THESIS STATEMENT
Hebrews represents one of the New Testament books that lack self attestation author thus its canonicity is disputed. The absentia of Hebrews authorship has forced several scholars and theologians to carry out enormous research to reveal who might have written the book.
INTRODUCTION
Studies indicate that Interest in the letter to the Hebrews as dramatically grown in recent years, with special sessions at major international conferences and canonical annual meetings demarcating the trend. However to the great realization, Hebrews represents one of the New Testament books that lack self attestation author thus its canonicity is disputed. The absentia of Hebrews authorship has forced several scholars and theologians to carry out enormous research to reveal who might have written Hebrews. King James Version normally references Hebrews as, “The Epistle of Paul the Apostle of Hebrews.” However, not limited to Paul, Luke, Philip, Apollos, Prisca and Barnabas, research proposals have been made to determine the authorship of the book Hebrews.
The majority of important scholars believe that Hebrews is mainly compost of Paul speech delivered in Diaspora synagogue that was documented by Luke during their mission and later published by Luke to the independent Jewish Christian churches. Certainly, a well established tradition that dominated the historiography stenograph and Greco-Roman rhetorical of narrative, compilation and independent speech circulation may give some light on the topic. As evidenced by persuasion of parallel practices by Early Christians particularly Luke and Mark, the book of Hebrews and Mark share enormous linguistic affinities. This paper aims to explore the scholarship evidences and proposals that examine the single level and multilevel theories of the authorship of Hebrews. The different theories will be exhaustively evaluated to shade light and provide clear evidence on the exact authorship of the Hebrews.
Context Surrounding the Authorship of Hebrew
Black in his book “Who wrote Hebrews” proposes theorized linguistic data and suggest that perhaps this be Paul amanuensis. This idea remains underdeveloped and non-robust enough to compel any serious scholar due to its weakness in recognizing that Hebrews is an epistles book. In distinction from Blacks perspective, theologians argue that Hebrews is a representation of Pauline speech that was published and circulated by Luke, Probably upon his work as a stenographer. Brown a renowned theological scholar, in his studies, advanced the theory that Apostle Paul authored the book while Luke published and edited its final contents. Probably, to some extend using these evidences, it important to relatively believe that the book is Pauline speech published by Luke and circulated among the early Christians.
Assuming the validity of Luke collaborating with Paul to the Authorship of Hebrews, the book of acts provides variant evidences for Luke’s companion to Paul based on the evidences of “we” passages. This communication data provides a valid possibility of Luke incorporating we-source in the book of Hebrews. In the book of acts it is showed clearly that Luke joined Paul at Philippi (Acts 16:10-17), he went with Paul on his return visit to Philippi (Acts 20:5-15) and set out with Paul to Rome after Paul’s two years of imprisonment. This companionship made Paul refers Luke as “a fellow worker” (Phil 24). The book of Colossians 4: 14-16, Paul collaborates with the physician Luke to disseminate his letter to the Colossian church. The book of acts adjourns by narrating the conditions upon its composition. These events provide enough time when Luke could have worked with Paul to collect the materials for publication of the Acts and Hebrews.
The validity of Paul authorship mainly depends on his collaboration with Luke. In (2 Tim 4; 11) Paul says, “Only Luke is with me” this indicates pretty companionship. These evidences in the book of second Timothy and the different strands of linguistic and literacy works in the book of Acts may have generated enough literature to be documented in the Pastoral letters. The scenario described mainly postulate the possibility of posthumous collaborative means of publishing the book of Hebrews. In circumstances where Luke and Paul collaborated to co-author the Pastorals, then, there is pretty chance of their close companionship allowed them to exchange the literary materials and certainly provide the context of Hebrews. Luke involvement in the Letters distributions provides enough evidences on his collaboration with Paul. The nature of this theory of collaboration between Luke and Paul to contribute to the publication of Hebrews is explored further using the various evidences. The evidences show in the context of Greco-Roman antiquity and the early church on the possibility of the parallel literacy activity.
