WIXLIB

Introductionin that context. This does not in any way diminish his apostleship that he argued for in Galatians, such argument for hisapostleship to the Gentiles obviously muted in this correspondence to Jewish Christians.The argument of differing style, grammar and vocabularyis not all that conclusive either, especially since this epistlewas being written to any entirely different audience and withan entirely different purpose than any of Paul's other epistles.Many of the vocabulary differences, where Paul employswords not used in other writings (hapax logomena), are in thecontext of his contrasting Jesus with Jewish history and theology, of which he was obviously quite knowledgeable andwould not have been so apt to use in writing to Gentile congregations. The stylistic differences of the Greek text wereexplained by Clement of Alexandria (see above) as due toLuke's translation from Hebrew to Greek.Having considered the objections to Pauline authorship, itis incumbent upon us to now present the evidence that existsthat points to Paul as the most likely author of this letter.The papyrus fragment identified as P46 is the oldest extantmanuscript of the Pauline epistles. This Greek manuscriptfrom Alexandria in Egypt is dated around A.D. 200, and thereare no earlier available manuscripts of Paul's epistles. Byacceptable criteria of textual criticism, the oldest manuscripts,i.e., those closest to the date of the original writing, must begiven greatest import or weight in textual considerations. SinceP46, the earliest manuscript containing the Pauline corpus ofliterature, includes the Epistle to the Hebrews immediately following Paul's Epistle to the Romans and attributes authorshipof the epistle to the Hebrews to Paul, this ascription must begranted a predominating weight of evidence in the critical consideration of authorship.We have already noted that the eight volume Hypotypos ofClement of Alexandria, written c. A.D. 200, clearly indicatedthat Paul was the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, giving4

Introductionexplanation of the absence of his name in the epistle andexplanation of the variation in grammatical style of the Greektext (see quotation from Eusebius above).Origen (185-253), in his Commentary on the Gospel ofJohn, wrote that "the Apostle Paul says in the Epistle to theHebrews: 'At the end of the days He spoke to us in His Son'.”(Heb. 1:2).2 Origen clearly attributes Pauline authorship to theEpistle to the Hebrews, from which he quotes.The early Alexandrian scholars of the Eastern Church consistently regarded Paul as the author of this epistle. The scholars of the Western Church in Rome were more skeptical ofPauline authorship until Jerome (c. 340-420) and Augustine(396-430) supported the thesis of Paul's authorship. From theSixth Synod of Carthage (419) until modern times, the RomanCatholic Church affirmed Pauline authorship of the Epistle ofthe Hebrews. The Protestant reformers, on the other hand,revived the questioning of Paul's authorship, with MartinLuther the first to propose Apollos as the author and JohnCalvin speculating that Clement of Rome or Luke may havebeen the author. Scholastic speculations of authorship of thisepistle have abounded since the Reformation, often with arrogant unwillingness to accept early tradition or to counter prevailing skepticism of scholarship.As additional evidence it should be noted that the authormentions Timothy (13:23), who was Paul's closest colleague inministry, mentioned often in other Pauline epistles (Rom.16:21; II Cor. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; 2;19; Col. 1:1; I Thess. 1:1; 3:2,6;Philemon 1:1). The author appears to have previously visitedthe group of people to whom he was writing, and hoped torevisit them (13:19,23), consistent with the fact that Paul hadvisited the church in Jerusalem on several occasions (Acts21:11-31; Rom. 15:25; Gal. 1:18). The mention of the "saintsof Italy" (13:24) would be consistent with Paul's imprisonmentin Rome, and his desire to send greetings on behalf of the5

