Hebrews 9 17

Hebrews 9:17 kjv

For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Hebrews 9:17 nkjv

For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives.

Hebrews 9:17 niv

because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living.

Hebrews 9:17 esv

For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.

Hebrews 9:17 nlt

The will goes into effect only after the person's death. While the person who made it is still alive, the will cannot be put into effect.

Hebrews 9 verses

Hebrews 9 17 Meaning

Hebrews 9:17 asserts a fundamental legal principle of the ancient world, applying it profoundly to the New Covenant: a testament, or a will (Greek: diathēkē), becomes legally binding and effective only upon the death of the person who made it (the testator). Prior to the testator's death, the will possesses no power or validity, as it can still be changed or revoked. This verse, therefore, underpins the critical necessity of Christ's death for the inauguration and efficacy of the New Covenant, highlighting that the promises and benefits of this covenant are conveyed as an inheritance secured only through His crucifixion.

Hebrews 9 17 Context

Hebrews Chapter 9 delves into the profound contrast between the Old Covenant's regulations for worship and the new, superior covenant inaugurated by Christ. Verses 1-10 describe the tabernacle and its rituals under the first covenant, highlighting their limitations as symbolic shadows that could not truly purify the conscience or provide ultimate access to God. Verses 11-14 then introduce Christ as the ultimate High Priest, who entered the "true tabernacle" in heaven not with animal blood but with His own blood, accomplishing eternal redemption.

Hebrews 9:17 specifically serves as the pivotal point that explains why Christ's death was indispensable. It builds directly upon verse 15, which states Christ is the mediator of a "new testament" (diathēkē) so that the called might "receive the promise of the eternal inheritance." Verse 16 immediately follows, providing the general principle that a testament (will) requires death. Verse 17 then reaffirms this principle as a self-evident truth known to the audience, stating that a will only becomes operative after the testator's death; it is otherwise inert. This legal understanding sets the stage for the crucial theological conclusion that follows in verses 18-22, which reiterates the necessity of blood for the ratification of any covenant, ultimately pointing to Christ's definitive sacrifice. The chapter underscores Christ's once-for-all sacrifice as superior to the repeated, insufficient sacrifices of the Old Covenant, establishing the new covenant's benefits (inheritance, forgiveness) as securely granted through His death.

Word Analysis

• For (γὰρ - gar): A connective particle indicating a reason or explanation. It links this verse back to the preceding argument, particularly the concept of a "testament" requiring death in verse 16, providing the general rationale.
• a testament (διαθήκη - diathēkē): This is a key word, possessing a dual meaning. While often translated as "covenant," its context here (and in verses 16 and 18) strongly implies "last will and testament" or a "disposition" of property that becomes effective after death. The author of Hebrews masterfully uses this legal meaning to explain the necessity of Christ's death for the "new covenant" to become active and distribute its promised "inheritance" (Heb 9:15). In biblical Greek, diathēkē fundamentally means an arrangement or disposition established by one party, often involving terms and conditions, like a covenant God makes with His people. However, in the Hellenistic world, it commonly referred to a will, allowing the author to bridge a common legal concept with divine truth.
• is of force (βεβαία - bebaia): From bebaios, meaning "firm," "stable," "sure," or "valid." It conveys legal certainty and effectiveness. A will only has its full legal power or binding effect after the conditions for its execution (the testator's death) are met.
• after men are dead (ἐπὶ νεκροῖς - epi nekrois): Literally "upon dead [persons]," referring to the death of the one who made the will or covenant. This highlights the indispensable condition for the diathēkē (as a will) to come into operation.
• otherwise (ἐπεὶ - epei): Introduces a conditional statement, "since otherwise" or "for if it were not so." It posits the counterfactual scenario to emphasize the preceding truth.
• it is of no strength at all (οὐδὲν ἰσχύει - ouden ischuei): Literally "nothing it has strength," meaning it possesses no validity, power, or effectiveness whatsoever. Without the required condition (death), the testament is null and void.
• while the testator liveth (ζῶντος τοῦ διαθεμένου - zontos tou diathemēnou): "while the one who has made the testament/covenant is living." Diathemēnou is the genitive participle of diatithēmi, which means "to set forth," "to dispose of," "to arrange," and specifically "to make a will." It designates the one who enacts the diathēkē. This emphasizes that the will-maker retains full control and the will remains latent during their lifetime.

Words-group analysis:

• "For a testament is of force after men are dead": This phrase establishes the universal legal principle upon which the theological argument rests. It shows that the New Covenant, like a will, had to be activated by death, not just initiated by a living promise-giver. This principle underscores that the beneficiaries (believers) receive an inheritance, which requires the death of the one granting it (Christ as the "testator").
• "otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth": This counterpoint reinforces the absolute necessity of death. It rules out any scenario where the benefits of the New Covenant could be accessed without the supreme sacrifice. It negates any thought of the New Covenant being "conditional" on a living Christ continuing to offer Himself or the previous covenant being sufficient without His death.

Hebrews 9 17 Bonus section

The author of Hebrews often appeals to familiar earthly institutions or concepts to illuminate profound spiritual truths. Here, the legal practice of wills/testaments serves as a powerful illustration for the divine economy of redemption. The Old Covenant itself, though initiated by God, was also ratified through death and blood (Heb 9:18-21), demonstrating a consistent divine principle of 'life for life' or 'death for covenant'. Christ's dual role as both the sacrificial lamb and the testator signifies His unique position in inaugurating a covenant superior in every aspect. He voluntarily offered Himself, not just making a covenant, but distributing its unchangeable provisions as an inheritance to His people. This highlights the personal and intentional nature of His sacrifice—it was a definitive act with clear beneficiaries and lasting effects.

Hebrews 9 17 Commentary

Hebrews 9:17, while seemingly a simple statement of legal fact, is central to understanding the theology of the New Covenant. It draws on a well-known ancient legal concept – that a will's provisions only become operative upon the testator's death – and applies it analogously to the diathēkē (covenant/testament) initiated by God through Christ. The crucial point is that Christ is both the Mediator of the New Covenant and, by this analogy, the Testator who makes the "will." For the glorious promises of this "will"—such as eternal redemption, forgiveness of sins, and access to God—to be bequeathed to His chosen heirs, His death was not merely symbolic but absolutely essential and legally indispensable. Without His death, the "will" would have no power, and its benefits could not be appropriated. Thus, Christ's death is presented not just as a propitiatory sacrifice but as the ultimate act that ratifies the New Covenant, making its incredible "inheritance" available to all who believe. This verse also implicitly refutes any idea that the Old Covenant sacrifices or practices were enough, or that a new way could be established without such a definitive and permanent act of blood shedding.