Speech Circulation in Greco-Roman Historiography
Theological interpreters of the book of Acts seem to form a consensus on the literal location with reference to the genres of the ancient world. Most of the staging of the book, grants the possibility of its author to have worked in other publications. The book has enormous evidences on the ancient publications. Therefore, it is vital to address the reliability of Luke’s speech. In historian’s context, Thucydides (c. 460-395 BC), provides the opportunity of documentation of the speeches in the ancient times. Thucydides acknowledges the validity of the employing the written aid to speech materials to publish them. The system of recording speeches is in the first century is concurrently supported by Seneca’s remarks of (c AD 63-64). Especially, when he says, “Quid verborum notas, quibus quamvis citata excipitur oratio et celeritatem linguae manus sequitur” meaning “signs for words, by which speech is recorded, however quick and the hand follows the speed of the speech.” Seneca (Apol, 9.2) mentions one of the Janus speeches that were too long for the stenographer to record. The Seneca study shows clearly the importance of stenographer in recording the speeches delivered in special occasions. Titus eloquent speeches and skill of stenography allowed him to participate in the professional art as a sport (Suetonius, Titus. 3). Quintilian (c. AD 35-200), in his classic work on the education of an orator further support the practice of speech recording in the ancient times as the “fine fancy of dictation.” The art of stenography was carried out by many Isocrates students such as Ephorus, Xenophon, and Theopomus. The application of stenographic by several copyists provides enough support to Luke possibility act as a shorthand man writer to the speeches of Paul.
The Speech Circulation in the Early Christianity
Research studies shows that, the certainty of Hebrews emerging as Luke’s efforts to record and publish Pauline speech is considered as a special case due to available resources and eye witnesses recorded in the book of (2 Tim 4:11). As stipulated by the entire Rabbanic literary traditions such as Mishna, the canonical materials of Luke Acts and Marks gospel might have used the art of transmission of speech. The early Christian gospels adopted different formats as some adopted narrative structure while others are the collection of independent sayings. The dominant method used to transmit notes was mainly through the eye witness’s testimony and memory but the role of scribes in recording and transmitting these notes cannot be ignored.
There is enormous substantive data to reveal the collaboration in the speech circulation about Luke and Paul’s case in regard to the Hebrew authorship. Papias in his literature work considers Mark as (ἑρµηνεύτης) meaning a great interpreter of Peter. Mark’s main role was to act as ascribe and prepare the speech content. The social relationships between Paul/ Luke and Peter/Mark have a higher percentage of similarity to warrant attention. Both sets of relationships have the basic structure of an apostle and a disciple. Luke apparently used the various opportunities they had with Paul to record collections of Paul’s discourses into his own narrative. Inspired by Mark as indicated in (Col 4:14) while in Rome, Luke compiled Paul’s speech materials inform of a running narrative to copy how Mark had treated Peter’s speech to release the book of Hebrews.
Social Settings for Hebrews and Paul’s Speeches
Scholars in analyzing the historical context in Luke’s Pauline speeches and the authorship mark that it vital to highlight the agenda of discussion with critical evaluation on some two important observations. First, assuming the early dates, Luke and Mark are the only devoted Christian stenographers. Second, in the context of New Testament Hebrews is the only document to be an independently published speech. The contemporary assumption that Hebrews is a sermon of a distinct kind provides avenues to help in unpacking the question of its authorship to greater extend. The sermon nature in the Hebrews context indicates that the audience must have heard the content in a loud voice (Heb 2:5; 6:9; 11:32; 13:22). Some scholars have also refuted the contextual features and the absence of the epistolary formulas of a formal letter. Meanwhile, based on the salutation referred at the end of Hebrews, the book may be marked as a personal letter or a “hybrid” documenting both a letter and a sermon. At present, such features seem odd literary context. However, it is important to note that speeches were published as letters in the first century.
Aragone in his Torah analysis demonstrates convincingly that Hellenistic Judaism does not prove the current view of synagogue sermon during Paul/Luke period but restrict the synagogue activities to prayer, discussions and scripture readings. He bases his argument in identifying Paul’s speech as a word of encouragement (λόγοςπαρακλήσεως) in (Acts 13:15). It is crucial to agree with Aragone on his study as Hebrews and Paul’s speech are the only documents identified as a means of encouragement. Further suggestions indicate that Hebrews has parallel literacy origin due to the similar social settings and historical contexts provided by Luke and Paul collaboration. Though there is a lack of concrete evidence on strategic and epistolary data on the use of scripture in Judaism, it is important to note the document as a representation of sermons by the first century Christians in Diaspora. The terminal section of the Hebrews (13:22-25) provides substantial evidences for Luke-Paul relationship to writing a book. This trend marks the onset of the need to examine the internal and external evidences to set the coordinated authorship.
Evidences for Pauline or Paul /Luke Origin for Hebrews
Both the internal and external evidences are available to substantiate Paul’s involvement in the authorship of the book of Hebrews. External reviews will receive a higher response to relate documentation to Paul production since historians, stenographers and scribes have accredited the Authorship.
