Q:
Does the Greek
word "διατίθεμαι" (dia·ti'the·mi) mean "to make a covenant," as some Bible
dictionaries state?
_________________________
A:
No, it does not! Although the word
διατίθεμαι (dia·ti'the·mi) is defined
in some Bible Dictionaries "to
make a covenant," as one of its meanings
(being related to the word covenant/will),
it does
not in itself mean to make a covenant or a will,
any more than the English word "bequeath" (to leave assets for others after
your death) means to make a will!
In the Greek language the word διαθήκη (diathēkē)
means
both covenant and will. The
Watchtower Society does not accept this basic fact, claiming that a covenant is
not a will (testament); and for that reason they also do not refer to the Hebrew and Greek
Scriptures as the "Old Testament" and "New Testament," respectively, as they are
otherwise commonly referred to. This has also influenced their definition of the
word διατίθεμαι, for which they have sought support from other sources.
(See Footnote*)
In order to better help us understand the meaning of the word "διατίθεμαι",
please consider the English word "will" or "testament" as an example.**
A "will", or "testament", as a noun, refers at
law to "a legal document in which a person states who should receive his or her
possessions after he or she dies."
The word "will" can also be a verb (or an adjective), where a person "wills" his
possessions to someone after his death; and the possessions become the willed
and legal property of that one. Does "to will" (verb) mean the same as "to make
a will"? Is it proper English to say that the person "willed a will"? No! He doesn't
"will a will", rather he "makes a will," in which he
instructs how his estate is to be disposed of after
his death. It is not the will that a person inherits, but rather what is stated
in the will. Therefore, it is always necessary to specify what it is that
is being willed or granted
or bequeathed (verb).
In the same way, the word "διατίθεμαι"
in itself does not mean to make a will, or a covenant (both of which are the
same in Greek), but rather refers to something that is being bequeathed or
promised. One would not say, "he (God) covenanted a covenant." That would be
redundant. As in the case of the verb "will," with diatithemi
it is necessary to state what it is that is being willed. At Luke
22:29, Jesus grants, bequests
(diatithemi)
the Kingdom to his disciples (no mention of a
covenant); while at Hebrews 8:10 Paul explains that God promised to "diatithemi"
[grant, make] a new covenant with the house of Israel, quoting Jeremiah 31:31-34. Since
"diatithemi" does not in itself mean to make a covenant, it is always necessary
to state what it is that is being bequeathed; or assigned; or conferred; or
given; or granted; or appointed; or bestowed upon; as other Bible Versions
translate the word.
Why then do some Bible Dictionaries say that διατίθεμαι means "to make a covenant"
διαθήκη?
For the same reason other words are often defined beyond their actual meanings —
being greatly influenced by the beliefs of the author, translator, scholar, on a certain subject.
Consider just one example
(though there are many others) such as the word agape.
Regarding the word agape
(αγάπη, η), one recent Watchtower
article stated:
"The ancient Greeks had four basic words, used in various forms, to
describe love: stor‧ge′,
e′ros, phi‧li′a,
and a‧ga′pe.
Of these, a‧ga′pe
is the term used to describe the God who 'is love.' Concerning this love,
Professor William Barclay in his New
Testament Words says: 'Agapē has to do with the mind: it is not simply an
emotion which rises unbidden in our hearts; it is a principle by which we
deliberately live. Agapē has supremely to do with the will.' In this context, a‧ga′pe
is love that is governed,
or guided, by principle, but it is often accompanied by strong emotion. As there
are good and bad principles, it is evident that Christians should be guided by
good principles, which are laid down in the Bible by Jehovah God himself. When
we compare Biblical descriptions of a‧ga′pe
with other terms used in the Bible to describe love, we will better understand
the love that we should demonstrate." —w09 7/15 p.
12 Do You Follow the “Surpassing Way” of Love?
A search of the word agape in the Scriptures will quickly discount the
above definition of the word, and reveal that it does not refer to any
special sort of love. (See "What
is the "AGAPE" [αγάπη] as used in the Scriptures? Is it a godly or Christian
love?" Note what the Hastings. J Dictionary of the Bible says on the
subject in the above link.) If you have the Greek Version of the New World
Translation, you can also check for yourself the many ways in which the word
"agape" is translated, both in the Greek as well as the Hebrew portions
of the Bible. ***
No,
the word
"διατίθεμαι"
(dia·ti'the·mi) in itself does not mean "to make a covenant" as some Bible Dictionaries
define the word, and as it appears in the New World Translation. Does it really
matter? Yes, a great deal, when it is claimed that Jesus made a covenant for a
kingdom with his disciples on that last night with them; and then teach that
this same "covenant for a kingdom" is the new covenant, restricted to only
144,000 disciples.
