AN INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF HEBREWS
I. AUTHORSHIP:1 It is not possible to be certain about who
authored the Book of Hebrews:
A. External Evidence: The external evidence offers some
support for Pauline authorship, but it is not unanimous
nor definitive:
1. Marcion Canon (c. AD 140): It was excluded from
Marcion's Canon, but he would not have liked the
continuity between the OT and the NT
2. Muratorian Canon (c. 170): It was omitted from
the Muratorian Canon, but this may be due to the
corrupt state of the of the text of that Canon;
but it was not included with the Pauline epistles
3. In The East: In the East the epistle was regarded
as Pauline:
a. Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 150-215)2
b. Origen (c. AD 185-254)3
c. Chester Beatty Papyrus (c. AD 200): In the
Chester Beatty papyrus (P46) places the
letter among the Pauline Epistles after
Romans4
4. In The West: The epistle was generally considered
to be Pauline
a. Tertullian: Tertullian (c. AD 150-220)
attributed it to Barnabas5
b. The Roman Church: The Roman Church disputed
Pauline authorship, and this led others to
reject the Epistle (Muratorian Canon, Roman
Canon; African Canon)
c. Hilary: Hilary considered Hebrews to be
canonical, but not Pauline
d. The Western Church: The later Western Church
was influenced by the Eastern Church in that
although they were not convinced of Pauline
authorship, they compromised and proclaimed
Pauline authorship in a unanimous way until
the time of the Reformation6
e. Reformation: In the Reformation Erasmus,
Luther, and Calvin all questioned Pauline
authorship of Hebrews7
B. Internal Evidence: Although there are several things
which can be known about the author of Hebrews, and
several have been suggested as possible candidates for
author of this book, it is not possible to draw any
definitive conclusion about who the author of Hebrews
is
1. What Is Known: Several things are known about the
author of Hebrews, but these are not enough to
identify this person:
a. The book makes no direct reference to the
author
b. The author was probably a Jew:
1) The author was very familiar with the
Old Testament Scriptures
2) The author was familiar with the
practices of First Century Jews
3) The author may have been familiar with
the hermeneutics of the first century
(midrash and pesher)
2. Various Suggestions: Many have been suggested as
possible authors of the book of Hebrews, but it is
not possible to be definitive in one's conclusion:
a. Paul: While many of the arguments could be
weighed either way, it seems unlikely that
Paul was the writer of Hebrews in view of
Hebrews 2:3-4:8
1) Anonymity: Nowhere in the letter does
the writer identify himself as Paul;
this is very unlikely in view of Paul's
other letters. Apostolic authority is
not mentioned either
2) Difference in Style: The Greek style is
not typical of Pauline abruptness and
digressions; it is more classical9
3) Absence of Pauline Spiritual Experience:
The author does not place his experience
into the letter as Paul is noted for
doing in his writings
4) Theological Similarities and
Differences:
a) There are theological similarities
in this letter with Paul's other
writings:
(1) Faith is an important topic
(2) The use of Habakkuk 2:4 is
only by Paul elsewhere in the
New Testament10
b) There are theological differences11
in this letter with Paul's other
writings:
(1) The exaltation of Christ
rather than resurrection is
emphasized
(2) The redemptive aspects of
Christ's work rather than the
sanctifying aspects of
Christ's work are emphasized
(3) The high priesthood of Christ
is nowhere else emphasized by
Paul12
5) Historical Difference: Unlike Paul who
emphasizes that he did not receive the
gospel from men (Gal. 1--2), this writer
seems to have received the gospel from
others13
6) Outside of Apostolic Circle: The writer
of Hebrews seems to place himself
outside of the Apostolic circle14
b. Barnabas:15 While there is some early
support for Barnabas as the author of this
epistle and some corresponding evidence in
favor of Barnabas, the evidence is not
determinative:
1) Early Support: Other than the
suggestion of Paul, Barnabas is the only
other suggestion which has early
ecclesiastical support, but this is
primarily restricted to the Western
Church
2) A Levite: Some consider the fact that
Barnabas was a Levite (Acts 4:36) to be
support for his having written so much
in the letter which concerns temple
ritual16
3) Son of Encouragement: It is possible
that a literary motif is being offered
with the correlation that Barnabas was
called the "Son of Consolation" (Acts
4:36) and the author notes that this
work is a work of "consolation" (Heb.
