PDA

View Full Version : Who wrote 'Hebrews'?



Bethany67
Aug 10th 2008, 08:40 AM
I know it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things, but I'm curious as to your thoughts - Paul? Barnabas? Apollos? Luke? Priscilla? Someone else?

Rullion Green
Aug 10th 2008, 11:33 AM
I've heard good reasons for Apollos and Good reasons for Paul, I havn't heard the agrgument for the others but i'm sure they would be good also.

It would be good to have all the answers but unfortunatly we dont so i'll just safely say....The Holy Spirit :)

ananias
Aug 10th 2008, 11:56 AM
Being very familiar with the epistles of Paul, I've personally picked up a strong Paul-like style in the writing and in the theology expressed in Hebrews - but Paul always idfentified himself at the beginning of all his other epistles - so I could be wrong about that.

I have no reason for saying this, but it has crossed my mind (totally speculatively) that perhaps the epistle to the Hebrews and the epistle to the Romans were sent out by Paul together.

ananias.

Bethany67
Aug 10th 2008, 12:08 PM
I'd always assumed Paul too for general stylistic reasons (eg. Jesus compared to angels was also a big topic in Colossians). I personally would discount Luke who was (probably) a Gentile; whoever wrote it had an extensive background in Judaism. I do wonder about the possibility of James though.

graceforme
Aug 10th 2008, 12:27 PM
Good thoughts have been posted on this subject.

An additional thought:

In Hebrews 2:3 the author includes himself with those who received confirmation of Christ's gospel from others. Paul states in his epistles that he received revelation directly from God, not from any men. (Gal. 1:12). Maybe this rules out Paul? Just a thought.

But, like someone said in another post, Hebrews was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

nzyr
Aug 10th 2008, 12:53 PM
Hebrews was probably written by Paul.


Here are a couple of similarities:


Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain.
And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.
I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air: -1 Corinthians 9:24-26

Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, -Hebrews 12:1

Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you.

Salute all them that have the rule over you, and all the saints. They of Italy salute you.

Grace be with you all. Amen. -Hebrews 13:23-25

The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house.
All the brethren greet you. Greet ye one another with an holy kiss.
The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand.
If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.
My love be with you all in Christ Jesus. Amen. -1 Corinthians 16:19-24

scourge39
Aug 10th 2008, 02:26 PM
I believe that Apollos wrote it. I plan on studying the arguments for Lukan authorship.

Literalist-Luke
Aug 10th 2008, 04:54 PM
The authorship of Hebrews is important to several contemporary issues of theology, particularly regarding the "eternal security" debate, as well as the "Law/Grace" debate instigated by the modern Hebrew Roots movement. The early Church considered this Epistle to be Paul's. But, modern Evangelical scholarship often denies this, usually because of theological reservations.

PRIMARY ARGUMENTS AGAINST PAULINE AUTHORSHIP
The arguments against Pauline authorship concern two main points. First, the following verse is said to rule out Paul.

Heb 2:3
3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him,
(NKJ)

The objection to Pauline authorship is that the writer seems to speak as though his knowledge is second-hand. Paul would not have spoken in this way, since He was also sent by Jesus, when He appeared to him on the Damascus road. And Paul was given special revelation by the Spirit.
However, Paul did not sit under the teaching of Jesus Christ in person, as the other 11 Apostles had. According to Acts 15 and Gal. 2:1-9, Paul's mission was to the Gentiles, and Peter retained the title of "Apostle of the circumcision" (Jews). It was the other Apostles in Jerusalem who were seen as the spiritual authority for the Jewish believers, since they had been taught personally by Jesus. Paul carried no authority over the Jewish believers. When he went up to Jerusalem, Paul always submitted himself to the leadership of the Apostles and elders regarding the Jerusalem church (Acts 21:18-26). Even when Paul confronted the Judaizers who threatened his ministry among the Gentiles, Paul appealed to the Apostles and elders in the Jerusalem church to rein in the Messianic "Judaizers" who were creating the problem (Acts 15). Paul always respected the other Apostles, and let them handle the Jewish believers as they saw fit. He did not interfere or assert himself while on their turf. However, when Peter came to Antioch and did not act according to the truth of the Gospel, Paul confronted him publicly, because Peter was on Paul's turf (Gal. 2:11-15). It is not that difficult to see that Paul was merely acting in character here, and acknowledging the fact that the Jewish believers, to whom he was writing, owed their allegiance to the 11 Apostles. These men were the conduit for the proclamation of the Gospel to them, not Paul. When it came to the Jews hearing the Gospel, and thousands of them being saved, Paul really had no part in that aspect of the development of the early Church, nor in their being discipled in the Faith. It would simply not have been proper for Paul to include himself in those who confirmed the message of Christ to the Jewish believers. Paul wrote, "how shall we (the Jewish believers) escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him."

The second objection is based on the writing style of the book of Hebrews, which differs from Paul's other Epistles. While it is true that Paul's other Epistles display a more crude form of Greek, and Hebrews is very polished and eloquent Greek, Paul rarely wrote his own Epistles. In fact, the only one he actually wrote himself was Galatians.

Paul had an eyesight problem, which was most likely his "thorn in the flesh" that he referred to in 2 Corinthians. Paul almost always had a companion with him. Paul usually dictated his Epistles, which were transcribed by a companion. You can see this in many of the closing remarks of his Epistles.

For example:
Rom 16:22
22 I Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord.
(KJV)

However, for some reason, Paul wrote the entire book of Galatians himself, perhaps so that the Galatians would understand that he was very serious, and that the Epistle was not a forgery.

Gal 6:11
11 See with what large letters I have written to you with my own hand!
(NKJ)

The original manuscript of Galatians was written in very large print, because of Paul's extremely poor eyesight.

