witness theology holds that God resurrects the vast majority of those who died in order to give them a second chance to know him and accommodate themselves to his righteous ways. Doing so cuts short the otherwise endless state of nonexistence that those who suffer the first death would otherwise “experience.” However, this does not mean that they deserve to exist again, deserve this supposedly less severe punishment. So merely pointing out the relatively short term of nonexistence of those who suffer the first death does nothing to extricate Witness theology from the present objection.

Witness literature describes the resurrection of the dead as gracious and unmerited. “The provision of a resurrection for humankind is indeed an undeserved kindness of Jehovah God, for he was not obligated to provide a resurrection.” (Insight on the Scriptures Vol. II, p. 791) “One of the greatest ways that Jehovah will show his undeserved kindness on earth will be the resurrection of humans from ‘the Grave.’” (July, 2016 Watchtower: Study Edition, p. 26) This underscores that according to Witness theology those who suffered merely the first death and who will be resurrected would otherwise have the same fate as those who die the second death and who will never live again. Both deserve to be dead, neither deserves to live again. Therefore, neither group deserves a more severe punishment than the other.

It is also worth keeping in mind that insulting the Spirit of grace in the way described in Hebrews is not the only way one can unrepentantly or incorrigibly sin. So, even if Witnesses could say that those who suffer the second death both receive and deserve a more severe punishment than those who merely suffer the first death, it would remove the difficulty that this passage poses for Witness theology. According to Witness literature, King Solomon, who they seem to regard as one who ended his life unrepentantly, was an Israelite who “ignored the Law of Moses.” Their literature is agnostic about whether he will be resurrected. The May, 2024 Watchtower (p. 4) states with respect to him:

“But was the manner of his burial a guarantee that he would be resurrected? The Bible does not say. Some might reason, though, that “the one who has died has been acquitted from his sin.” (Rom. 6:7) True, but this does not mean that all who have died will be resurrected, as if a new life were a right that they have earned. Resurrection is a gift from a loving God. He bestows it on those whom he wants to give an opportunity to serve him forever. (Job 14:13, 14; John 6:44) Will Solomon receive such a gift? Jehovah knows the answer; we do not. We do know, though, that Jehovah will do what is right.” 

This shows that, according to Witness theology, one who “ignored the Law of Moses” can suffer the second death. This is problematic for Witness theology. For, if the second death is also the worst that anyone who has “insulted the Spirit of grace” in the particular way described in Hebrews can receive, according to Witness theology, it would be patently false to say one who has “insulted the Spirit of grace” in that way deserves a far worse penalty than anyone who has “ignored the Law of Moses” could deserve. Witness theology would make null the word of God for its own sake.