IntroductionItalian Christians to the Jewish-Christian recipients of this letter.The evidence is certainly not sufficient to dismiss or denyPaul as the most likely author of this epistle to the Hebrews. Infact, we must be honest enough to admit that the preponderance of the evidence leads to Pauline authorship. All other proposed authors of this epistle (Silas, Philip, Mark, Priscilla, etc.)are merely speculative assignments, "shots in the dark" to suggest another name other than Paul. The name of Apollos wasnot even suggested until the 16th century by Martin Luther.There is no way to compare the literary criteria of grammar,vocabulary and style with other writings of these speculativelyproposed authors for many of them have no other literature tocompare with. What a convenient way to preclude Paulineauthorship and preempt having to deal with the grammaticalissues by assigning authorship to unpublished persons.Though one must "swim against the tide" of several centuries of skeptical academic scholarship in the textual criticismof Protestant biblical studies, the evidence is quite sufficient toassert that the Apostle Paul was the most likely author of thisEpistle to the Hebrews.RecipientsThe text does not indicate who the first readers were, againleaving us with an anonymity of original recipients. So, whatinternal and external evidence can be presented to make anassignment of destination?Based upon the abundance of references to Jewish religionand the old covenant, particularly the Levitical priesthood andtemple practices, this document has been referred to as "theEpistle to the Hebrews," at least since the latter part of the second century AD. It is reasonable to assume that the originalreaders were Christians from a Jewish background, eventhough the quotations from the Old Testament seem to be from6

Introductionthe Greek translation of the Septuagint (LXX), which would beconsistent with Paul's bilingual knowledge of the OldTestament and his frequent utilization of the LXX amongGentiles.It appears that the author was addressing a particular community of Christians with whom he was personally acquainted.He was aware of their having endured persecution (10:32,33;12:4), as well as their present situation (5:12; 6:9; 13:17), andintended to revisit them (13:19,23). The author and the readerswere mutually acquainted with Timothy (13:23).The mention of "Italy" (13:24) in the closing comments ofthe epistle has caused some to conclude that the recipientswere Jewish Christians residing in Rome, who were beinggreeted by fellow Italians living in the location from whencethis epistle was written. That same reference can be interpretedto mean that the location of origination was Italy, however,and that the author is sending greetings to the readers from theItalian Christians where he is located. Although other destinations such as Alexandria, Caeserea, Ephesus, Corinth, andAntioch have been suggested, the most likely location of theresidence of the original readers is Jerusalem.Who else would have had such attachment to Jewish history and theology, such close ties with temple worship and itssacrifices, such pressure to relapse to Judaic religion, than theHebrew saints in Jerusalem? Consider also that in subsequentChristian history no church claimed that this letter had beenwritten to them, a practice of all the other churches whosought to make a "claim to fame" as the recipients of an apostolic letter from Paul. The church at Rome did not claim thisletter. The churches at Alexandria, Ephesus, Corinth orAntioch did not claim this letter. No church claimed to be therecipients of this letter in the history of the early church. Theexplanation for this phenomenon is simple: within a few yearsafter this epistle was written the church at Jerusalem ceased toexist. Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 Palestine was devas7

Introductiontated and its inhabitants decimated. There was no church inJerusalem to lay claim to being the recipients of this epistleafter A.D. 70 This serves as an important historical evidence tothe Jerusalem church having been the likely recipients of thisletter.It is most reasonable to assume that Paul was imprisonedin Rome in the mid-60s of the first century (as we know fromLuke's account in the Acts of the Apostles 28:16-31), and hehad a good social and spiritual perspective of what was goingon in the Roman persecutions of Christians under EmperorNero (who died in A.D. 68), as well as the Roman attitudestoward the Palestinian Jews. He also knew the attitudes of thePalestinian Jews with their intense nationalist patriotism, theirreligious absolutism, their racist superiority, and he could foresee that a violent war was about to erupt in Palestine betweenthe Romans and the Jews.The Christian Jews in Palestine had lost their leaders(13:7), and Paul, though he knew he was the Apostle to theGentiles (Acts 9:15; Rom. 1:5; Gal. 1:16; 2:7), never lost hisheart for his Jewish kinsmen (Rom. 9:3). It is likely that hedecided to write this letter to encourage (13:22) the JewishChristians in Jerusalem to be confident in their endurance(10:35,36) by emphasizing the superiority of Jesus over allreligion. The Palestinian Christians were being pressured torevert to Judaism, to join the patriotic cause of militaristicdefense against the Roman empire. Christianity did not seemto be going anywhere except among the Gentiles, and eventhen Paul was on death-row in Rome. Some of the Christianswere not even assembling together anymore (10:25), werebecoming casual about sin (10:26; 12:10-16), and were in danger of apostasizing (6:4-6; 10:26-31).Paul writes to encourage these Palestinian Christians not totake the easy way out and revert to religion again, in particularJudaism, with its religious practices and nationalistic patriotism. He explained that the old covenant of God's working with8