Gal 4:13-16
13 You know that because of physical infirmity I preached the gospel to you at the first.
14 And my trial which was in my flesh you did not despise or reject, but you received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.
15 What then was the blessing you enjoyed? For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me. 16 Have I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?
(NKJ)

That different people wrote the different Epistles of Paul for him, explains the differences in writing style. Luke was Paul's companion on his journeys according to Acts. And the Greek style of Hebrews is indistinguishable from Luke's other works, his Gospel and Acts.

INTERNAL EVIDENCE OF PAULINE AUTHORSHIP
Paul indicated that there were some forged epistles in circulation, which were attributed to Paul, yet were not written by him. Most likely, they were written by some of the Judaizers who were constantly at loggerheads with Paul.

II Thess 2:2
2 not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come.
(NIV)

Because of Paul's infirmity, and because it was not difficult for someone to claim a forgery was genuine because he used a variety of scribes, Paul's Epistles were "password protected." Paul let it be known that in EVERY epistle that was genuinely from him, he would write in his own handwriting (using the large letters) something along these lines, "grace to you." Paul's Gospel was all about grace. And he signed each letter with a note to the readers, about the grace of God to them. In the second Epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul wrote the last two verses in his own unique handwriting:

II Thess 3:17-18
17 The salutation of Paul with my own hand, which is a sign in every epistle; so I write.
18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
(NKJ)

Every Epistle of Paul's contains this closing blessing, written in his own handwriting. Here are all fourteen:

Rom 16:20
20 And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.
(KJV)

1 Cor 16:23
23 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.
(KJV)

2 Cor 13:14
14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.
(KJV)

Gal 6:18
18 Brethren, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.
(KJV)

Eph 6:24
24 Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. Amen.
(KJV)

Phil 4:23
23 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
(KJV)

Col 4:18
18 The salutation by the hand of me Paul. Remember my bonds. Grace be with you. Amen.
(KJV)

1 Thess 5:28
28 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.
(KJV)

II Thess 3:18
18 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
(KJV)

1 Tim 6:21
21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
(KJV)

2 Tim 4:22
22 The Lord Jesus Christ be with thy spirit. Grace be with you. Amen.
(KJV)

Titus 3:15
15 All that are with me salute thee. Greet them that love us in the faith. Grace be with you all. Amen.
(KJV)

Philemon 1:25
25 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.
(KJV)

Heb 13:25
25 Grace be with you all. Amen.
(KJV)

With this well know signature of Paul's, I can assure you, no other orthodox writer in the early Church would have infringed on Paul's signature statement. If you look at the other epistles by James, Peter, John, and Jude, none of them have this statement.

During Paul's lifetime, he oversaw the care of the churches from Italy to Asia Minor. However, after Paul's death, and prior to his being imprisoned on the Isle of Patmos, John was handed over the care of the churches of Asia Minor, that were the result of Paul's missionary activity. It is no surprise then, that long after Paul's death, when John delivered the seven letters and the book of Revelation to these seven churches, that he ended with a salute to Paul.

Rev 22:20-21
20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
(KJV)

John really took up Paul's mission after his death in Rome, and became the "Apostle to the Gentiles."

There are other indications of Pauline authorship in Hebrews as well. The theology is most definitely "Pauline," as Hebrews is the companion book to Galatians, only written to the Messianic believers rather than to Gentiles. It is beyond the scope of this article to do an extensive comparison. However, one example regarding the superiority of the New Covenant to the Old Covenant should suffice.

Gal 4:19-5:4
19 My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you,
20 how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!
21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.
23 His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.
24 These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar.
25 Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children.
26 But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.
27 For it is written: "Be glad, O barren woman, who bears no children; break forth and cry aloud, you who have no labor pains; because more are the children of the desolate woman than of her who has a husband."
28 Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise.
29 At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now.
30 But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son."
31 Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

5:1 It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
2 Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all.
3 Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law.
4 You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.
(NIV)

Heb 8:6-13
6 But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises.
7 For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another.
8 But God found fault with the people and said: "The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.
9 It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
10 This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more."
13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.
(NIV)

Literalist-Luke
Aug 10th 2008, 04:57 PM
Many of the churches Paul started contained some Jewish believers too. Some people have the idea that Paul started exclusively Gentile churches. But, if you follow Luke's account in Acts, some of them actually had a core group of charter members who were Jews of the Diaspora. For example, the church in Ephesus was started as a split from the synagogue (Acts 18:19-21 & Acts 19:1-20). The original members of the Ephesian church were Jews and Jewish proselytes (Gentiles who had formerly converted to Judaism). Likewise, the church in Antioch was mixed also. Those mixed churches had already been followers of Paul's Gospel teaching. Hebrews was written primarily to the Jews who had lived in Judea, many of whom were on the run because of the persecution from the unbelieving Jewish leadership.

Heb 10:32-35
32 But recall the former days in which, after you were illuminated, you endured a great struggle with sufferings:
33 partly while you were made a spectacle both by reproaches and tribulations, and partly while you became companions of those who were so treated;
34 for you had compassion on me in my chains, and joyfully accepted the plundering of your goods, knowing that you have a better and an enduring possession for yourselves in heaven.
35 Therefore do not cast away your confidence, which has great reward.
(NKJ)

This is a reference to Paul's arrest in Jerusalem, and imprisonment in Caesarea (a few miles west of Jerusalem) prior to his appealing to Caesar, and being sent to Rome (where he was when he wrote this Epistle). Paul had Messianic friends in Caesarea, whom he visited on his way to Jerusalem.

