Replies

Jude, your willingness to attack the best evidence with such weak arguments just strengthens my point. You are one of those who attacks the word with man's false controversy.

Um... not that I'm qualified to criticize, but...

...don't you think that's a little harsh, editor?? (and I say that I someone who is impressed with your arguments for the Pauline authorship of Hebrews).

I'll jump in uninvited here and respond to Jude's arguments on my own, if I may.

Argument #1 -- Weak argument.... 2 Peter is a general epistle... "to them that have obtained like precious faith with us," not to the Hebrews. Hebrews might be Pauline, but it is probably not. However, if you look at the passage editor references (2 Peter 3:15-16), Peter speaks of those who "wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction". This implies that Peter is addressing those who would be familiar with "the other scriptures" (Old Testament), which suggests Hebrews and proselytes; by extension, then, "Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you" (Hebrews and proselytes).
Argument #2 -- Heb. 2:3 seems to indicate that the epistle is written by a Christian who had no direct contact with Christ-- something Paul emphasizes that he had in Galatians. Hebrews 2:3 actually speaks of "so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him". It is true that Paul never listened to Jesus' teachings during the earthly Incarnation, and received additional instruction in the Gospel from them that had. So this statement could certainly be true of Paul.

Beyond that, editor-surveyor still receives some points for his arguments that the Paul was closely associated with Timothy (Hebrews 13:23) and was the Apostle sent to Italy (Hebrews 13:24); editor's arguments there remain unanswered and do suggest Pauline authorship for the Epistle to the Hebrews.

JMHO. Thoughts?

best, OP

Arguement for Pauline authorship of Hebrews - the stylistic differences, the main reason for discounting its Pauline authoriship (despite dealing with Pauline topics), can be acounted for by assuming a composition by St. Paul in Aramaic on his own, followed by a very good translation into Greek for distribution in the west. In the main the Jews and Syrians did not speak Greek, and the Greeks did not speak Aramaic. Unlike his letters to the Greek speaking Churches, which he did not write himself, but instead dictated (Romans 16.22, 1 Cor. 16.21, 2 Thess. 3.17, etc.), this letter was written directly by the author.