-
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
The early Christians attributed Hebrews to Clement. Tertullian attributed it to Barnabus. Paul was popularized by Augustine. I do not rely on the Catholic Church to determine my belief. I rely on Scripture. I consider opinions about Scripture but I consider them as opinions.
I am not saying it is impossible that Timothy wrote Hebrews based on Paul's words. I am saying it is very foolishness to declare as a fact that Paul wrote Hebrews. Internal evidence (actually Scripture, not Catholic theologians) lean against a Pauline authorship but that doesn't mean it's impossible.
My point is there is no evidence for a specific authorship.
37818
Well-Known Member
Hebrews js known to have been grouped with Paul's letters.
What mss attribute to be any of the other authors? Or other mss grouping.
Yes, Hebrews was grouped with Paul's letters in a codex. We can also find the Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas. And 1 and 2 Clement are in the Codex Alexandrinus.
It is interesting that it took centuries before Paul was considered to have written Hebrews and the Catholic Church cemented it as "fact" in the minds of so many.
When expressing Biblical fact we need to trust Scripture, not men.
Good point. Hebrews was considered Scripture centuries before people attributed it to Paul, but by claiming Paul as the writer it did secure that the letter remained Scripture. It could have fell off (like 1&2 Clement) had Augustine not insisted Paul was the writer. I wonder if this was a reason.
37818
Well-Known Member
A low view of Holy Scriptures. Actual Holy Scripture was Holy Scripture when it was written. Not sometime later.
2 Peter 1:21, For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
The authorship was known to the original recipients.
I don't think they had a low view of Scripture at all. But if you believe their view of Scripture was so low then why try to use their organization as eviden e Paul wrote Hebrews?
God's Word is infallible, perfect, and complete. Had God wanted to make the writer of Hebrews known them He would have inspired the writer to identify himself as Paul did in his epistles. Why seek evidence for something God chose not to include. The evidence of Hebrews is in divine authorship, not in seeking to find what is not there.
Again, I am not saying it is impossible that Paul wrote Hebrews. I am saying that it is improbable, but more than that that we should trust Scripture as was delivered to us.
The truths are that it is inspirede scripture, and the ultimate author was the Holy Spirit
37818
Well-Known Member
Who thought the Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas and 1 and 2 Clement to be Holy Scripture? And why? And now why are they not?
In 1611 Hebrews was believed to be written by Timothy for Paul.
Last edited:
The Kjv translators were not inspired by the Holy Spirit to know that as being the truth
37818
Well-Known Member
But then neither are none of the modern translations that rightly omit those non-Biblical books.
Let's all now sing the old '60's hit, "Who Wrote the Book of Love?"
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, everyone.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, everyone.
Wasn't Paul. Some suggest Ringo.Let's all now sing the old '60's hit, "Who Wrote the Book of Love?"
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, everyone.
Happy New Year!!!
GodisgraciousR325
Member
Oh yes they did, they put Holy Bible contaning Old and New Testaments. Put Acryophal on headings on every page and the eople who did the trandlatipn of saod text said it was the most undesired work to be done.They put it there for historical and be able to help people understand where Catholic's doctrine, also to rebuke them
You do not need to be ashamed because the King James Version translators put the Apocrapha books right slap between the New and Old Testaments. They did not include them because they are evil. They included them because they thought it helpful. In other words, they included them in the Bible, as Apocraphal books.
The 1611 translations had same amount of inspirations as those who did the Nasb, Esv, Niv, Nkjv, which was non.
Rome needs to have their r\extra non inspired canonical books, as much of their theology cannot be found in the real inspired 66 canon
GodisgraciousR325
Member
Yes
But Catholics treat the apocryphal books as Scripture. "While Augustine was the first significant theologian to argue for their full inclusion in the canon, it was not until the Council of Trent that the Roman Church officially declared the OT Apocrypha to be fully canonical" (The Apocrypha.).