Acts 21:8-15
8 And the next day we that were of Paul's company departed, and came unto Caesarea: and we entered into the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him.
9 And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.
10 And as we tarried there many days, there came down from Judaea a certain prophet, named Agabus.
11 And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.
12 And when we heard these things, both we, and they of that place, besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.
13 Then Paul answered, What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.
14 And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done.
15 And after those days we took up our carriages, and went up to Jerusalem.
(KJV)

After arriving in Jerusalem, Paul was arrested at the instigation of the unbelieving Jews, put in prison, and eventually shipped back to Caesarea to be held in prison (Acts 23:23ff). Paul spent two years in the Roman jail at Caesarea, while the Jewish believers ministered to his needs.

Acts 24:23-27
23 And he commanded a centurion to keep Paul, and to let him have liberty, and that he should forbid none of his acquaintance to minister or come unto him.
24 And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.
25 And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.
26 He hoped also that money should have been given him of Paul, that he might loose him: wherefore he sent for him the oftener, and communed with him.
27 But after two years Porcius Festus came into Felix' room: and Felix, willing to shew the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound.
(KJV)

This is what Paul referenced when writing to the Jewish brethren in Hebrews. The unbelieving Jews in Judea were at that time persecuting the Messianic believers. Yet, they ministered to Paul from their own means, while he was in the Roman prison. Thus he writes to them, "for you had compassion on me in my chains, and joyfully accepted the plundering of your goods, knowing that you have a better and an enduring possession for yourselves in heaven."

Also, note that Paul mentioned his companion, Timothy.

Heb 13:23-25
23 Know that our brother Timothy has been set free, with whom I shall see you if he comes shortly.
24 Greet all those who rule over you, and all the saints. Those from Italy greet you.
25 Grace be with you all. Amen.
(NKJ)

Paul was writing from "Italy" (Paul was in prison in Rome for 2 years at this time, having been sent there from Caesarea because of his appealing to Caesar {Acts 28}).

EXTERNAL EVIDENCE OF PAULINE AUTHORSHIP
Church tradition, from the earliest days, has classified Hebrews as Paul's. In fact, in the first few centuries, manuscripts of New Testament books were not bound all together. Often, each book was a separate scroll. But, sometimes they were bound together in sections. This was the case with the four Gospels and Acts, being bound together. And it was also the case with Paul's fourteen Epistles including Hebrews. Also some of the Early Church Fathers made reference to Paul's fourteen epistles.

Here is an example, written in the second century by Clement of Alexandria, commenting on the "style" of writing. Luke was Paul's companion on his missionary journeys. Clement argues that Luke's style of Greek writing (from Acts) is evident in Hebrews, which he attributes to Paul.

"As Luke also may be recognized by the style, both to have composed the Acts of the Apostles, and to have translated Paul’s Epistle to the Hebrews." [Clement, Fragments from the Latin of Cassiodorus, I]

Eusebius, the fourth century Christian historian, had quite a bit to say about the authorship of Hebrews which he gleaned from earlier writers.
"But it is highly probable that the works of the ancients, which he says they had, were the Gospels and the writings of the apostles, and probably some expositions of the ancient prophets, such as are contained in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and in many others of Paul’s Epistles." [Eusebius, Book II, ch. XVII].

"Paul’s fourteen epistles are well known and undisputed. It is not indeed right to overlook the fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying that it is disputed by the church of Rome, on the ground that it was not written by Paul. But what has been said concerning this epistle by those who lived before our time I shall quote in the proper place." [Eusebius, Book III, ch. III]

Referring to Clement of Rome, Paul's acquaintance (Phil. 4:3) who wrote one of his own epistles (I Clement), Eusebius wrote the following: "In this epistle he gives many thoughts drawn from the Epistle to the Hebrews, and also quotes verbally some of its expressions, thus showing most plainly that it is not a recent production. Wherefore it has seemed reasonable to reckon it with the other writings of the apostle. For as Paul had written to the Hebrews in his native tongue, some say that the evangelist Luke, others that this Clement himself, translated the epistle." [Eusebius, Book III, ch. XXXVIII]

Clement was in Rome at the time of Paul's imprisonment. He also wrote his Epistle to the Corinthians (I Clement) after Paul's death, and quoted from Hebrews. Eusebius' conclusion is that Hebrews was known to Clement in the mid-first century, so it can be traced back to Rome about Paul's time. He concludes that it is not a more recent epistle, as the detractors claimed.

Speaking of Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius wrote; "He says that the Epistle to the Hebrews is the work of Paul, and that it was written to the Hebrews in the Hebrew language; but that Luke translated it carefully and published it for the Greeks, and hence the same style of expression is found in this epistle and in the Acts. But he says that the words, Paul the Apostle, were probably not prefixed, because, in sending it to the Hebrews, who were prejudiced and suspicious of him, he wisely did not wish to repel them at the very beginning by giving his name. Farther on he says: “But now, as the blessed presbyter said, since the Lord being the apostle of the Almighty, was sent to the Hebrews, Paul, as sent to the Gentiles, on account of his modesty did not subscribe himself an apostle of the Hebrews, through respect for the Lord, and because being a herald and apostle of the Gentiles he wrote to the Hebrews out of his superabundance.”" [Eusebius, book VI, ch. XIV]

"In addition he makes the following statements in regard to the Epistle to the Hebrews in his Homilies upon it: “That the verbal style of the epistle entitled ‘To the Hebrews,’ is not rude like the language of the apostle, who acknowledged himself ‘rude in speech,’ that is, in expression; but that its diction is purer Greek, any one who has the power to discern differences of phraseology will acknowledge. Moreover, that the thoughts of the epistle are admirable, and not inferior to the acknowledged apostolic writings, any one who carefully examines the apostolic text will admit.” Farther on he adds: “If I gave my opinion, I should say that the thoughts are those of the apostle, but the diction and phraseology are those of some one who remembered the apostolic teachings, and wrote down at his leisure what had been said by his teacher. Therefore if any church holds that this epistle is by Paul, let it be commended for this. For not without reason have the ancients handed it down as Paul’s. But who wrote the epistle, in truth, God knows. The statement of some who have gone before us is that Clement, bishop of the Romans, wrote the epistle, and of others that Luke, the author of the Gospel and the Acts, wrote it.” But let this suffice on these matters." [Eusebius, Book VI, ch. XXVI]

