Hebrews 9:16-17 contains one of the biggest interpretative issues in the epistle; considerable debate exists over whether the translation of diathēkē should be rendered as “will/testament” or “covenant”. Seventeen times in Hebrews the term diathēkē is used, which is normally and rightly rendered “covenant”. However, modern translations render this word either as “will/testament” in these two verses. The context of the surrounding verses and how it is used elsewhere in Hebrews, suggest diathēkē should be properly rendered as “covenant”.
In the Greek language, diathēkē is used to indicate both a covenant and a will. The primary use of diathēkē in first century Hellenistic Greek is that of “testament” in the sense of a last will wherein one passed on possessions or property to another upon death.[1] This fact is one of the strongest arguments in favor of the translation “testament” or “will.” Furthermore, the author’s use of “inheritance” in verse 15 and the significance he gives to the term in Hebrews 1:2 set the stage for a transition of meaning from “covenant” in verse 15 to “will” in verse 16.[2]
In 9:15-20, the author explains why the second covenant has succeeded the first one made at Mount Sinai, employing an analogy to a “will.” Thus, diathēkē is used throughout this section employing two different meanings of the word and tying them together.[3] The writer uses a semantic shift in which he treats “covenant” in the sense of a will. While “covenants” and “wills” are not in all respects identical, the author seems to indicate the New Covenant is really a trust arrangement.[4] Like last wills, all the arrangements are made by the testator and its beneficiaries need only to accept its terms. When Christ died to initiate the New Covenant, like the stipulations of a last will, He freed believers from bondage of first covenant.[5] This analogy illustrates how the death of Jesus was necessary for Israel to receive its Christian inheritance.
In favor of the translation “covenant” is the evidence from the LXX itself, where diathēkē is used to translate the Hebrew berith over 270 times.[6] In addition, the word is used 33 times in the Greek New Testament, and this would be the only place it could be translated “will.”[7] Within Hebrews the word is uniformly rendered “covenant” in 16 other instances. The author’s use of conjunctions in this context shows the tight connections within verses 15-18.8
“Covenant” better fits the context and the temple culture in 9:18-22. Verses 16-17 seem like the writer is talking about a will. However, when looking at the section as a whole, the context is discussing “covenants,” not wills; and 9:18-20 explain how the first covenant was made.[9] Verses 16-17 seem to indicate that a person who makes the covenant, represents their death by making a sacrifice. “As the Mosaic covenant was ratified by blood, so is the New Covenant.”[10] Thus, it seems best from the context to render as “covenant.”
There are three possible interpretations concerning the translation of diathēkē in 9:16-17: the word should be translated “covenant” throughout Hebrews; translated as “testament/will” throughout Hebrews; or the author uses a double meaning as “will” using the terms ambiguity to cover both concepts. The evidence provides three conclusions. First, the author may be using word play making the translation “will” possible. Second, while the language seems to fit the “will/testament” translation better, the surrounding context before and after, as well as the translation throughout Hebrews provides better support for “covenant.” Third, the use of conjunctions tends to preclude the translation of “will/testament.”[11] Therefore, linguistically and contextually, the “covenant” translation seems preferable instead of “will/testament” for 9:16-17.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, David L. “Hebrews.” In The New American Commentary, vol. 35. Nashville: B & H Publishing Group, 2010.
Hodges, Zane C. “Hebrews.” In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, vol. 2, 776-814. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1985.
Radmacher, Earl D., Ronald B. Allen, and H. Wayne House, eds., Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary. Nashville: Nelson, 1999.
Toussaint, Stanley. “Hebrews.” Unpublished class notes for BE107. Dallas Theological Seminary. Fall Semester, 2016.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] David L. Allen, “Hebrews,” in The New American Commentary, vol. 35 (Nashville: B & H Publishing Group, 2010), 478.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Earl D. Radmacher, Ronald B. Allen, H. Wayne House, eds., Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Commentary (Nashville: Nelson, 1999), 1650.
[4] Zane C. Hodges, “Hebrews,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, eds. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, vol. 2 (Wheaton: Victor Books, 1985), 802.
5 Radmacher, Allen, House, Commentary, 1650.
[6] Allen, “Hebrews,” 479.
[7] Ibid.
8 Ibid.
[9] Stanley Toussaint, “Hebrews,” unpublished class notes for BE107 (Dallas Theological Seminary, Fall Semester, 2016), 24.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Allen, “Hebrews,” 481.