13:22)17
4) Hellenistic Characteristic: Because of
the Hellenistic character of the letter,
some question whether Barnabas with his
connections with Jerusalem and Cyprus
would have been able to write with such
an "Alexandrian slant;" but this may be
saying too much since Hellenism had
penetrated Cyprus by this time
5) Hebrews 2:3: Some question whether
Barnabas would have described his
introduction to the gospel they way
which he did in Hebrews 2:3; but this is
not determinative since 2:3 need not
describe a second generation, and the
Acts narrative does not specifically
state how Barnabas learned about the
gospel
6) Pauline Association: Some of the
Pauline concepts and phrases could be
explained on the basis of Barnabas'
close relationship to Paul (Acts 11; 13-
-14)
c. Luke: Although there are some early
ascriptions which connect Luke with this book
and literary affinities which may show a
connection, it is not possible to be certain
of Lucan authorship in view of the present
evidence:
1) Early Ascriptions: Some in Origen's day
considered Luke to be the author of the
epistle; Clement of Alexandria thought
that Luke translated the epistle from
Paul's Hebrew18
2) Literary Affinities: Some have
considered Hebrews to have literary
affinities with Luke's writing (e.g.,
Acts and especially Stephen's Speech in
Acts 7),19 however, it may also be that
the author was aware of Luke's writings
and was influenced by them
3) Nationality: Some have suggested that
Luke was a Jew, however, this is not
possible to know for sure; he may well
have been a Gentile who was familiar
with Jewish thought through his
relationship with the Apostle Paul
d. Clement: The parallels with Clement's
epistle have led to the notion that he was
either author or translator of the work; but
the differences outweigh the similarities;
also, the similarities may be accounted for
by Clement being aware of this epistle
e. Silvanus: Silvanus was a member of the
Pauline circle20and was associated with the
writing of 1 Peter21 which has some
similarities with Hebrews; but the
differences outweigh the similarities
f. Apollos: The positive evidence can not be
argued against, but it is not determinative,
and the negative evidence consists of mostly
arguments from silence, but they bare
consideration; this not an impossible
hypothesis:
1) Luther has been very influential in
affecting the opinion of others
concerning this view
2) Support for Apollos as author of
Hebrews:22
a) Apollos' close acquaintance with
Paul, thus accounting for the
Pauline influences
b) His connection with Alexandria,
which would account for the
Alexandrian coloring
c) His knowledge of the Scriptures,
which would explain the biblical
content of the argument and the use
of the LXX version
d) His eloquence, which well suits the
oratorical form of the Epistle
e) His contacts with Timothy
f) His considerable influence in
various churches
3) Weakness for Apollos as author of
Hebrews:
a) There is no early tradition to
support this theory
b) There is no evidence of literary
activity on his part
g. Philip: Although Ramsay considered this
letter to have been written by Philip the
deacon to commend Paulinism to the Jewish
Christians in Jerusalem, there is no certain
evidence, this does not explain the
Hellenistic approach in the letter as well as
why there is not a greater emphasis upon
Pauline thought in the letter
h. Priscilla: Harnack considered Priscilla to
have been the author of the epistle23 and
supported it in view of its anonymity since a
woman would not have been regarded will as an
authority source, her association with Paul,
her instruction of Apollos, the inclusion of
women in Hebrews 11, as well as other
supposed signs of femininity, but these
points are not determinative24
i. Jude: Dubarle25 considered Jude to be the
author because of the similarities of
vocabulary, syntax, stylistic processes,
mentality and culture between Hebrews and the
Epistle of Jude, but these may be due to the
two author's common Jewish Christianity
II. DATE OF THE BOOK: Sometime Between AD 68 and 95 (probably
AD 68-69)26
A. Hebrews is known and cited by Clement of Rome in 1
Clement (AD 95)27
B. Hebrews bares no mention of the destruction of the
Jewish Temple in Jerusalem by Titus in AD 7028
C. The writer of Hebrews seems to regard the sacrificial
system of the Old Testament to still be in operation29
D. Hebrews was written during the lifetime of Timothy whom
the author knew30
III. RECIPIENTS OF THE BOOK: Although the recipients were most
probably Jewish, it is not possible to be absolutely certain
about which particular community of Jews the letter was
written; Perhaps it was to those in the Palestine area
A. Jewish: All understand that this letter was probably
written to Jews;31the question is what kind of Jews
were they and where did they live.