In summary, it is clear that the orthodox Christians of the early Church recognized the Epistle to the Hebrews as Paul's genuine work. The most common tradition was that Luke, Paul's companion, transcribed the book for Him into Greek. Some thought Clement of Rome did the transcription. Some claimed that Paul wrote the original in the Hebrew tongue, and that Luke translated it into Greek. As Eusebius says, only God knows who the scribe was. Regardless, the consensus of the earliest testimonies is definitely that the Epistle is genuinely Paul's.

livingwaters
Aug 10th 2008, 05:41 PM
Why are we questioning what the Bible says. My KJV says that Hebrews is the epistle of the Apostle Paul.

Isn't the Bible true in it's entirety??

God Bless:hug:

Bethany67
Aug 10th 2008, 05:45 PM
What's the verse reference where it's identified as Paul?

scourge39
Aug 10th 2008, 05:58 PM
What's the verse reference where it's identified as Paul?

There isn't one. No Greek manuscripts explicitly identify Paul as the author. If that were the case, the matter would've been settled long ago. Ultimately, the authorship of Hebrews won't be settled this side of eternity, and by then, none of us will care. It really doesn't matter and isn't really 'important.' Pauline authorship is incredibly unlikely, mainly because Paul's letters, even the disputed ones, contain his name while Hebrews is anonymous. Paul explicitly says in Galatians that he received his message from no one other than Christ; the author of Hebrews seems to have heard the Gospel secondhand (cf. 2:3). Hebrews does not conflict with Paul's teaching on the relationship between Law and Gospel. The important thing to remember when reading, preaching, or teaching Hebrews is that it was written to a congregation of Christian Jews who were on the verge of reverting back to Judaism in the face of persecution for their Christian faith. Some speculate that this was yet another epistle written to correct more problems within the Church at Corinth. Its inclusion in the Bible was greatly disputed, much like that of 2 Peter and Jude. Apparently, they were added to the canon and removed a few times before a final, decisive choice to include them was made. The Canon of Scripture by the late scholar, F.F. Bruce, provides a great explanation of the disputes regarding those epistles that is easily accessible for laypeople.

ServantofTruth
Aug 10th 2008, 06:25 PM
We all use different bibles. We are all at different levels of growth. May God bless our individual search with the help of the Holy Spirit, may he also bless what we share with eachother.

Romans chapter 14 and chapter 15: verses 1-6.




BIG SofTy SofT outside, bible core. :D

Literalist-Luke
Aug 10th 2008, 06:48 PM
Why are we questioning what the Bible says. My KJV says that Hebrews is the epistle of the Apostle Paul.

Isn't the Bible true in it's entirety??

God Bless:hug:That place in the title where it says it was written by Paul is the title the KJV translators gave it, not the original manuscript. It's not a proof in and of itself.

Literalist-Luke
Aug 10th 2008, 06:49 PM
There isn't one. No Greek manuscripts explicitly identify Paul as the author. If that were the case, the matter would've been settled long ago. Ultimately, the authorship of Hebrews won't be settled this side of eternity, and by then, none of us will care. It really doesn't matter and isn't really 'important.' Pauline authorship is incredibly unlikely, mainly because Paul's letters, even the disputed ones, contain his name while Hebrews is anonymous. Paul explicitly says in Galatians that he received his message from no one other than Christ; the author of Hebrews seems to have heard the Gospel secondhand (cf. 2:3). Hebrews does not conflict with Paul's teaching on the relationship between Law and Gospel. The important thing to remember when reading, preaching, or teaching Hebrews is that it was written to a congregation of Christian Jews who were on the verge of reverting back to Judaism in the face of persecution for their Christian faith. Some speculate that this was yet another epistle written to correct more problems within the Church at Corinth. Its inclusion in the Bible was greatly disputed, much like that of 2 Peter and Jude. Apparently, they were added to the canon and removed a few times before a final, decisive choice to include them was made. The Canon of Scripture by the late scholar, F.F. Bruce, provides a great explanation of the disputes regarding those epistles that is easily accessible for laypeople.If you'll take a couple of minutes to read my post(s), you'll see that there is actually very convincing evidence of Paul's authorship for those who are motivated enough to dig in the Scriptures.

scourge39
Aug 10th 2008, 07:14 PM
If you'll take a couple of minutes to read my post(s), you'll see that there is actually very convincing evidence of Paul's authorship for those who are motivated enough to dig in the Scriptures.

I read your post and have read the opinions of others on the subject. I don't find the evidence to be very convincing at all. The arguments in favor of Apollos are much more compelling, IMHO.

Elouise
Aug 10th 2008, 07:23 PM
Hallo Bethany,

Whilst many Christians assume Paul was the author of Hebrews the truth is we have no records on any of the P scripts that we have that this is so. You know I am geeky enough to dig into the P scripts :lol:

Currently amongst NT scholars there is a consensus that this may have been written towards the end of the C1st and the author may have been well known so no one thought they needed to record the name of the author. Have a look at back copies of The Journal of the New Testament, I can lend you copies if you spot any of interest to you.

I am fairly sure it was Jerome who attributed the letter to the Hebrew to Paul in the Latin Vulgate and this explains why some bibles still say Paul wrote the letter to the Hebrews but there is NO attributed author prior to the Vulgate (C5th) which has many copying errors.

