Introduction

ON THE EPISTLE OF THE HOLY APOSTLE PAUL TO THE HEBREWS

The Epistle of the holy Apostle Paul to the Hebrews differs from the other epistles of this apostle chiefly in that it nowhere names its author — who, in view of other differences in style, was not always unanimously held to be the Apostle Paul.

One of the earliest witnesses of the epistle — St. Clement of Rome (at the end of the first century) — gives us, from his citations, no definite judgment as to whom the Romans considered the author of the epistle. Among later Western Church writers, Tertullian, in citing the epistle, attributes it to Barnabas. Eastern writers are more unanimous and definite than Western ones. Pantaenus, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen not only cite the epistle under the name “the Epistle to the Hebrews” but acknowledge it specifically as a work of the Apostle Paul. Origen confirms this even with a reference to the testimony of tradition. It must be noted, however, that the evident peculiarities of the epistle’s language prompted even Origen to conjecture that, although the ideas of this epistle are entirely Pauline, their expression could have belonged to one of his disciples — either Luke or Clement.

Be that as it may, already in the second century the East was unanimous in acknowledging the epistle as Pauline. The West confirmed this view later (in the mid-fourth century, with the spread of Origen’s writings). And finally, at the Council of Carthage (397 AD), the epistle was definitively acknowledged as an epistle of the Apostle Paul, the fourteenth in number.

What, then, are the features that gave reason to doubt the epistle’s attribution to the Apostle Paul, how can their force be weakened, and what evidence speaks in favor of attributing the epistle to the named apostle?

One of the most apparent features that seems to give strong grounds for doubting the epistle’s attribution to the Apostle Paul is Heb 2:3, where it seems as though someone else is speaking. Attention was also drawn to the method of citing the Old Testament in this epistle, which is somewhat unusual for Paul. Normally he everywhere quotes from the Old Testament according to the LXX translation, but also makes use of the Hebrew text when it is more accurate; whereas in the Epistle to the Hebrews the author uses exclusively the LXX alone, even where that text admits of significant inaccuracies. The very form of citation diverges considerably from Paul’s usual practice. While in other epistles he typically writes: “Scripture says” or “such-and-such a writer,” here the speaker is presented as either God or the Holy Spirit. Finally, the latter epistle also differs from the others in its greater purity of language, more reminiscent of Luke’s Gospel and Acts.

In contrast to all this, it is sufficient to point to several passages in the epistle where the personality of the writer, if not mentioned, is clearly revealed (cf. Heb 13:23 and following), and where individual expressions and views prove to be entirely akin to Paul’s (cf., e.g., Heb 10:30 and Rom 12:19). No doubt about the epistle’s authorship is left by its overall content or by the very spirit of the epistle. As for the circumstance that the apostle, contrary to his custom, nowhere names himself in the epistle, this very fact, finding a fair explanation in itself, only serves to confirm his authorship further. The point is that the apostle needed to reckon with the very hostile feelings of his fellow countrymen to whom his epistle was directed, and therefore deemed it necessary not to mention his name.

The occasion, and in part the time, of writing the epistle are established from Heb 6 and following; Heb 10:26 and following, and other passages. These passages speak of a great danger to faith in the mixing of Christian requirements with Jewish ones, and of the need to establish the completely independent and self-sufficient significance of Christianity apart from Judaism. This danger threatened especially Palestinian Christians of Jewish origin, who could not reconcile themselves to their new position in Christianity and continued, not only by force of habit but also out of conviction, to observe all the Temple rites and Jewish laws, regarding them as essentially important for salvation. In later times, when the Palestinian Church had lost such an influential leader as the Apostle James (died 62 AD), and when disillusionment with the Messianic Kingdom — in which so many sufferings had to be endured, and participation in which was connected with the loss of national identity and the characteristic features of Israel — began to steal into many souls, many abandoned the Christian assemblies and returned to Jewish worship. Others, failing to stand firm in the true faith, fell into a peculiar state of hardness, which later degenerated into the heresies of the Ebionites and Nazarenes. Above all, all of this (approximately around 66 AD, cf. Heb 13:23) must have weighed heavily on the soul of such a zealot as Paul, which is why he writes his epistle to the Palestinians, the purpose of which is clearly indicated in Heb 13:22. It is an exhortation not to abandon faith in Jesus Christ and hope in Him. He is the fulfillment of all that in the Old Testament was only the subject of prefigurations and promises. And if the glory of the New Covenant, which replaced the old one, is still hidden in the darkness of sufferings, this is entirely in keeping with the expectations and spirit of Christianity (Heb 13:13-14) and does not exclude the hope of attaining corresponding greatness and glory in the future through sufferings.

The main thoughts of the epistle: the superiority of the Founder of the Christian faith, as the God-man, over Moses (Heb 1-4); the superiority of the means of enlightenment and salvation given to people through Jesus Christ, as the Divine High Priest seated at the right hand of God the Father (Heb 5-10); and, finally, the superiority of the believers in Christ themselves, endowed with such gracious means for salvation from sin and death and for the closest communion with God, under the guidance of the pastors and teachers of the Church.

Such a grounding and elucidation of the spirit and power of Christianity makes the epistle of the utmost importance and value not only for the Jews, but for all believers of all times and nations, providing the most necessary completion of all the other apostolic epistles, in which the entire system of Christian theology is contained.

The original language of the epistle, according to some, is Hebrew; it was probably translated into Greek by Clement, Bishop of Rome.