External Evidence
The Chester Beatty Papyrus one of the most significant external evidences indicates an early Pauline reception of Hebrews within the canon of Pauline letters. The prominent location of the book of Hebrews between Romans and Corinthians suggest Hebrews as a Pauline’s work. Further, it is important to note the parallel partner used to mark the titles of the letters. For instance, Romans the title ΠΡΟΣΡΩΜΑΙΟΨΣ while Hebrews correspondingly uses the label ΠΡΟΣΕΒΡΑΙΨΣ. This uniformity critically associate Hebrews to the rest of other publications believed to have been written by Paul. The remains of primary sources such as Origen contribute extensively of Hebrews as Pauline’s work. Origen cites the documents (Cels 3-52; 7-29; Princ. 1; 2-33-5; 27-7). Clement denotes that “the blessed presbyter” to represent Paul writing the book of Hebrews but out of respect for Christ left his name unwritten. Eusebius in his literal work refers to Paul’s fourteen epistles as “undisputed works of Paul.”
In the context of Paul/Luke collaboration, it is important to note that Luke had the greater interest in the recording Pauline speeches as documented by the available twelve speeches. He records these speeches at the sea voyage in Diaspora. At the end of the second century, Clement theorizes that the book of Hebrews was published by Paul but later translated by Luke in Greek. This argument is due to the element of both characters writing in the two languages. It is important to note that there are substantive evidences to support Hebrews as Paul’s work than Luke in the external context.
Internal Evidences
Among all other suspected Hebrews authors, Paul enjoys substantive internal evidences to qualify as the true authorship of the book of Hebrews. It is evidently clear that no other person in the early church had the mandate of producing the composition such as the epistles produced by Paul. There is a fair bit of information regarding the ability of other proposed authors but out of all Paul appears to be the refined candidate for the epistle work. Paul had well education standards and had visited the Diaspora Judaism and minister in the synagogue as suggested by Lane. The book of Hebrews also reflects similarity of Paul Christological emphasis through the mechanism of employing the parallel citations. In both Colossians and Hebrews, Christ dominates and acts as the basis of Paul’s creative power. These two books resemble one another as they onset with Jesus as the creator and adjourns with His sovereignty. The book of Hebrews 11:17 states that (τῆςκατὰπίστινδικαιοσύνης) righteousness comes by faith an idea that is observed to be Paul’s central focus in most of his books notably in Romans $:1-12. As noted both the Christian traditional materials and theological phrases provides enough evidences on Possibility of Paul publishing the book of Hebrews.
In the context of Paul/Luke collaboration in authorship of Hebrews, Luke’s linguistic style and literary works would have dominated. Strikingly, there is no stylistic correlation between Hebrews and Luke and only the linguistic affinity that creates the bond. There is a substantive lexical similarity between Luke-Acts and Hebrews. Together with the various recorded works of Paul by Luke it is possible to ascertain that the two collaborated to publish the book of Hebrews.
Possible Objection of Paul Authorship to the Book of Hebrews
Most of the current scholarship objects the strict Pauline authorship to the book of Hebrews thus making the dissertation unbearable to sustain in the minds of many. Guthrie argues that out of all Paul’s epistles none has been refined as the book of Hebrews. This objection is mainly based on the stylistic evidence and vocabulary use. Macrae comments that Luke was a gentle Christian who would not have afforded to write. In the book of (Hebrews 2:3) it is possible to refute Paul as the author of Hebrews, as in Gal 1:11, Paul defines his apostleship as a gift from God. This idea shows that Paul may have been merely acting as a character among the believers. Paul also fails to indicate his name in the book of Hebrews thus causing the weakness of his authorship. Certainty of Paul failure to include his name must have been due to the xenophobia characteristics that were created by most of the Jewish during the period. Despite all these objections, there is substantive evidence to qualify Paul as the ultimate author of the book of Hebrews.
Suggested Alternative Authors of the Book of Hebrews
Priscilla
Some scholars such as professor Macrae have suggested that Priscilla and Aquila be the true authors of Hebrews. These were gospel teachers who guided Apollo to Christianity. They had some connection with certain small Christian community in Rome in Hebrews the stylistic method of vocabulary interchange of “we” and “I” suggest the possibility of Priscilla’s work. It is important to recognize the limited position of women in the early church in order to refute the idea.
Barnabas
Tertullian in the early third century suggests that Barnabas have authored the book of Hebrews. This was due to his companionship with Paul in his missions during the early years.
Philip
Much has been made by scholars to prove that Philip is the main author of Hebrews. The main reason for this argument is due to availability of Philip as the most prominent Christian after the martyrdom of Stephen thus he could have taken the opportunity to scribe that book of Hebrews.
Apollo
This suggestion was put forward by Martin Luther. Luther based his evidences on the claim that Apollo’s was well versed with the scriptures and his eloquence as recommended in the book of Acts 18:24-28; 19:1Titus 3:13). This view continues to attract support from different researchers.
