Sorry for the late response. This is a comment on a reply from “You Know”, regarding the meaning of the Last Supper. ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=23523&site=3)
I said:
Jesus did not talk about a “Covenant of a Kingdom” in this situation.
You Know replied:
Nonsense. The apostles were still at the table when Jesus said "You are the ones that have stuck with me in my trials; just as my Father has made a covenant with me, for a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones to judge the twelve tribes of Israel."
Interesting. You Know quotes NWT. I checked 8 other major English bible-translations, comparing Lu 22:20 (the covenant of the blood) to Lu 22:29 (the appointment of the Kingdom). The NWT is the ONLY ONE that uses the word “covenant” in both verses. Other translations often use the word “covenant” in v20, but they use words as “appoint”, “grant”, “agreement”, “right”, “assign”, “confer”, or “vest” in v29. By using “covenant” in both verses, the NWT is thereby giving the impression that the covenant of the blood (v20) is the same thing as the appointment of the Kingdom to the disciples (v29).
The Greek word for “covenant” in v20 is “diatheke”. Here’s what Vine’s Dictionary says about this word (boldface mine):
\Covenant (Noun and Verb)\
<A-1,Noun,1242,diatheke>
primarily signifies "a disposition of property by will or
otherwise." In its use in the Sept., it is the rendering of a
Hebrew word meaning a "covenant" or agreement (from a verb
signifying "to cut or divide," in allusion to a sacrificial
custom in connection with "covenant-making," e.g., Gen. 15:10,
"divided" Jer. 34:18,19). In contradistinction to the English
word "covenant" (lit., "a coming together"), which signifies a
mutual undertaking between two parties or more, each binding
himself to fulfill obligations, it does not in itself contain
the idea of joint obligation, it mostly signifies an obligation
undertaken by a single person. For instance, in Gal. 3:17 it is
used as an alternative to a "promise" (vv. 16-18). God enjoined
upon Abraham the rite of circumcision, but His promise to
Abraham, here called a "covenant," was not conditional upon the
observance of circumcision, though a penalty attached to its
nonobservance.
"The NT uses of the word may be analyzed as follows: (a)
a promise or undertaking, human or Divine, Gal. 3:15; (b) a
promise or undertaking on the part of God, Luke 1:72; Acts 3:25;
Rom. 9:4; 11:27; Gal. 3:17; Eph. 2:12; Heb. 7:22; 8:6,8,10;
10:16; (c) an agreement, a mutual undertaking, between God and
Israel, see Deut. 29; 30 (described as a 'commandment,' Heb.
7:18, cp. Heb 7:22); Heb. 8:9; 9:20; (d) by metonymy, the token
of the covenant, or promise, made to Abraham, Acts 7:8; (e) by
metonymy, the record of the covenant, 2 Cor. 3:14; Heb. 9:4; cp.
Rev. 11:19; (f) the basis, established by the death of Christ,
on which the salvation of men is secured, Matt. 26:28; Mark
14:24; Luke 22:20; 1 Cor. 11:25; 2 Cor. 3:6; Heb. 10:29; 12:24;
13:20.
"This covenant is called the 'new,' Heb. 9:15, the
'second,' Heb. 8:7, the 'better,' Heb. 7:22. In Heb. 9:16,17,
the translation is much disputed. There does not seem to be any
sufficient reason for departing in these verses from the word
used everywhere else. The English word 'Testament' is taken from
the titles prefixed to the Latin Versions." * [* From Notes on
Galations by Hogg and Vine, p.144.] See TESTAMENT.
The actual Greek word in v29 is “diatithemi”. Here’s what Vine’s Dictionary says about this word, and a more basic form of the same word (boldface mine):
\Appoint, Appointed\
<3,,5087,tithemi>
"to put," is used of "appointment" to any form of service.
Christ used it of His followers, John 15:16 (RV, "appointed" for
AV, "ordained"). "I set you" would be more in keeping with the
metaphor of grafting. The verb is used by Paul of his service in
the ministry of the Gospel, 1 Tim. 1:12 (RV, "appointing" for
"putting"); 1 Tim. 2:7 (RV, "appointed" for "ordained"); and 2
Tim. 1:11 (RV, "appointing" for "putting"); of the overseers, or
bishops, in the local church at Ephesus, as those "appointed" by
the Holy Ghost, to tend the church of God, Acts 20:28 ("hath
made"); of the Son of God, as appointed Heir of all things, Heb.
1:2. It is also used of "appointment" to punishment, as of the
unfaithful servant, Matt. 24:51; Luke 12:46; of unbelieving
Israel, 1 Pet. 2:8. Cp. 2 Pet. 2:6. See BOW, COMMIT, CONCEIVE,
LAY, MAKE, ORDAIN, PURPOSE, PUT, SET, SINK.
Note: Akin to tithemi is the latter part of the noun
prothesmia, Gal. 4:2, of a term or period "appointed."
<4,,1303,diatithemi>
a strengthened form of No. 3 (dia, "through," intensive), is
used in the Middle Voice only. The Lord used it of His disciples
with reference to the kingdom which is to be theirs hereafter,
and of Himself in the same respect, as that which has been
"appointed" for Him by His Father, Luke 22:29. For its use in
connection with a covenant, see MAKE and TESTATOR.
My conlusion: Two different words, two different contexts.
You Know:
The new covenant makes possible the kingdom covenant. They go together. That proves that the new covenant is for only those who are destined to be kings in Christ's kingdom and not intended for, nor necessary, for mankind in general to inherite everlasting life earth.
I can agree to the first sentence here. But still, Jesus said that the new covenant was about his blood poured out “for many”, as a ransom for their sins. So the new covenant, the covenant of the blood, is the very basis for salvation and everlasting life. To say that the blood of Christ is “not intended for, nor necessary, for mankind in general” is the foremost apostasy that John and Paul warned us about so many times.