Troublesome Topic: HEBREWS 9:16-18

Hebrews 9:16

Translation

For where there is a will,

it is necessary to bring forth

the death of the one who arranged

it.

Paraphrase

Consider this illustration: when someone establishes a will, it is necessary for the death of the person who established it to be proven before the will can take effect.

Hebrews 9:17

Translation

For a will is made firm after death, since it is not strong at the time when the one who arranged it is living,

Paraphrase

For a will is affirmed after death, since it has no legal force while the person who established it is still living.

Hebrews 9:18

Translation

From there, not even the first was inaugurated apart from blood.

Paraphrase

From this we deduce that there is a comparison here, for even the first covenant was not inaugurated without death.

A PLAY ON WORDS

The play on words here between “will” and “covenant” is necessary because Jesus did something unheard of – He inaugurated His New Covenant with His own blood, His own death, rather than symbolically using the blood of animals (verses 12 and 14 of this chapter are making the same point). In order to highlight how absurd that was, the author must bring to mind a totally different situation that does indeed require the death of the one establishing it, i.e. a will. It was convenient that the same word could mean “will” or “covenant”. It is also convenient that the dual meaning desired was true in both Greek and Hebrew, although possible more rare in Hebrew than in Greek. I believe the Epistle to the Hebrews was originally written in Hebrew and later translated into a high level of Greek. For that to be the case, this play on words had to be possible in both Hebrew and Greek, not just Greek. While some scholar may say that it is only possible in Greek, the reality seems to be that it was possible in both languages, but in Hebrew it was more forced. However, the fact that it was forced or stretched gives more power to the illustration. By using His own death to ratify His New Covenant, Jesus did something so radical that coming up with a way to illustrate it required stretching the play on words to its outer limits. All readers in either language would have known that, when the author was referring to the death of the one who established the arrangement was required, that was a will, not a covenant, but Jesus did that with a covenant as well.

We could summarize by saying that verses 11-14 of Hebrews chapter 9 are making the point that Jesus is a better High Priest because He died for us, rather than using the symbolic death of animals, verse 15 ties the death of Christ to the New Covenant (which stretched the understanding of how covenants were established), verses 16-17 use a will as an example that does necessitate the death of the one establishing it, verses 18-22 show how key the shedding of blood was in the inauguration of the covenant at Sinai, and verses 22 and following bring the reader back to the way Jesus used His own death to inaugurate a New Covenant.

Footnotes

1: "a will"

Here the author employs a play on the words “covenant and will”. This is the same Greek word used earlier and rendered “covenant”; it can mean both “will and covenant”, as well as other legally binding agreements. According to Johannes Behm, in his article on “διαθηκη/covenant” in the famed TDNT, often referred to as Kittel, vol 2, the corresponding Hebrew word, which is usually rendered “covenant”, can also refer to “legal relationships of all kinds”, including wills. Therefore, the play on words would be viable whether this Epistle were originally written in Hebrew or in Greek.

If you are unfamiliar with the TDNT (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament), Edited by Gerhard Kittel, it is truly the big gun in the world of Greek analysis of words, spanning 9 volumes of word-studies. Its articles go more in-depth than any other source I know. For instance, Johannes Behm’s article on the Greek word for “covenant” is 29 pages long, much of which is dedicated to the Hebrew equivalent in the OT. This is a short article compared to some. Length alone does not mean it is good or trustworthy, but it does show that they dig deeper into a topic than most lexica that are only one volume can afford to do.

2: "bring forth"

The primary meaning of this verb is “to carry, to bear, to bring forth, to bring forward.” The idea of “bring forward” could be accomplished through speech, by presenting a fact to the ears of those present. In this context the idea was to bring forth evidence of the death of the one who had established the will.

3: "arranged"

This verb comes from the preposition “through” and the verb “to lay, to put, to place, to lay down, to appoint, to make.” Together their meaning is “to arrange, to set in order.” It was used for such binding testaments as covenants and wills.