Basic HTML Version
251
substitution of the word in which this was very prominent. The word diatheke thus, like many
other words, received a new meaning, when it became the vehicle of divine thought, This
change is important in connection with the New Testament use of the word. There has been
considerable difference of opinion respecting the proper translation of the word. In about half
of the passages in which it occurs the Holland and the Authorized Versions render the word
“covenant,” while in the other half they render it “testament.” The American Revised Version,
however, renders it “covenant” throughout, except in Heb. 9:16,17. It is but natural, therefore,
that the question should be raised, What is the New Testament meaning of the word? Some
claim that it has its classical meaning of disposition or testament, wherever it is found in the
New Testament, while others maintain that it means testament in some places, but that in the
great majority of passages the covenant idea is prominently in the foreground. This is
undoubtedly the correct view. We would expect a priorily that the New Testament usage would
be in general agreement with that of the LXX; and a careful study of the relevant passages
shows that the American Revised Version is undoubtedly on the right track, when it translates
diatheke by “testament” only in Heb. 9:16,17. In all probability there is not a single other
passage where this rendering would be correct, not even II Cor. 3:6,14. The fact that several
translations of the New Testament substituted “testament” for “covenant” in so many places is
probably due to three causes: (a) the desire to emphasize the priority of God in the transaction;
(b) the assumption that the word had to be rendered as much as possible in harmony with Heb.
9:16,17; and (c) the influence of the Latin translation, which uniformly rendered diatheke by
“testamentum.”
B. THE CONCEPT.
The covenant idea developed in history before God made any formal use of the concept in the
revelation of redemption. Covenants among men had been made long before God established
His covenant with Noah and with Abraham, and this prepared men to understand the
significance of a covenant in a world divided by sin, and helped them to understand the divine
revelation, when it presented man’s relation to God as a covenant relation. This does not mean,
however, that the covenant idea originated with man and was then borrowed by God as an
appropriate form for the description of the mutual relationship between Himself and man.
Quite the opposite is true; the archetype of all covenant life is found in the trinitarian being of
God, and what is seen among men is but a faint copy (ectype) of this. God so ordered the life of
man that the covenant idea should develop there as one of the pillars of social life, and after it
had so developed, He formally introduced it as an expression of the existing relation between
Himself and man. The covenant relationship between God and man existed from the very
beginning, and therefore long before the formal establishment of the covenant with Abraham.