Did he? Paul's authorship of Hebrews is doubtful. Did Paul mention this elsewhere?
Sure:
2 Cor 5:21 : God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
FWIW, Peter (1 Peter 2:21-22) and John (1 John 3:5) also confirm. But I know we were talking about Paul.
I am going to go out on a limb and give you my opinion. I do not think that Paul knew everything about Christianity that we do today.
Well, I would say that Paul didn't know everything that we THINK about Christianity today (including Protestants). However, if I did not have assurance and was offered a last-second chance to trade my faith for Paul's before facing Judgment, I would do it. :)
It is very unlikely, for example, that Paul's theology regarding the Trinity was largely undeveloped and took the Church many years to understand what had been revealed to the Church.
Does "unlikely" = "likely"? If so, then because the Trinity is such a core and basic concept for us, I can't believe Paul didn't essentially get it. For example, Paul mentions them as all being distinct:
2 Cor 13:14 : May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.
While Paul obviously acknowledges the deity of the Father, he also does of the Son:
1 Tim 3:16 : And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. KJV
And finally, we have this:
Isa 40:13-14 : 13 Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or being his counsellor hath taught him? 14 With whom took he counsel, and who instructed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and shewed to him the way of understanding? KJV
Ps 139:7-8 : 7 Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? 8 If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there. (Spirit is omnipresent)
1 Cor 2:10-11 : 10 but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
Of course the OT quotes weren't from Paul, but he certainly knew of them and believed them. I understand that 1 Cor 2 COULD be used as evidence that he didn't fully get it, but I'm still convinced he understood the Trinity.
I will say the same regarding Paul's thought on Mary. It is unlikely that Paul had considered that Mary was the archtype for the Church - pure and spotless (as he writes in Ephesians). It is Paul who ALSO writes about the "New Adam". Naturally, he didn't appear to had plumbed the depths of discovery that Mary would have been the "New Eve".
I fully agree here.
What we DO know is that Christianity very soon after Paul DID realize that Mary was something more than in incubator for the Christ - which is how Protestants seem to "honor" Mary... This was a result of prayerful meditation of the Scriptures and the Apostolic teachings given to the successors of the Apostles.
I have a very hard time believing that there are men today who understand God better than Paul did. Paul's mentor was Jesus Himself, one on one. Who can top that? Did Jesus keep secrets from Paul, etc.? I doubt it. Besides you appear to be freely admitting here that the later Church ADDED to what even the Apostles taught and understood. OOPS! :) So much for "always and everywhere", not to mention the specific scriptural prohibition against this.
And, Protestants do not see Mary as only an incubator. We honor her for her great faith and devotion to God. It's just that we also honor others for the same thing. That only diminishes Mary if she truly was above all other humans. We don't think she was. In this theater, Christ mentions John the Baptist, not Mary.
The New Testament leaves no doubt that the Apostles were really not sure Who Jesus was or what His real mission entailed. "So when they met together, they asked him, 'Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?'" [Act 1:6]
However, Jesus made His mission very clear: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." [Mat 15:24]
Paul believed otherwise (because Matthew's Gospel wasn't written yet). He was convinced that gospels were intended for the Gentiles.
In fact, Paul had his own mission: to preach his 'own gospel' [Rom 2:16, 16:25], and 'our gospel' [2 Corinthians 4:3], declaring that he proclaimed fully the gospel of Christ [Rom 15:19] (wouldn't that make the work of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John superfluous?!), admitting that it was always his ambition [Romans 15:20], yet more than half of his life he either knew nothing of Christ or persecuated His followers with impunity! I guess it depends what you mean by 'always.'
When it comes to Jesus, Paul considers Him the "Son of God," but not the same as God. That is clear from numerous verses, some of which are selected here:
Paul also emphatically maintains that God [sic] raised Jesus.*
*This is later completely rejected by the Church as the Nicene Creed (325 AD) states "he suffered, and the third day he rose [not God raised Him!] [sic] again (was there more than one resurrection?!!!)"