B. Support for a Particular Community:32
1. Hellenistic Jews: Some believe that it was sent
to Hellenistic Jew because all of the quotations
came from the LXX and related texts, but this is
not a strong argument because the LXX was in
common use at this time throughout the Greek
speaking world--including Palestine
2. North Africa or Cyprus:33
a. The Alexandrian coloring has suggested an
Alexandrian destination, but the church at
Alexandria never laid claim to the letter;
rather, they assumed that it was addressed to
the Hebrew people of Palestine by Paul
b. It has been suggested that the people lived
in North Africa or in Cyprus, people who had
an ascetic lifestyle similar to the Qumran
community's lifestyle. Evidence from Qumran
suggests that the Qumran community had a
highly developed doctrine of angels which
would fit in very nicely with the thought of
the author of Hebrews34
3. Rome:
a. The letter seems to have been first known in
Rome (since it was probably there for a while
before Clement cited it in his Corinthian
Epistle in AD 95
b. The closing Salutation in 13:24 ( oij ajpoV
jItaliva") describes those who are away from
Italy sending greetings home rather than
those from Italy (in say Palestine) sending
greetings to others; yet, it could go either
way
c. Timothy (13:24) was known to the Roman
Christians (Col. 1:1; Philemon 1--both of
which are written from Rome)
d. The description of the leaders in 13:7, 17,
24 is similar to that in 1 Clement 1:3
e. The generosity of the readers in 6:10ff;
10:32ff would match that which was true of
the Romans
f. The reference to meats in 13:9 my be similar
to Romans 14 (hard to be sure)
g. The spoilation of goods referred to in 10:32
could be explained by either Claudius' edict
in AD 59, or Nero's persecution (which would
probably be too late)
h. But 2:3 would be difficult, the particular
troubles in 10:32 are difficult to pin point,
and there is no mention of Gentiles (yet this
could have been to a group of Jews in Rome)35
4. Palestine:
a. This would be in the area of Palestine and
possibly Jerusalem in particular
b. This is supported by the existence of the
temple
c. The sense that the crisis is imminent thereby
suggesting the coming siege of Jerusalem
(1:2; 3:13; 10:25; 12:27)
d. The former suffering (10:32; 12:4) would
relate to the persecution of the Jerusalem
Jews in the Acts account (Acts 5; 7; 12)
e. There is no mention of the Gentile-Jewish
controversy
f. The objections to this position (the way the
author addressing them in 2:3; the
discrepancy between generosity of 6:10;
10:34; 13:6 and the poverty of Jerusalem, the
use of the LXX, the statement that the church
had not yet suffered martyrdom in 12:4) are
removed if the destination was Palestine
rather than Jerusalem in particular
C. Spiritual Condition of the Community--Two Main Views:
1. A Mixed Audience: Some maintain that the
recipients were Jews who were a mixed group.
There were true believers and there were
"professors"--those who said that they were really
believers, but were not. The warning sections in
this view would be to those who were not really
believers in that a lapse back into Judaism would
show that they really did not have faith in Jesus
Christ (2:3; 3:12-14; 4:1; 10:25, 26, 29).