Introductionand through the Jews, was obsolete and would soon disappearin destruction (8:13) – as it soon did in A.D. 70 The oldcovenant was only intended to pre-figure and set-up the newcovenant of all that God intended to do in His Son, JesusChrist. Jesus is the fulfillment of all the old covenant picturesand types, the fulfillment of all God's intents and promises (IICor. 1:20) for His people. "Don't go back to religion," Paul issaying. "Go outside the camp" (13:13), repudiate Judaism, perhaps even consider leaving Jerusalem and Palestine (as manyof them did, and survived the Roman slaughter of 70 A.D.). Toreject Christ and go back to Judaic religion (any religion) isfatal and final, Paul indicates (10:29-31). Paul was telling thePalestinian Christians that there was a polarity of either/or,either Christ or Judaism, but you cannot have both. Like oiland water, Christianity and religion do not mix!J. Barmby explains thatwhen the Epistle to the Hebrews was written, the time had come for acomplete and final severance from the ancient order. For now the predicted judgment was impending on Jerusalem, the temple was about tobe destroyed forever, the whole sacrificial system connected therewithto cease, and the nation to be scattered through the world without ahome in Palestine. Full time was it now for Christ's followers fully toperceive that from the old dispensation, never more than provisional,the glory was passed away; to come entirely out of the once holy butnow doomed city; to lean no longer on the tottering fabric of the temple, lest their very faith should be shattered in its downfall.3If, as the evidence suggests, Paul wrote this epistle to thechurch in Jerusalem which was undergoing persecution (notonly by the Romans, but even more by the Palestinian Jews cf. 10:32-36), then this epistle was one of the last, if not thelast, that Paul wrote. Why is this important? Because if theEpistle to the Galatians was the first of Paul's extant epistles,and the Epistle to the Hebrews was the last, then we canobserve the total consistency of Paul's thinking throughout hisministry. Galatians and Hebrews are two of the clearest New9

IntroductionTestament epistles exposing the radical uniqueness ofChristianity as set against the old covenant and Judaic religion.All of Paul's other writings must then be interpreted in thecontext of Galatians and Hebrews, as they form the alpha andomega of the Pauline corpus, serving as the "bookends" ofPauline theology.Date of WritingThere is also no direct indication of the date of writing inthe text of this epistle. Most scholars have concluded that itwas written prior to the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 sincethere is no reference to that catastrophic historical event, andone would certainly expect such had it been written toChristian readers of Jewish background after that event. Thewriter's repeated references to Jewish rituals using presenttense verbs (7:8; 9:6-13; 13:10,11) also seems to indicate adate when such practices were still being performed in thetemple at Jerusalem prior to its destruction. The only other referent point for dating this document is that Clement of Romewas apparently acquainted with this epistle by approximatelyA.D. 95.It is quite likely that Emperor Nero's "urban renewal project" had just occurred in Rome, when in A.D. 64 Nero hadapparently arranged to burn a large section of Rome in order toclear the way for his building campaign which would memorialize him in its lasting grandeur. "Nero fiddled while Romeburned" was the scuttlebutt that prevailed at the time, and thephrase remains as a lasting indictment to that imperial crime.The Christians, regarded as but a sect of the Jews at the time,became Nero's scapegoat of blame for setting the fire, ignitingan incendiary wave of suspicion and persecution against theChristians, as well as the Jews.Paul, under house arrest in Rome, might well haveobserved the glow of the flames and smelled the smoke from10

