It is only liberalism that questions the authors of the four gospel. Generally the critique of the scripture is done without any consideration of how God works through inspiration. I have studied this at the Bachelors level and the Masters level. It is a failed process. As far as Hebrews goes anyone who says definitively that the author is not Paul doesn't know what they are talking about.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Who Wrote Book of Hebrews
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
That is another good point - ideas may depend on ones tradition as well.
I was raised Baptist (Southern Baptist, to be specific). So for me Pauline authorship was often questioned (because it did not "sound" like Paul) or rejected.
Growing up we used the KJV and NASB mostly. Hebrews is not in the Pauline epistles in those Bibles (it's between the Pauline epistles and James). But I don't know if all maintain that order.
I have also studied at the same levels (and the same seminary).
My point is that if Scripture is our guide, not tradition, then what verse will you provide that Mark was written by the apostle Mark rather than another apostle?
It is an important question because you just stated that to question whether Mark wrote the Gospel attributed to him, or Matthew the Gospel attributed to him, that equates to a question only liberals would ask.
Although I do believe the Gospels were written by those they are commonly attributed, I also suggest that you are using the label "liberal" to shut down any conversation.
The reason I believe this is most scholars (to include conservative scholars) believe that Matthew and Mark were written anonymously.
So I have to ask -
Why do you consider conservative theologians to be liberal if they question that the unnamed writers God used to write Matthew and Mark were not the men to whom those works are commonly attributed?
According to Eusebius, 'as for the Epistle to the Hebrews, [Clement of Alexandria] says indeed that it is Paul's, but that it was written for the Hebrews in the Hebrew tongue, and that Luke, having carefully translated it, published it for the Greeks; hence, as a result of this translation, the same complexion of style is found in this epistle and in the Acts: but the words, "Paul an apostle" were naturally not affixed, for, he says, "in writing to the Hebrews who had conceived a prejudice against him, he very wisely did not repel them at the beginning by putting his name."'
Make of that what you will. Proof of that would only come if a hebrew version of Hebrews was discovered, but the possibility cannot be ruled out. The Presbyterian theologian Robert Reymond has a lengthy defense of Pauline authorship in his book, 'Jesus, Divine Messiah.' For myself, on this matter, I'm content to remain an agnostic.
Make of that what you will. Proof of that would only come if a hebrew version of Hebrews was discovered, but the possibility cannot be ruled out. The Presbyterian theologian Robert Reymond has a lengthy defense of Pauline authorship in his book, 'Jesus, Divine Messiah.' For myself, on this matter, I'm content to remain an agnostic.
Yep. There was absolutely no agreement among the Early Church, much less later on (except in the Catholic Church).
Tertullian wrote that Hebrews was written by Barnabas, Hippolytus that Clement wrote it, Origen that it was written by Clement of Rome or Luke, Martin Luther held it was written by Apollos. Others suggest Silus.
I agree with you here. We do not know. Evidence (internal evidence) leans against Paul but not really towards anybody that can be verified.
If one reads Heb 2:3 carefully.
Heb 2:3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
Putting faces to the pronouns will help greatly in the above verse.
The writer is not claiming to have been there when Jesus spoke of this great salvation, which was probably his words to the 11 apostles and the 70 elders post resurrection. He is claiming to be among the Hebrews who had his words confirmed to them by signs and wonders and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost.
He is probably not referring to a one time event of confirmation by these signs but a continual display of these signs over maybe a period of about seven years until the death of Stephan in Acts 7 when the rulers during that generation in Jerusalem rejected Jesus Christ for themselves and the nation finally and forever and killed the messenger. It was at this time that the gospel of Christ began to exceed Jewish bounds, going to Samaria. After this, the door of faith was opened to the gentiles by Peter, who had been given the keys to the kingdom of God in Matthew 16. Paul had been saved in chapter 9 in a miraculous conversion between the Samaritan (chapter 8) and the gentiles salvation (chapter 10).
According to Paul, who has stated his credentials in the Jewish religion and as a Jew, there was no one on the planet as qualified to write Hebrews and make the application to the person of Jesus Christ than he. He is the one man who had seen the risen Lord 3 times and had been taught by him and been given the revelation of the "mystery of Christ," the church in this age and would have been able to make the spiritual applications that affected the Hebrews better than any man.
Peter, writing to the strangers scattered throughout a stated 5 provinces of Asia Minor (1 Pe 1:1-2) made this statement about Paul and his writing to them.
2Pe 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
These are Hebrews, though displaced from their own land and called strangers, They are called in Ga 2 the concision and are those whom the 12 apostles are called to minister to. The same warning of Hebrews is suggested by Peter in his letter.
Another indication that Paul is the author of Hebrews is the salutation. All his epistles end like Hebrews ends.
He 13:22 And I beseech you, brethren, suffer the word of exhortation: for I have written a letter unto you in few words.
23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you.
24 Salute all them that have the rule over you, and all the saints. They of Italy salute you.
25 Grace be with you all. Amen.
My vote is Paul as the author of Hebrews.
37818
Well-Known Member
The Apostle Paul's authorship and majority text book's subscription that Timothy transcribed the book, had became a well established written tradition.