Conclusion
The research carried fails to provide total evidence on the true authorship of the book of Hebrews but to greater extend prove that the book mainly comprises of Paul’s speech recorded and published by Luke. This is because, not limited to Paul, Luke, Philip, Apollos, Prisca and Barnabas, research proposals have been made to determine the authorship of the book Hebrews but no clear evidence. Nonetheless, Paul makes the most probable identity of the authorship of this book However, it is important to note that it is unnecessary to make conclusive remarks regarding the human authorship of the book of Hebrews. Due to the controversies surrounding the subject, it is important to conclude that He is only supreme God who knows who wrote the book. For every scripture is inspired by God, whoever wrote the book of Hebrews must have been a great instrument used by God under His total authority to mankind. Our God is supreme, supernatural, and all knowing of every single scripture provided in the bible.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aragone, Joan. "Author Sheds Light on Biblical Question." Oakland Tribune, Jun 03, 2005, http://search.proquest.com/docview/352004104?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014)
"Arts & Humanities." Library Journal 137, no. 6 (Apr 01, 2012): 77-n/a, http://search.proquest.com/docview/940870401?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014)
Barram, Michael. "The Face of New Testament Studies: A Survey of Recent Research." The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 67, no. 3 (07, 2005): 549-551, http://search.proquest.com/docview/220260330?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Bateman, Herbert W. IV, general editor. Four Views on the Warning Passages of Hebrews. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2007. ISBN: 978-0-8254-2132-7.
Bateman,Herbert W.,,IV. "Letters to the Church: A Survey of Hebrews and the General Epistles." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 55, no. 4 (12, 2012): 871-873, http://search.proquest.com/docview/1326701339?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Carty, Jarrett A. "Martin Luther's Political Interpretation of the Song of Songs." The Review of Politics 73, no. 3 (summer, 2011): 449-467, http://search.proquest.com/docview/899290871?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Cohn, Robert L. "Hebrews between Cultures: Group Portraits and National Literature." Journal of Biblical Literature 120, no. 4 (Winter, 2001): 739-741, http://search.proquest.com/docview/214613002?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Cockerill, Gareth Lee. The Epistle to the Hebrews. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2012. ISBN: 978- 0-8028-2492-9.
George, Sim Johnston. "The Battle of the Book." Wall Street Journal, Mar 02, 2005, Eastern edition, http://search.proquest.com/docview/398929708?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Goldberg, Louis. "Interpreting the Epistle to the Hebrews / Hebrews." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43, no. 1 (03, 2000): 157, http://search.proquest.com/docview/211136594?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Guthrie, George. Hebrews: The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998. ISBN: 978-0-310-49390-7.
Guthrie, George H. "Lukan Authorship of Hebrews." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 54, no. 4 (12, 2011): 858-860, http://search.proquest.com/docview/1001337010?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Harnack, A., “Probabilia über die Adresse und den Verfasser des Hebräerbriefes,” ZNW1 (1900): 16–41;
Hoppin, Ruth. 1997. Priscilla's letter: finding the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. Fort Bragg, Calif: Lost Coast Press. http://www.worldcat.org/title/priscillas-letter-finding-the-author-of-the-epistle-to-the-hebrews/oclc/167250908 (Accessed on April 23 2014) !-194
Kruger, Michael J. "The Date and Content of P. Antinoopolis 12 (0232)." New Testament Studies 58, no. 2 (04, 2012): 254-271, http://search.proquest.com/docview/926571411?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Lane, William L. Hebrews: A Call to Commitment. Regent College Publishing, 2004. ISBN: 978-1-57383-2953.
Long, D. S. Remythologizing Theology: Divine Action, Passion, and Authorship. The Christian Century, Aug 10, 2010. 39, http://search.proquest.com/docview/816710907?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Macrae, Allan A. The Ups and Downs of Higher Criticism. Christianity Today (Pre-1986), Oct 10, 1980. 32, http://search.proquest.com/docview/200646761?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014).
Outlaw, W. Stanley. 2005. The book of Hebrews. Nashville, Tenn: Randall House Publications. http://www.worldcat.org/title/book-of-hebrews/oclc/71210039 (accessed April 23, 2014) 1-389
Rothschild, Clare K. 2009. Hebrews as pseudepigraphon: the history and significance of the Pauline attribution of Hebrews. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. http://www.worldcat.org/title/hebrews-as-pseudepigraphon-the-history-and-significance-of-the-pauline-attribution-of-hebrews/oclc/315998013 (accessed April 23, 2014)
Significant New Reprints. Christianity Today (Pre-1986), Aug 08, 1980. 33, http://search.proquest.com/docview/200561391?accountid=1611 (accessed April 13, 2014)