Introductionthe fire. Hearing that the Christians had been blamed for setting the fire, Paul may have "seen the handwriting on thewall,” so to speak, and realized that the days ahead would bedifficult times for Christians and Jews. Paul was also wellaware of the growing sentiment of resentment against Rome inPalestine, with the feverish swell of nationalistic patriotismbeing incited by the Zealot party within Judaism, advocatingtheir alleged God-given right as the "chosen people" of God tooperate as a sovereign nation in the line of David within thePalestinian land that they regarded as their "promised land."But Paul may have had a much better perspective of the mightand power of the Roman army than the Palestinian peopleshad in their blind fervor for self-rule. He may have had graveconcerns of the outcome if the Roman military were to moveinto Palestine to put down an insurrection of revolt againstRome by the Jewish nationalists. Aware of attitudes both inRome and Palestine, Paul may have decided that this was atimely opportunity to encourage his Christian brothers inJerusalem by writing an epistle to the Church there, encouraging them to remain faithful to Jesus Christ and not to succumbto the political and religious influences that were beingbrought to bear upon them at that time.The best conclusion, based on the evidence, seems to indicate that this letter was written by Paul from Rome to theHebrew Christians in Jerusalem in the middle 60s of the firstcentury, perhaps in A.D. 64 or 65 just prior to Paul's likelyexecution at the hands of the Romans.Interpretive ConsiderationsBe forewarned that the Epistle to the Hebrews containswhat is perhaps the most radical message in the NewTestament. It may upset the applecart of your religious understanding. No other book in the New Testament so categoricallyasserts that God's arrangement with men in the Old Testament11

Introductionis no longer valid, making that point by declaring that Jesus isbetter than every feature of the old covenant. To drive thepoint home the readers are warned that if they revert to theJudaic religious practices of their past, having participated inthe new covenant realities of Jesus Christ, they will forfeit allopportunity to participate in the eternal realities of Jesus Christagain.With at least eighty-six direct references to the OldTestament within this letter, and with constant attention drawnto the Jewish people and their religion, it is important to consider the correlation of this document to the Old Testament.Some have indicated that a thorough understanding of the OldTestament is essential to understanding the Epistle to theHebrews. Though it is true that an understanding of the historical background and ritualistic practices of the old covenantand the Hebrew peoples provides a valuable context for interpreting this document, it is perhaps even more important torealize that a thorough understanding of the Epistle to theHebrews is essential to a proper understanding of the OldTestament from a Christian perspective. If the "Old Testamentis the New Testament concealed, and the New Testament is theOld Testament revealed," as has often been explained as thebasis for Christian hermeneutics, then the revealing of thegospel, especially in the book of Hebrews, should serve as thestarting-point to consider how the gospel was concealed in theclues of the prefiguring of the Old Testament. The failure tointerpret the Old Testament from this perspective has led tomuch confusion and misemphasis in Christian teaching, allowing the Old Testament to serve as the priority literature even inthe lives of new covenant Christians. When this happensChristianity is perverted into religious forms of ChristianizedJudaism, which is the very thing that this epistle warns againstand condemns. The Epistle to the Hebrews is the best antidoteto such religious perversion, serving as the necessary commentary on the Old Testament, and interpreting the history, wor12

Introductionship and prophecy of the Old Testament as it points in itsentirety to Jesus Christ.Clyde F. Whitehead explains,The Hebrews epistle deals with most of the important things that wereassociated with the old dispensation. The writer's objective is to showthat the Mosaic law has been replaced by something that is far 'better.'4J. Barmby, writing in the Pulpit Commentary, comments,its main purport is to show, from the Old Testament Scriptures themselves, that the Mosaic dispensation was from the first only preparatory for and prophetic of a higher one to come which was entirely tosupersede it, and that Christ had come as the one only true High Priestfor all mankind, the true fulfilment of all ancient ritual and prophecy,the satisfaction of all human needs, to renounce whom would be torenounce salvation.5The Epistle to the Hebrews is pivotal

CHRISTOCENTRIC COMMENTARY SERIES A COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS JESUS– Better Than Everything James A. Fowler PUBLI