That's why I don't listen to most scholars!... I don't question it, you can if you want along with most scholars... Paul wrote Hebrews... Brother Glen
But you do listen to some scholars (otherwise you'd have no reason to attribute Hebrews to Paul).That's why I don't listen to most scholars!... I don't question it, you can if you want along with most scholars... Paul wrote Hebrews... Brother Glen
When it comes to listening to Christians, I don't think listening to a minority vs majority of Christians (or vise versa) makes a difference.
My position is that if God wanted us to know who wrote Hebrews then the writer of Hebrews would have been identified in Hebrews. But as it is, all we can say with certainty is that God write Hebrews.
Why speculate?
Why do you believe Paul wrote Hebrews (what evidence)?
37818
Well-Known Member
The major evidence, which is almost totally ignored, is tradition, which was common, in written form.
David Alan Black in his book documents both internal and external evidence to make a case for Paul's authorship.
One small example. Hebrews 1:5 with Romans 1:4. Page 5. I was surprised he didn't include Acts 13:33 on that page.
Paul is the author... The LORD provided the words!... Brother Glen
Psalm 12: 6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
37818
Well-Known Member
Is about persons "thou shalt preserve them . . . ." See 1611 Hebrew translator's note. "Heb. him: that is, every one of them."
The Early Church had different opinions (but only a few indicating Paul).
The tradition that favors Paul is the Catholic Church. I question the validity of that tradition (they validate by attributing to a Saint - it alleviates questions that were being asked about Hebrews...and challenged to their placement of the book...by attributing it to Paul).
If we were using tradition outside of Catholic tradition, then we'd probably attribute it to Apollos.
So it depends on which we choose. But the Catholic Church did have a great impact on Christianity.
I go back to the writer not being identified. If we were meant to know, then I believe God would have revealed it to us in the writing.
I disagree with the validity of the "internal evidence".
The Gospels are very similar in ways. Some believe this is because the Gospel of Mark was a source document....or that there was an unknown source all four Gospels used.
I disagree. I believe the similarities are there because God is the ultimate author and we are talking about objective truths.
If you and I describe an airplane our description will be different but at the same time very similar.
There is more internal evidence pointing against a Pauline authorship than not. The only tradition pointing towards a Pauline authorship is the Catholic Church attributing the work to Paul.
I do not believe it was written by Paul because it appears not to be Paul's writing (some dismiss this by saying Paul had another write down his ideas....not dictate, as that would appear more like Paul, but Paul was preaching and somebody was describing what was written. That is too much speculation.
God wrote Hebrews, ultimately. And unlike all of Paul's known writings God did not record the writer of Hebrews.
The early church unanimously held that Paul was the author. It wasn't until Augustine and Calvin came on the scene that it was ever seriously questioned. Later Augustine came on board with Pauline authorship. The arguments against Pauline authorship are strictly from literary criticism and I find them unconvincing. The similarities to other Pauline works are most often ignored by those who have an agenda to oppose Pauline authorship. Some of them are the work of Christ in creation, the humiliations of Christ in the incarnation and crucifixion, the place of the new covenant, the working of the HS, speaking of the behavior of Israel in the desert.
There is enough similarities to other Pauline works to be reasonable in holding to Pauline authorship of Hebrews.
There is enough similarities to other Pauline works to be reasonable in holding to Pauline authorship of Hebrews.
Doesn't it seem as if God holds certain generations accountable for recognizing and following his pivot points that are designed for changing his way of prosecuting his purpose to something new? The generation mentioned in Psa 12 cannot be one that has lived up to this present point in history, for obvious reasons. This is bound to be a future generation under prophetic discussion, don't you think.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
So, I think you are right that persons will be preserved.
Revmitchell makes good points about the Pauline authorship of Hebrews, I think.
Last edited:
@Revmitchell did make some good points, but some erroneous claims as well.
He was wrong in his claim that the early church unanimously held that Paul was the author and it wasn't until Augustine (354-430 AD) that it was ever seriously questioned.
Tertullian (160-240 AD) believed that Barnabas wrote Hebrews.
Eusebius (260-339 AD) believed it was probably Paul but mentioned this was disputed.
Gaius and Hippolytus (170-235 AD) claimed Hebrews was written by Clement (35-99AD.
Origen (185-253 AD) believed it was written by either Clement or Luke.
Augustine strongly insisted on a Pauline authorship and this became the Catholic tradition.
Today most biblical scholars reject a Pauline authorship but leave the writer as unknown. As Daniel Wallace (Dallas Seminary) out it, "the arguments against Pauline authorship, however, are conclusive", and Guthrie, "most modern writers find more difficulty in imagining how this Epistle was ever attributed to Paul than in disposing of the theory"
The reasons for rejecting a Pauline authorship has been listed, but in the end of the day one can only speculate (if one is interested in speculating).
I can accept Paul as the author. I also think the letter is intended for Jewish Christians in Jerusalem and Luke may have been the scribe.
But, as Jon has rightly stated, it's speculative since no author is stated in the text.
37818
Well-Known Member
But most current ms copies Hebrews have as an end note, 'Written to the Hebrews from Italy by Timothy.'
The Textus Receipts does.
But it also concludes Philemon with "written from Rome to Philemon, by Onesimus", although Paul states at the start he is the writer.
It does make me wonder why Timothy is not often mentioned (we hear Paul as recorded by Luke quite a bit).
37818
Well-Known Member
The NA26 has, Subscriptio: Greek text notations . . . [M Symbol for majority text]