The style does seem different to Paul but has some similarities that make most theologians consider this letter to be attributable to the School of Paul just as Caravagio's students painted in the school of Caravagio.

You might find it interesting to access the New Testament Gateway and follow the links to scholarly articles on Hebrews.

scourge39
Aug 10th 2008, 07:58 PM
I believe that we can safely say that Hebrews was written by someone who was familiar with Paul's writings. All of the likely candidates are individuals who were associates of Paul.

ProjectPeter
Aug 10th 2008, 08:20 PM
Yeah... who knows but agree that it was someone very familiar with the teaching of Paul. I'm not sold that it was Paul himself though... his style always announced himself in his letters.

Diolectic
Aug 10th 2008, 08:31 PM
I know it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things, but I'm curious as to your thoughts - Paul? Barnabas? Apollos? Luke? Priscilla? Someone else?Act 18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
:25 This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spoke and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.

I would say that is it Apollos.

markedward
Aug 10th 2008, 10:37 PM
Other than simply picking a named person from the New Testament, is there any real evidence for who the author of Hebrews is?

Meaning... you can't just say "Hm, there's a guy named Apollos mentioned in the New Testament. Despite the fact that he's mentioned in passing only a few times, that we have no idea what his style of teaching was like, or that he isn't even recorded as writing any letters... Apollos must be the author of Hebrews!"

That's all I've really seen so far when it comes to naming Apollos.

ProjectPeter
Aug 10th 2008, 10:41 PM
Other than simply picking a named person from the New Testament, is there any real evidence for who the author of Hebrews is?

Meaning... you can't just say "Hm, there's a guy named Apollos mentioned in the New Testament. Despite the fact that he's mentioned in passing only a few times, that we have no idea what his style of teaching was like, or that he isn't even recorded as writing any letters... Apollos must be the author of Hebrews!"

That's all I've really seen so far when it comes to naming Apollos.
Nah... no one knows for sure. It seems (emphasis on seems) that the writer has sat under or understands the teaching of Paul pretty well. Sounds a lot like him yet enough subtle differences where one figures this... he knew the Scripture very well (OT at that time) and he knew Paul's teaching very well. Now... folks think that narrows down the field pretty well and that might be true... might not either. But it don't matter. One of the best letters in the Bible... bar none. ;)

Diolectic
Aug 11th 2008, 01:20 PM
Hey y'all, there is evidence that it ain't an apostle.


Hebrews 2:3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him;

That last part explains that it was not an apostle.
"Them that heard Him" were the apostles and the "us" which it "was confirmed to" are anybody who did not hear Jesus.

Therefore, as my last post said, I think it was Appolos.

turtledove
Aug 11th 2008, 01:29 PM
Nah... no one knows for sure. It seems (emphasis on seems) that the writer has sat under or understands the teaching of Paul pretty well. Sounds a lot like him yet enough subtle differences where one figures this... he knew the Scripture very well (OT at that time) and he knew Paul's teaching very well. Now... folks think that narrows down the field pretty well and that might be true... might not either. But it don't matter. One of the best letters in the Bible... bar none. ;)

Yep, agreeing with all of the above. No one knows for sure. Traditionally Paul..but the writing does differ from Paul's other writings especially in the narrative style included. Obviously it was someone who knew Paul well.

I always tell people who are setting out to read through the whole Old Testament to read Hebrews in the New Testament first since it is a good summary of the story of faith in the Hebrew Scriptures (OT).

John146
Aug 11th 2008, 05:36 PM
Yep, agreeing with all of the above. No one knows for sure. Traditionally Paul..but the writing does differ from Paul's other writings especially in the narrative style included. Obviously it was someone who knew Paul well.

I always tell people who are setting out to read through the whole Old Testament to read Hebrews first since it is a good summary of the story of faith in the Hebrew Scriptures (OT).As has been pointed out, in all other books attributed to Paul, he gave his name in the very first verse of each of those books. In Hebrews, the author never identifies himself. This is strong evidence that it wasn't Paul. Why would he identify himself in all his other letters, but not in this one? I'm not saying there couldn't have been a reason for Paul to have done that, but I'm not aware of any.

I think it was probably Silvanus or Apollos. Silvanus co-authored 1st and 2nd Thessalonians with Paul and Timothy. The author of Hebrews mentions "our brother Timothy". I agree that if it wasn't Paul, it had to be someone who knew Paul well and spent a good deal of time with him.

markedward
Aug 11th 2008, 10:07 PM
Hey y'all, there is evidence that it ain't an apostle.

Hebrews 2:3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great a salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him;

That last part explains that it was not an apostle.
"Them that heard Him" were the apostles and the "us" which it "was confirmed to" are anybody who did not hear Jesus.

Therefore, as my last post said, I think it was Appolos.This is not evidence that it was Apollos who wrote it, only evidence that Paul didn't.

dan p
Aug 16th 2008, 11:40 PM
I vote that was Paul and some the things that will mention have already been posted.
1) The closing words of this letter are common to all Paul's letters, Grace be with you all ( Heb 13:25 )

2) the mention of Timothy in Heb 13:23

3) Paul new the Law better than any ONE

4) Peter said that Paul had written a letter to his people , and it was to be considered as Scripture 2 Peter 3:15-16. If it was not Hebrewa than where is it ? If it was lost , than the canon of Scripture is not complete. Hebrews is that letter.

5) Paul did have a ministry to the chrildren of Isreal. Acts 9:15. Hebrews belongs to part of his ministry

6) Paul is the only writer to quote Habakkuk 2:4 in the New Testament , three times , each with a different emphasis , Rom 1:17 ; Gal 3:11 ; Heb 10:38.