2. Believers: Some maintain that these are believers
who are being tempted to go back under the
umbrella of Judaism. The various warning sections
would then be to refrain from putting themselves
back under the bondage of Judaism (3:1; 4:6; 5:12;
6:4; 10:19, 32; 12:7; 13:1, 20-22)
IV. THEOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTIONS:
A. The Incarnation
B. Jesus' Substitutionary Death
C. Jesus' Priesthood
D. The Relationship between the New Covenant and the Old
Covenant
E. The Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New
Testament
F. The Life of Faith
V. PURPOSES OF THE BOOK:36
A. Positive: To provide a "word of exhortation"
(encouragement) to his readers to go on in maturity in
their faith in Christ (13:22)
B. Negative: To warn his readers against the dangers of
lapsing back into Judaism37
C. To instruct his readers about the superiority of
Christ38
D. To instruct his readers through a letter (or better a
sermon or homily)39
___________________________
1 While this kind of background information is helpful, it's
absence does not impede the interpreter's ability to understand
the meaning of the Book of Hebrews since meaning resides in the
words of the text in their context and not behind the text in the
author's mind.
2 Eusebius, HE, 6.14.
3 Although Origen considered the contents to be Pauline, he
was not actually certain about who penned the book. He thought
that one of Paul's pupils might have written the book, yet
mentions that some thought that Clement of Rome, or Luke might
have been the author. His famous quote is significant, "But who
wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly" (Guthrie, NTI, p.
686).
4 Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, second
edition, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1968), pp. 37-38.
Guthrie writes, "IN the majority of early Greek manuscripts it is
placed after 2 Thessalonians and before the personal letters of
Paul (NTI, p. 686).
5 De pudicitia, 20.
6 Guthrie, NTI, p. 687.
7 Luther relegated Hebrews to the end of his NT with the
other books which he deemed questionable (e.g. after 3 John with
James, Jude and Revelation). His own theory was that Apollos
wrote it.
8 Nevertheless, Childs may have made an important canonical
observation when he writes concerning the conclusion of Hebrews
that, "The ending does not propose a direct link with Paul by
attributing to him the authorship. Rather, it offers an indirect
relationship through Timothy with whom the unknown writer shares
a common ministry." Later he writes, "The effect of the
canonical ending, which has greatly influenced the usual
positioning of the letter within the New Testament either before
the Pastorals or after Philemon, is not to propose an easy
harmonization with Paul, but to establish a context in which the
different approaches to the great theological issues, shared by
these authors, are viewed together as comprising the truth of the
one gospel" (The New Testament as Canon, p. 417-418).
9 There is less of a burning passion and more of a literary
control in the style of the letter. This is a weak and
subjective argument, however. It is also possible that Paul
employed an emanuencis.
10 See Galatians 3:11 and Romans 1:17.
11 Note that these are not disagreements but differences
with Paul's other writings.
12 Nevertheless, there is no necessary contradiction
implied.
13 See Hebrews 2:3, "It was declared at first by the Lord,
and it was attested to us by those who heard him, ...."
14 Ibid.
15 See Zane Hodges, "Hebrews" in BKC, pp. 777-778 for a
fuller discussion of this option
16 Guthrie makes a very important point, however, when he
writes, "Nevertheless this detail must not be overstressed since
the author's main obsession seems to be the biblical cultus
rather than contemporary ritual procedure" (NTI, p. 691).
17 The common work is paraklhvsew".
18 Guthrie, NTI, p. 603.
19 "both contain reviews of Hebrew history; both stress the
call of Abraham and mention Abraham's non-possession of the land;
both describe the tabernacle as divinely ordered; and in both the
tradition that the law was mediated by angels finds a place"
(Ibid.).
20 Acts 15:22, 27, 32, 40.
21 1 Peter 5:12 reads, "By Silvanus, a faithful brother as I
regard him, I have written briefly to you, exhorting and
declaring that this is the true grace of God;" (RSV).
Nevertheless, it is difficult to be sure of the precise part
which Silvanus played in 1 Peter.