For further consideration, please see
"Did Jesus Make a
Covenant for a Kingdom with his Disciples?"
Compare:
http://biblehub.com/greek/1303.htm
Footnotes:
*
This
is what The Watchtowwer, March 1, 1995, said regarding the use of the
terms "Old Testament" and "New Testament":
“Old
Testament” or “Hebrew Scriptures”—Which?
TODAY it is a common practice in Christendom to
use the terms “Old Testament” and “New Testament” to describe the
Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek language parts of the Bible. But is there any
Biblical basis for using these terms? And for what reasons do Jehovah’s
Witnesses generally avoid using them in their publications? True,
2 Corinthians 3:14, according to the King James Version
as well as some other older translations, such as the German
Septembertestament, Martin Luther’s first translation (1522), may appear
to support this practice. In the King James Version,
this verse reads: “But their minds were blinded: for until this day
remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament;
which veil is done away in Christ.”
However, is the apostle speaking here about the
39 books that are commonly called the “Old Testament”? The Greek word here
translated “testament” is di·a·the′ke. The famous German theological
encyclopedia Theologische Realenzyklopädie, commenting on
2 Corinthians 3:14, says that ‘the reading of the old di·a·the′ke’ in
that verse is the same as ‘reading Moses’ in the following verse. Hence, it
says, ‘the old di·a·the′ke’ stands for the Law of Moses, or at most,
the Pentateuch. It certainly does not stand for the entire pre-Christian
body of inspired Scripture.
The apostle is referring to only a part of the
Hebrew Scriptures, the old Law covenant, which was recorded by Moses in the
Pentateuch; he is not referring to the Hebrew and Aramaic Scriptures in
their entirety. Furthermore, he does not mean that the inspired Christian
writings of the first century C.E. constitute a “new testament,” since this
term occurs nowhere in the Bible.
It is also to be noted
that the Greek word di·a·the′ke that Paul here used actually means
“covenant.” (For further information see New World
Translation of the Holy Scriptures—With
References, Appendix 7E, page 1585, published by the Watchtower Bible
and Tract Society of New York, Inc., 1984.) Many modern translations
therefore correctly read “old covenant” rather than “old testament.”
In this connection, the “National Catholic
Reporter” stated: “The term ‘Old Testament’ inevitably creates an atmosphere
of inferiority and outdatedness.” But the Bible is really one work, and no
part is outdated, or “old.” Its message is consistent from the first book in
the Hebrew part to the last book in the Greek part. (Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy
3:16, 17) So we have valid reasons to avoid these terms that are based on
incorrect assumptions, and we prefer to use the more correct terms “Hebrew
Scriptures” and “Christian Greek Scriptures.”
—w95 3/1 p. 19 “Old
Testament” or “Hebrew Scriptures”—Which? (Bold added)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
** The words will and testament date back to 1250-1300; Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin & Latin; Late Latin testamentum covenant with God, holy scripture, from Latin, last will, from testari to be a witness, call to witness, make a will, from testis witness; akin to Latin tres three & to Latin stare to stand; from the witness's standing by as a third party in a litigation.
*** Another
example of the dishonesty of some Bible scholars and translators is in
connection with the Greek word "η αρχή", meaning the
beginning. At Revelation 3:14 Jesus says, according to the English
Standard Version: “And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write,
‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning
of God's creation." Here, some Bible Versions translate "the beginning" (η
αρχή, feminine article) as "ruler" (ο άρχος,
masculine). Why the discrepancy, when in other places of the Scriptures they
render η αρχή correctly as "the beginning," or "first", such as at
John 1:1; Matt. 24:8; Mark 1:1; John 6:64; 15:27; 16:4; Heb. 1:10; 2 Peter
3:4; 1 John 2:13,14; etc.? They do so because of their belief that Jesus is
God, or equal to God, and therefore he had no beginning. At Revelation 1:5 Jesus
is called "The Ruler (ο άρχος) of the kings of the earth." Clearly,
η αρχή and ο άρχος
are not the same, although the words
are related. They are not interchangeable.
Many scholars and translators, and religious leaders, are
influenced by their beliefs when interpreting or teaching God's Word. They
will not hesitate to tamper with the Scriptures in order to make them
reflect their own teachings, doctrines, and traditions; thereby making God's
Word invalid. (Matt. 15:3-9; 1 John 4:1, 6) That is the case also with the
Greek word
διατίθεμαι.