7) Paul is the only apostle to ask for prayer Heb13:18, note 13:22

8) Paul is the only writer in the New Testament who wrote about the passing away of the Law of Moses, the Old Covenant Heb8:13 in line with what he wrote in 2 Cor 3:11 , Eph 2:15 , Col 2:14 .

9) and then there are many Pauline expressions in Hebrewa that are peculiar to Paul's thought

10) here are 2 questions ; Does the writing of Hebrewa contradict the many revelations that Paul received from the risen Christ concerning the Mystery and the Body of Christ > NO, it doesn't because he wrote to HEBREWS. If Paul had written this letter to Gentiles or to the Body of Christ , then Hebrews would have been contradictory in nature

11) In believeing that Paul wrote Hebrews, does this belief make void his commission to the Gentiles as stated in Acts 9:15. NO, of course not.

MrAnteater
Aug 17th 2008, 12:12 AM
God wrote it. Just like He wrote the other 65 books.

Human beings bring no truth of their own into the equation. It's 100% from Him. God was gracious enough to let a few men record his words, but thats about it.

2Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness

livingwaters
Aug 17th 2008, 12:24 AM
And that's all that matters....You nailed it MrAntEater!!!

Praise the Lord!!!:pp

Ethnikos
Aug 17th 2008, 03:57 AM
Origen wrote:
... If I were asked my personal opinion, I would say that the matter is the Apostle's but the phraseology and construction are those of someone who remembered the Apostle's teaching and wrote his own interpretation of what his master had said...http://www.orthodox.net/faq/canon.htm
He was influincial to allowing the Book of Hebrws to be entered into the New Teastament Canon.
He seemed to feel that it was the next best thing to being writen by Paul, himself.

LookingUp
Aug 17th 2008, 04:19 AM
I know it doesn't really matter in the scheme of things, but I'm curious as to your thoughts - Paul? Barnabas? Apollos? Luke? Priscilla? Someone else?Looks like we can rule out Paul.

Hebrews 2:3 shows that the author is a second-generation Christian: "which in the beginning was spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard." He came to faith through the testimony of one who had been led to faith by Jesus (likely one of the twelve). Paul, of course, came to faith directly in response to Christ's appearance to him on the Damascus road, and insists that he received his commission directly from Christ in Galatians 1:12.

racough
Aug 23rd 2008, 02:44 AM
I have heard from people who study Greek that the style of Greek is much more formal than the Greek of Paul's letters. I understand that the Greek of Luke and Hebrews most approaches the pure literary Attic Greek of Plato, the playwrights, etc. than any other book of the Bible.

talitha
Aug 23rd 2008, 02:50 AM
Let me just throw something else in the mix - I've heard some people claim that Lydia wrote it. I rather like that theory!! Goes against lots of religious grainage....... We have no real proof of who wrote it, so we're free to guess, LOL!

:pp

mischievously yours
tal

Elouise
Aug 23rd 2008, 06:19 PM
When a scholar puts forward a suggestion of a possible author they usually reference and present an arquement to explain why.

If you have any suggestions as to which theologian may be putting forth an arguement for Lydia it would be interesting to know who.

jamesand57
Aug 25th 2008, 11:43 AM
I vote that was Paul and some the things that will mention have already been posted.
1) The closing words of this letter are common to all Paul's letters, Grace be with you all ( Heb 13:25 )

2) the mention of Timothy in Heb 13:23

3) Paul new the Law better than any ONE

4) Peter said that Paul had written a letter to his people , and it was to be considered as Scripture 2 Peter 3:15-16. If it was not Hebrewa than where is it ? If it was lost , than the canon of Scripture is not complete. Hebrews is that letter.

5) Paul did have a ministry to the chrildren of Isreal. Acts 9:15. Hebrews belongs to part of his ministry

6) Paul is the only writer to quote Habakkuk 2:4 in the New Testament , three times , each with a different emphasis , Rom 1:17 ; Gal 3:11 ; Heb 10:38.

7) Paul is the only apostle to ask for prayer Heb13:18, note 13:22

8) Paul is the only writer in the New Testament who wrote about the passing away of the Law of Moses, the Old Covenant Heb8:13 in line with what he wrote in 2 Cor 3:11 , Eph 2:15 , Col 2:14 .

9) and then there are many Pauline expressions in Hebrewa that are peculiar to Paul's thought

10) here are 2 questions ; Does the writing of Hebrewa contradict the many revelations that Paul received from the risen Christ concerning the Mystery and the Body of Christ > NO, it doesn't because he wrote to HEBREWS. If Paul had written this letter to Gentiles or to the Body of Christ , then Hebrews would have been contradictory in nature

11) In believeing that Paul wrote Hebrews, does this belief make void his commission to the Gentiles as stated in Acts 9:15. NO, of course not.



In Truth only God knows for sure who wrote Hebrews, What we do know is that it was not written by a Apostle as Hebrews 2:3 indicates that the Person who wrote it is a second generation Christian. Had Paul written it the verse would be a lie, or else Paul would have lied on his Chapter 1 of Galatians. Paul received the Gospel directly from Christ, independent of human hands.
The Author in style differs widely from Pauline writing, but is extremely strong in his knowledge of the Torah, as any trained rabbi would be, The Leading Candidate I believe would be Apollos, who is described in these very terms in the Book of Acts. Apollos came to faith in Christ through Paul's ministry as disciples associated with Paul, Priscilla and Acquilla explained the full gospel to Apollos, and Apollos remained a confident of Paul, being mentioned in 1 Corinthians several times, and in Titus. Also Apollos style was that of a Preacher, the Book of Hebrews is written mostly in the form of a sermon, unlike Paul's letters.