22 The following comes directly from Guthrie, NTI, p. 695.
23 ZNTW 1 (1900): 16-41.
24 See a fuller discussion in Guthrie, NTI, pp. 696-697.
25 Revue Biblique, XLVIII (1939): 506-529.
26 For a more detailed discussion involving several options
see Guthrie who concludes, "In view of all the data available, it
would seem reasonable to regard this Epistle as having been sent
either just before the fall of Jerusalem, if Jerusalem was the
destination, or just before the Neronic persecutions if it was
sent to Rome" (NTI, p. 718).
27 Hebrews 11:7 (cf. 1 Clement 9:4; 11:1); Hebrews 1:3f (cf.
1 Clement 36:1f). Therefore, it must have been written at least
by this date.
28 This would have supported his thesis that the "old
cultus" has passed away, and something better has been
inaugurated.
29 See 8:4, 13; 9:6-9; 10:1-3.
30 "Take notice that our brother Timothy has been released,
with whom, if he comes soon, I shall see you" 13:23. We know
that Timothy was still alive when Paul was about to be martyred
in AD 68 (cf. 2 Timothy 4:9ff), but we do not know the later
history of Timothy.
Hebrews 2:3 does not need to be understood to be referring
to a second generation.
31 Note that some of them were inclined to remain in Judaism
(13:13), and that they were well acquainted with the Old
Testament and with rituals (cf. 7:11; 9:15; 13:13).
Not only this, but the title "PROS EBRIAOUS" speaks of the
book's destination even though it may be late in nature (e.g.,
second to early third Century). It may have been added as part of
the canonical process of joining the letter to the larger corpus.
Further, as Childs suggests, "The title does not therefore refer
to any specific historical referent, whether aramaic- or Greek-
speaking Jews, but to those of the old covenant who form the
major subject-matter of the epistle in contrast to those of the
new covenant. In other words, the term is a theological
construct in which an historical anachronism functions as a
theological referent" (Brevard S. Childs, The New Testament as
Canon: An Introduction (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), p.
414; For another discussion of this topic see Guthrie, NTI, pp.
698-703).
32 The reason one moves toward a particular community is
because the book writes to a people who seem to have a definite
history (2:3; 6:9-10; 10:32-34; 11:4; 13:7), a definite link with
the writer (13:18, 19, 23) and are a section of a larger
community (5:12; 10:25). See Guthrie, NTI, pp. 698-700 for a
more detailed discussion.
33 See Zane Hodges, "Hebrews" in BKC, pp. 779-780 for a
fuller discussion of this option.
34 See Herb Bateman's ThD dissertation soon to be placed in
Turpin Library at DTS.
35 Guthrie says it best when he writes, "All that can safely
be claimed, however, is that we know that it was used in Rome in
the first century, but insufficient literature is preserved from
other districts to enable us to pronounce more confidently on any
alternative theory" (NTI, pp. 714-715).
36 See Guthrie for some other proposed purposes of the book
of Hebrews (NTI, pp. 704-710).
37 It seems that a central issue revolves around the
atonement. The Jewish system would say that Christ is not the
atonement, whereas the Christian system would say that Christ is
the atonement. Therefore, going back to the Jewish system is to
say that Christ is not the atonement but that the "lamb" is your
atonement.
38 The term "better" is used thirteen times in the book.
Also, Childs is correct when he writes, "The canonical
significance of the interchange between doctrinal and paraenetic
sections is in reminding the reader that the christological
discussions of the letter have an immediate effect on the
believer" (The New Testament as Canon, p. 416).
39 Note that even though there is a conclusion and there are
personal allusions, there is no introductory greeting and address
as is the case with the form of letters in the NT. It has been
suggested that this letter was originally a spoken sermon which
was then written down (see Guthrie, NTI, pp. 725-727; Childs, The
New Testament as Canon, p. 415).
©1996 David Malick, http://www.bible.org. Anyone is free to reproduce this
material and distribute it, but it may not be sold under any circumstances
whatsoever without the author's consent.