This is echoed in equally numerous examples throughout Acts (and in 1 Peter), not surprisingly, but never in the Gospels:
Other non-trinitarian statemens incluse these examples:
The Church clearly distinguishes between the co-essential co-equality of Hypostases, being divine and eternal One simple, individisible God, and God's Hypostatic revelation to mankind in the Divine Economy of our salvation.
Neither Paul nor any other Apostle mentions anything even close. Rather, one of the Gospels suggests that even Christ believed He was inferior to the Father: "for the Father is greater than I." [John 14:28].
And when it comes to knowing, the Father stands supreme: "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." [Mat 24:36]
If anything, one can see why Doceticts and Gnostics had a field day reading the New Testament.
Why? I thought you were "once saved, always saved"... How can you "just barely be saved"? Either you are or you aren't, in your scheme.
If so, then because the Trinity is such a core and basic concept for us, I can't believe Paul didn't essentially get it. For example, Paul mentions them as all being distinct:
Yes, for US it is core. For the Apostles and Paul, I do not believe that the Trinity was a core concern. This developed only later as the Church meditated on what was given. IF Paul and the Apostles were clear on things concerning the Trinity, there wouldn't have been so many heresies on the subject - heresies that continued for 500 years. Note, there was no heresies on the Eucharist or Apostolic succession because "everyone" knew about it and was taught it. The Trinity, in my opinion, was not taught in the fullness of detail that we have today - or even 325 AD. Thus, Nicea to Chalcedon concentrated so heavily on WHO Jesus Christ was and what His relationship was to the Father and the Spirit.
I have a very hard time believing that there are men today who understand God better than Paul did. Paul's mentor was Jesus Himself, one on one.
You seem to forget that God is quite capable of acting even TODAY in our world. As such, God can enlighten men in the history of the Church. God CONTINUES to gradually reveal more about Himself through the one-time "tradition" given by Christ to the Apostles. Paul HIMSELF shows a development of thought on various subjects, to include the time of the second coming of Christ. We note in his writings that his ideas on justification also develop over time. Paul is no different than any other person who has been given revelation from God. It is not ALL INCLUSIVE. Apparently, Paul, like everyone else, learns about God through the same school that everyone else learns - through the school of obedience and humility and prayer. Paul, like everyone else, had to THINK and REFLECT on God's Word.
Did Jesus keep secrets from Paul, etc.? I doubt it.
Did Jesus keep secrets from Mary? Yet, the Scriptures tell us that Mary ALSO contemplated what happened to her in her heart - reflecting on these matters for 30 years to the cross. Again, I do not believe that God has revealed Himself fully to ANYONE. His ways are to lead man to reflect on Him through our lives. It is not God's intent to merely write the Catechism or whatever into our logical brains. He desires we experience Him in life - DAILY. Thus, our ideas of God develop as we mature in Christ.
But surely you knew that, if you say you are in Christ...
Besides you appear to be freely admitting here that the later Church ADDED to what even the Apostles taught and understood. OOPS! :) So much for "always and everywhere", not to mention the specific scriptural prohibition against this.
I am saying our UNDERSTANDING increases. If I give you a math book at the beginning of a college semester of calculus, do you understand it all on day one??? Again, I thought you were beyond such mindless mantras repeated by other of my separated brothers...
And, Protestants do not see Mary as only an incubator. We honor her for her great faith and devotion to God.
I apologize, but after what I have read on Free Republic over the last few years, I find that as BS. You do not honor her one bit. She has been dishonored continuously here. IF Jesus really IS fully human, I can imagine what He must think about all these Protestants who "honor" her with their incessant attacks that strive to make her as just another person, rather than one who has been blessed above all other women.
If I'd know any better, I'd think some Protestants consider her as merely a utilitarian tool that God HAD to use to save man while following the "script"...
Regards