TESTAMENT, OLD AND NEW. When the books written by the apostles of Jesus Christ, or by apostolic men, came to be placed alongside the sacred books of the Hebrews, as compnsing the entire Scriptural canon, it became necessary to dis tinguish the two divisions by appropriate designa tions. A usage which already prevailed furnished the designations required. The gracious engage ments into which God was pleased to enter with individuals and communities bear in the O. T. the name of n+-12 or covenant [COVENANT], and to this corresponds the Greek aza07)10) in the LXX. and N. T. Of these covenants two stand out front all the rest as of pre-eminent importance—God's cove nant with Israel mediated by Moses, and that cove. nant which He promised to establish through the Messiah. In the Jewish Scriptures this flatter is designated ne-ri StaNrcn (Jer. xxxi.
31), and this, adopted by our Lord (Matt. xxvi. 28), and familiarly used by the apostles (2 Cor.
6 ; Heb. ix. 15, etc.), would naturally suggest the application of the phrase 41 raXrcta SLaBipcn to the former. Among the Jews such expressions as rolzn 71-Xciices Tijs StaBijrcus, for the tablets • : on which the law was inscribed (Deut. 9) ; 1DID ns7tn, piptop ri)r StaBircus (Exod. xxiv. ; 2 Kings 21 • Maccab. 57), pliiXos SzaHrols (Ecclus. mrdv. 23)2, were in common use. From these it is an easy transition to such an expression as that of the apostle (2 Cor. 14)2 anityVWPCS 7C7S iraXaLcir SLaBipols, where the name appropriate to the thing contained is used of that which contains it. There thus arose in the Greek church the usage of the phrases 4) raTaa ScaOhz?; and .4) Katvi) SmOipo) as designations of the Jewish and Christian sacred writings respectively. In the Latin church the usage prevailed of calling these Vetzes et Nowene :Testamentzem. Why the word Testamentzem was selected to represent Stai9iini rather than Foedus or Pactum may be explained by the fact that the former rather than the latter is the proper equiva lent of the Greek word. Hence in the old Itala made from the LXX. it is always used where the Greek has &alio) ; and in the Vulgate it is used similarly in those books that remain in the old version whereas in those which Jerome translated from the Hebrew ro-0 is represented by fxdus or pactum. That this usage was an early one in the Latin church is evident from the words of Ter. tullian (Adv. Marc. iv. i) : Duos Deos dividens (Marmon) alterum alterius Instrumenti vel, quad magi's usui est dicere, Testamenti. The use of 7'estanzentzem, however, does not seem to have been universally accepted till a much later period.
/n the passage quoted Tertullian evidently gives the preference to the word instrumentum, a term used technically to denote a writing by which any thing is to be attested or proved (comp. Quintil. Inst. Orat. xii. 8. 12) ; and this is the word he generally uses (comp. Adv. Marc. iv. 2 ; De Pudic. c. 12, etc.) Rufinus also has novum et vetus in strumentum' (Expos. Symb. Apostal.); and Augus tine uses both instrumentum and testamentum in the same context (De Civ. Dei, xx. 4). Lactantius, however, freely uses testamentum as a well-accredited term when he wrote (Inst. Div. iv. 2o).
From the Vulgate and the usage of the Latin fathers, Luther adopted Testament in his translation, and this has continued to be the usage in Germany, though some sdiolars there prefer the term Bund, the proper rendering of n+-12 and of StaBijim as used by the sacred writers. In this country Testament has so established itself in common usage and the reverent feelings of the community, that all attempts to displace it would be futile and unwise.
The Jews divided the O. T. into three portions —the Thorah or Law (comprising the Pentateuch), the Nebiim or Prophets (with the subdivision into Earlier and Later), and the Chethubim or Hagio grapha. [CANox.] From an early period the books of the N. T. were divided into two portions, the one embracing the four gospels, the other the remaining books, and called respectively 7-6 da-y -yeXiov or .74 dayyENuol, and 7˘ d7rOITTOXOCa Or oi cir6o-roXot (Iren. i. 3. 6 ; 1. 8 ; Clem. Alex.
Strom. v. p. 561 ; vi. p. 659). Tertullian has Instrunientum Evangelicum,—apostolicum' (Adv. Marc. iv. 2) ; and he speaks also of the Evangelicm, apostolicm literm' (De Brauer. c. 36). It is often stated that the latter division is sometimes called throcrroXos by the fathers, but this is more than doubtful ; at any rate the two passages usually ad duced in proof do not fully bear it out ; for in the one (Tertull. De Bapt. c. 15) certainly, and in the other (Clem. Alex. Steonz. vii. p. 7o6) probably, Apostle' means the writer not the writing. In one passage Clement seems to use Ezkey-ygXtov as comprehending the Epistles as well as the Gospels (Strom. iv. p. 475). The division now generally adopted is into three classes—the Historical, includ ing the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles ; the Ey5istolary, and the Apocalyptic.
On the canonicity of the different books, see