Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews
The
Ancient views
The Epistle to the Hebrews was included in the collected writings of Paul from a very early date. For example, the late second-century or early third-century codex 𝔓46, a volume of Paul's general epistles, includes Hebrews immediately after Romans.[3]
While the assumption of Pauline authorship readily allowed its acceptance in the Eastern Church, doubts persisted in the West.[4]
Doubts about Pauline authorship were raised around the end of the second century, predominantly in the West. Tertullian attributed the epistle to Barnabas.[8] Both Gaius of Rome[9] and Hippolytus[10] excluded Hebrews from the works of Paul, the latter attributing it to Clement of Rome.[11] Origen noted that others had claimed Clement or Luke as the writer, but he tentatively accepted Pauline origin of the thought in the text and the explanation of Clement of Alexandria, saying 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", as quoted by Eusebius.[12]
Jerome, aware of such lingering doubts,[13] included the epistle in his Vulgate but moved it to the end of Paul's writings. Augustine affirmed Paul's authorship and vigorously defended the epistle. By then its acceptance in the New Testament canon was well settled.
Modern views
In general, the evidence against Pauline authorship is considered too solid for scholarly dispute.
As Richard Heard notes, in his Introduction to the New Testament, "modern critics have confirmed that the epistle cannot be attributed to Paul and have for the most part agreed with Origen's judgement, 'But as to who wrote the epistle, only God knows the truth.'"[19]Attridge argues that similarities with Paul's work are simply a product of a shared usage of traditional concepts and language. Others, however, have suggested that they are not accidental, and that the work is a deliberate forgery attempting to pass itself off as a work of Paul.[20][21]
Internal evidence
Internal anonymity
The text as it has been passed down to the present time is internally anonymous, though some older title headings attribute it to the Apostle Paul.
Identification as a second-generation Christian
In Hebrews 2:3, the author states that this "great salvation" was "declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard". This is usually taken to indicate the author was a second-generation Christian.[22]
Stylistic differences from Paul
The style is notably different from the rest of Paul's epistles, a characteristic noted by
This stylistic difference has led Martin Luther and Lutheran churches to refer to Hebrews as one of the antilegomena,[24] one of the books whose authenticity and usefulness was questioned. As a result, it is placed with James, Jude, and Revelation, at the end of Luther's canon.
Stylistic similarities to Paul
Some theologians and groups, such as
Paul is also the only Biblical author, or Jewish author of the same period, to use the analogy of "spiritual milk" negatively contrasted with "solid food" (Hebrews 5:12ff cf. 1 Corinthians 3:2ff). No other author treats spiritual milk negatively, with Old Testament witnesses always speaking milk in a positive sense of nourishment, while Peter employs the term "spiritual milk" as something Christians should "yearn for" in 1 Peter 2:2. The analogy of Christian maturity as moving from milk to meat is unique to Paul’s writing.[additional citation(s) needed]
In the 13th chapter of Hebrews,
The epistle contains Paul's classic closing greeting, "Grace… be with you…" as he stated explicitly in 2 Thessalonians 3:17–18 and as implied in 1 Corinthians 16:21–24 and Colossians 4:18. This closing greeting is included at the end of each of Paul's letters.
Although the writing style varies from Paul in a number of ways, some similarities in wordings to some of the Pauline epistles have been noted. In antiquity, some began to ascribe it to Paul in an attempt to provide the anonymous work an explicit apostolic pedigree.[29]
Other possible authors
Priscilla
In more recent times, some scholars have advanced a case for
Ruth Hoppin provides considerable support for her conviction that Priscilla had written the Epistle to the Hebrews.[31] She maintains that Priscilla "meets every qualification, matches every clue, and looms ubiquitous in every line of investigation". She suggests that the masculine participle may have been altered by a scribe, or that the author was deliberately using a neutral participle "as a kind of abstraction".[32]
Barnabas
Luke, Clement, Apollos
Other possible authors were suggested as early as the third century CE.