IPet2_9
Aug 25th 2008, 03:44 PM
I am not following how Hebrews 2:3 says that the author has to be a 2nd-generation Christian? Seems to me that it is saying the exact opposite: that is has to be a FIRST generation Christian. I will quote a different English translation, the NIV:

Hebrews 2:3 how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him.

Note how the translation changed from "those who heard" to "those who heard HIM". I'm not as strong in Greek as I am Hebrew, so I can't speak to what the original Greek says, but it looks inconclusive to me. How do you prove that the author had to have heard the message from someone other than Christ based on this?

My conclusion from studying the Hebrews-authorship issue before is that, yes, Paul wrote it. But he wrote it in Hebrew. That explains the different grammar from his other books. When he wrote to the Gentiles, he wrote in Greek. When he wrote to the Hebrews, he wrote in Hebrew. That is perfectly in character for him. The earliest manuscripts we have on hand have the book of Hebrews written in Greek. I would argue that the book was since translated from Hebrew language to Greek--most likely by someone other than Paul--thus explaining the grammar differences.

jamesand57
Aug 25th 2008, 05:55 PM
I am not following how Hebrews 2:3 says that the author has to be a 2nd-generation Christian? Seems to me that it is saying the exact opposite: that is has to be a FIRST generation Christian. I will quote a different English translation, the NIV:

Hebrews 2:3 how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him.

Note how the translation changed from "those who heard" to "those who heard HIM". I'm not as strong in Greek as I am Hebrew, so I can't speak to what the original Greek says, but it looks inconclusive to me. How do you prove that the author had to have heard the message from someone other than Christ based on this?

My conclusion from studying the Hebrews-authorship issue before is that, yes, Paul wrote it. But he wrote it in Hebrew. That explains the different grammar from his other books. When he wrote to the Gentiles, he wrote in Greek. When he wrote to the Hebrews, he wrote in Hebrew. That is perfectly in character for him. The earliest manuscripts we have on hand have the book of Hebrews written in Greek. I would argue that the book was since translated from Hebrew language to Greek--most likely by someone other than Paul--thus explaining the grammar differences.

Heb 2:3 how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard,



The Salvation was first Preached by the Lord according to Hebrews 2:3, if a first generation Christian they would have heard Jesus Words, in this verse though, it was confirmed to the author through those who heard. Also, there is not one document that supports the contention to Hebrews being written in Hebrew originally, In fact all the quotes follows the Septuagint, not the Masorotic text which supports greek authorship. Being that it was written to Helenized Jews, Which if you remember from Acts were a significant early group of the first century church. see Acts 6. Paul's constant assertion is he received the Gospel Directly from Jesus, 'Not from Men nor through the Agency of Man, but through Jesus Christ' according to Galatians 1.


A First Generation Christian is a direct wittness of Jesus Words and Deeds, Paul makes it as one untimely born, and of which it appears Jesus ministred to Paul directly for about three years at the beginning of his ministry from certain comments he makes.

A Second Generation Christian is one who received the gospel message through a wittness of Jesus Christ ( a Apostle or Disciple who was present )


Here the Writer no matter which version you wanting to go with we can use yours

Hebrews 2:3 how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him.


Again it was confirmed to Us in this by those who heard, indicating both the author and the rest of the hearers being second generation Christians. The author did not say it was confirmed to you, but includes himself in the statement which would be directly against Paul's previous assertion in Galatians 1.


As Much against Pauline authorishp though remains style, The Author puts the form in a sermon rather than a treatise as Paul did in past Theological discussions of great depth, such as the Book of Romans. I suspect apollos primarily because of his great eloquence, his depth of knowledge in the scriptures, which being a helenized Jew from Alexandria would be primarily from the Septuagint.

Steve M
Aug 25th 2008, 06:15 PM
Hebrews 2:3 isn't conclusive proof it wasn't Paul, either. Because Paul spoke of going back to the other Apostles after a time and checking to make sure that what he had been teaching was what they had been teaching--after all, he had recieved it by divine revelation, not from man. They confirmed to him that it was.

Paul might be associating himself with those who had not seen Christ in this way--a way of emphasizing what they had in common. As he says elsewhere, he became all things to all men.

However, anyone at all familiar with Church history has heard Origen's opinion on the matter.

Origen said ‘But as to who wrote the epistle, God knows the truth’. I'm not sure when he said it, but that still puts this judgement as somewhere in the third century. The name 'Hebrews' was slapped on it by Tertullian, who actually called it Barnabas' Epistle to the Hebrews. So right from the start, people didn't know. By the fourth century, those saying it was Paul were in the forefront, but not with any proof.

Some have proposed Priscilla--who we recall was active incorrecting Apollos, along with her husband.

But some commentators claim (I'm no scholar) that the self-reference in Hebrews 11:32 employs a masculine participle, meaning either a man wrote it or the author was being deliberately untruthful. The second one I reject.

The King James Bible 1611 ed. ends the Epistle to the Hebrews with "Written to the Hebrewes, from Italy, by Timothie"

I conclude that in this matter, the scriptures are silent, and we don't need to know. The internal evidences--the way it lines right up with Paul's teachings, Peter's teachings, and John's teachings, just to name some of the other New Testament writers--speaks for itself. There could be no possible justification for not including this book in the canon, and everything in it is very important to our understanding of God.

Emanate
Aug 25th 2008, 07:55 PM
The problem with Hebrews is when people read it with Gentile eyes.

Bethany67
Aug 25th 2008, 07:58 PM
The problem with Hebrews is when people read it with Gentile eyes.

I think you have a valid point there. How would you suggest that we Gentiles look at it through different eyes?

Emanate
Aug 25th 2008, 08:50 PM
I think you have a valid point there. How would you suggest that we Gentiles look at it through different eyes?