References
- ^ Alan C. Mitchell, Hebrews (Liturgical Press, 2007) page 6.
- ISBN 978-1-109-90125-2.
- ISBN 0-8054-3145-4.
- ^ Alan C. Mitchell, Hebrews (Liturgical Press, 2007) page 2.
- ^ Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 3.25.5 (text).
- ^ Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 3.3.5 (text); cf. also 6.20.3 (text).
- ^ Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 6.14.2–3 (text), citing Clement's Hypotyposes,
- ^ De Pudic. 20 (text).
- ^ Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 6.20.3 (text).
- ^ Photius, Bibl. 121.
- ^ Bar Ṣalībī, In Apoc. 1.4.
- ^ Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 6.25.11–14 (text).
- ^ Jerome, Ad Dardanum 129.3.
- ^ p. 671
- ^ Peter Kirby, EarlyChristianWritings.com
- ^ "Hebrews: Introduction, Argument and Outline", Daniel Wallace
- R.C. Sproul – The Supremacy of Christ– Ligonier.org. Retrieved 22 September 2014.
- ^ Ehrman 2004:411
- ^ Religion-online.org Archived 2009-02-15 at the Wayback Machine, Richard Heard, Introduction To The New Testament
- ^ Bart D. Ehrman, Forged: Writing in the Name of God--Why the Bible's Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are (HarperCollins, 2011) page 23.
- ISBN 978-3-16-149826-8.
- ^ Collins, Raymond F. (2006). Letters That Paul Did Not Write: The Epistle to the Hebrews and the Pauline Pseudepigrapha. Wipf and Stock. p. 53. Retrieved 3 October 2023.
- ^ Eusebius (1965) [c. 311]. The History of the Church. London: Penguin. pp. #37, p.101.
- ^ "Canon, Bible.", Lutheran Cyclopedia, LCMS,
6. Throughout the Middle Ages there was no doubt as to the divine character of any book of the NT. Luther again pointed to the distinction between homologoumena and antilegomena* (followed by M. Chemnitz* and M. Flacius*). The later dogmaticians let this distinction recede into the background. Instead of antilegomena they use the term deuterocanonical. Rationalists use the word canon in the sense of list. Lutherans in America followed Luther and held that the distinction between homologoumena and antilegomena must not be suppressed. But caution must be exercised not to exaggerate the distinction.
- ^ a b c Keathley, Hampton IV (12 August 2014). "The Argument of Hebrews". Bible.org. Retrieved 30 October 2014.
- ^ "Introduction to the Letter to the Hebrews". Archived 2013-10-20 at the Wayback Machine Accessed 17 Mar 2013.
- ^ Hahn, Roger. "The Book of Hebrews". Christian Resource Institute. Accessed 17 Mar 2013
- ^ Epistle to the Hebrews. Biblical Training. 23 September 2014.
- ^ Attridge, Harold W.: Hebrews. Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989, pp. 1–6.
- ^ von Harnack, Adolph, "Probabilia uber die Addresse und den Verfasser des Habraerbriefes". Zeitschrift fur die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der aelteren Kirche (E. Preuschen, Berlin: Forschungen und Fortschritte, 1900), 1:16–41. English translation available in Lee Anna Starr, The Bible Status of Woman. Zarephath, NJ: Pillar of Fire, 1955), 392–415.
- ^ Hoppin, Ruth. Priscilla's Letter: Finding the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Lost Coast Press (2009). 978-1-88289750-6.
- ^ Ruth Hoppin, "The Epistle to the Hebrews is Priscilla's Letter" in Amy-Jill Levine, Maria Mayo Robins (eds), A Feminist Companion to the Catholic Epistles and Hebrews, (A&C Black, 2004) pages 147–70.
- ^ Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 6.25.11-14 (text)
- ISBN 978-1-4185-8711-6.
- ISBN 978-0-310-86625-1.
- ISBN 978-0-529-11441-9.