I would suggest a little study of the Hebrew culture to which it was written. First century Judaism and its views on Torah. Which of course would lead us to what the Torah actually says, not what we think Paul said about it. We must understand the audience to be the audience.

talitha
Aug 27th 2008, 09:57 PM
When a scholar puts forward a suggestion of a possible author they usually reference and present an arquement to explain why.

If you have any suggestions as to which theologian may be putting forth an arguement for Lydia it would be interesting to know who.
I'm not claiming to be a scholar - this is bible "chat", yes? :idea:

jamesand57
Aug 27th 2008, 10:42 PM
Hebrews 2:3 isn't conclusive proof it wasn't Paul, either. Because Paul spoke of going back to the other Apostles after a time and checking to make sure that what he had been teaching was what they had been teaching--after all, he had recieved it by divine revelation, not from man. They confirmed to him that it was.

Paul might be associating himself with those who had not seen Christ in this way--a way of emphasizing what they had in common. As he says elsewhere, he became all things to all men.

However, anyone at all familiar with Church history has heard Origen's opinion on the matter.

Origen said ‘But as to who wrote the epistle, God knows the truth’. I'm not sure when he said it, but that still puts this judgement as somewhere in the third century. The name 'Hebrews' was slapped on it by Tertullian, who actually called it Barnabas' Epistle to the Hebrews. So right from the start, people didn't know. By the fourth century, those saying it was Paul were in the forefront, but not with any proof.

Some have proposed Priscilla--who we recall was active incorrecting Apollos, along with her husband.

But some commentators claim (I'm no scholar) that the self-reference in Hebrews 11:32 employs a masculine participle, meaning either a man wrote it or the author was being deliberately untruthful. The second one I reject.

The King James Bible 1611 ed. ends the Epistle to the Hebrews with "Written to the Hebrewes, from Italy, by Timothie"

I conclude that in this matter, the scriptures are silent, and we don't need to know. The internal evidences--the way it lines right up with Paul's teachings, Peter's teachings, and John's teachings, just to name some of the other New Testament writers--speaks for itself. There could be no possible justification for not including this book in the canon, and everything in it is very important to our understanding of God.



I suggest you re-read Paul's writings in Galatians, he affirms directly that his Gospel came directly from God not from Man.


It was years later that Paul defended the Gospel he Preached with the apostles, and we know this from the same letter, After he had asserted that his Gospel came directly from Jesus Christ. Which by the way, the rest of the Apostles didn't contradict him.


The Writer of Hebrews states that He was within the group who received the gospel from those who had heard directly from Jesus.

If it is Paul, we then have a direct contradiction in the scirptues, which I don't believe for a second. The rational explanation is that its a close associate of Paul's, one well versed in the scriptures. Apollos is well mentioned several times as Paul's close associate, and placed on a like level
in that Paul uses comparisons of himself and apollos to the corinthians.

Steve M
Aug 28th 2008, 02:23 PM
I suggest you re-read Paul's writings in Galatians, he affirms directly that his Gospel came directly from God not from Man.


I actually read that this morning.


It was years later that Paul defended the Gospel he Preached with the apostles, and we know this from the same letter, After he had asserted that his Gospel came directly from Jesus Christ. Which by the way, the rest of the Apostles didn't contradict him.

My point was explicitly this:

1 Corinthians 9:22
To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.

Elsewhere he refers to the 'super-Apostles' (or 'those who seemed to be pillars') as a way of emphasizing his closeness to those he was speaking to. We have many examples of him 'becoming all things to all people'--emphasizing those traits they had in common. If not taken completely literally, this verse could be simply saying 'like you, I didn't follow Christ while He was here on Earth--I was not there, I was 'as one born out of season.'

Do I believe that is what this says, and that Paul wrote the book? No. But I don't think your argument based on it is strong enough to say outright it could not have been Paul.


The rational explanation is that its a close associate of Paul's, one well versed in the scriptures. Apollos is well mentioned several times as Paul's close associate, and placed on a like level
in that Paul uses comparisons of himself and apollos to the corinthians.

Apollos, Timothy, and Barnabas are the three I have heard the most cited for these reasons. I think it could well have been any of them; but I conclude that the lack of a signature means the Spirit doesn't think I need to know the answer.

RJ Mac
Aug 28th 2008, 03:33 PM
I believe Paul wrote Hebrews. The reason he didn't identify himself like he did
in all his other letters was because of who he was writing to. The Jews whom
he loved and would be willing to exchange his soul for their salvation Ro.9:3;
But because the Jews of Palestine hated Paul he knew they wouldn't listen to
him so he had to write without their knowledge it was him.

The explanation he gives us of the heavenly throne room in Heb.12:22ff can
only come from one who was there - Paul. 2Cor.12:1-3; when he died in
Ac.14:19;

But then we will only know for sure, when we die and ask him who wrote it.

RJ Mac

Emanate
Aug 28th 2008, 07:29 PM
I believe Paul wrote Hebrews. The reason he didn't identify himself like he did
in all his other letters was because of who he was writing to. The Jews whom
he loved and would be willing to exchange his soul for their salvation Ro.9:3;
But because the Jews of Palestine hated Paul he knew they wouldn't listen to
him so he had to write without their knowledge it was him.

The explanation he gives us of the heavenly throne room in Heb.12:22ff can
only come from one who was there - Paul. 2Cor.12:1-3; when he died in
Ac.14:19;

But then we will only know for sure, when we die and ask him who wrote it.

RJ Mac

Jews of Palestine? There was no such thing as palestine until a Roman Emperor (Hadrian?) decided to wipe the name of Israel out of memory and changed the name of the land to Palestine (Philistine) well after the 1st century.

Jews of Philistine just sounds like an oxymoron.

How do we know the writer never signed the document? Could it not have been lost along the way? What if it were a group of people who penned it?