Skip to content
The Upper Register

Introduction to Hebrews

Authorship: Anonymous

Section titled “Authorship: Anonymous”

  1. Arguments for Pauline authorship.

    1. Themes and theology of Hebrews sound a lot like Paul.
    2. Ecclesiastical tradition: the Eastern churches affirmed Pauline authorship.
    3. Clement of Alexandria thought Paul wrote it in Hebrew and Luke translated it into Greek.
    4. Paul didn’t identify himself:
      1. Either “on account of his modesty” as an apostle of the Gentiles and not of the Hebrews
      2. Or to avoid stumbling his Jewish audience who were skeptical of Paul as one who set aside the Mosaic Law.
    5. In all Greek manuscripts (as early as P46), Hebrews is included within the collection of Paul’s letters.

  2. Arguments against Pauline authorship.

    1. Absence of sender identification: “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus.”
      1. Paul revealed his identity in Gal and 2 Cor, which were also addressed to churches that included people opposed to Paul’s law-free gospel.
      2. Paul doesn’t seem like the sort of person who would attempt to conceal his identity as an apostle in the face of opposition.
    2. The Greek style is more polished and literary than Paul’s (as Origen recognized).
    3. The author of Hebrews says the gospel was “attested to us by those who heard” the Lord (2:3).
      1. But Paul makes clear that he received the gospel directly from Christ himself, not from men (Gal 1:1, 11-12, 16; 2:6).
      2. It is very difficult to believe that Paul would classify himself alongside those who received it from the original disciples.
    4. Paul never refers to Christ as a “high priest.”
      1. Paul comes very close to it when he says that the exalted Christ “intercedes for us” (Rom 8:34), but the Christological title “high priest” itself is not found in Paul.
      2. Whereas for Heb the identification of Christ as a “high priest” (9x: 2:17; 3:1; 4:14-15; 5:5, 10; 6:20; 7:26-28; 8:1-3; 9:11) is absolutely central to his argument.
      3. If Hebrews is by Paul, how could a theme that is so close to his heart in Hebrews be so neglected in all of his other writings?

  3. However, Heb clearly has some sort of connection with Paul.

    1. Inclusion of Heb in the Pauline letter collection in all Greek manuscripts.
    2. Reference to Timothy (Paul’s co-worker): “You should know that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom I shall see you if he comes soon” (13:23).
    3. The distinctly Pauline flavor of the theology of Heb.
      1. High Christology (1:1-4)
      2. Strong teaching on the limitations and end of the Old Covenant
      3. The superiority of the New Covenant
      4. Righteousness by faith (10:38; 11:7)

  4. Theories of a Pauline connection:

    1. Origen: “If I gave my opinion, I should say that the thoughts are those of the apostle, but the diction and phraseology are those of someone who remembered the apostolic teachings and wrote down at his leisure what had been said by his teacher.”
    2. Recent view: It was an oral synagogue speech by Paul that Luke as a stenographer wrote down and published (Andrew W. Pitts and Joshua F. Walker, “The Authorship of Hebrews: A Further Development in the Luke-Paul Relationship,” in Paul and His Social Relations, ed. Porter & Land [Leiden: Brill, 2013]).
    3. More likely, it was a fresh composition by a disciple of Paul, who drew on Paul’s theology to address a specific audience and situation.

  5. Profile of the author

    1. A member of the Pauline circle (co-worker with Timothy).
    2. Possibly a Hellenistic Jew (or God-fearer) who had become a Christian.
    3. Steeped in the Greek Bible (LXX).
    4. Familiar with Greek-speaking Diaspora Jewish communities of Roman Empire.
    5. Highly educated in Greek literature and rhetoric.
    6. Not an apostle, but a 2nd-generation Christian (2:3).
    7. Suggestions: Priscilla, Barnabas, Apollos (Acts 18:24), Luke.
    8. Origen: “Who wrote the epistle, in truth, God knows.”

Genre

Section titled “Genre”

  1. Traditionally, Hebrews has been viewed as an epistle.

    1. It has a definite community in view (6:10; 10:32-34; 13:3, 7) and was written to address a specific situation.
    2. The title in the Greek manuscripts: “[Epistle of Paul] to the Hebrews.”
    3. It ends like an epistle:
      1. Prayer requested (13:18-19)
      2. Benediction (13:20-21)
      3. “I have written [ἐπέστειλα] briefly to you” (13:22)
      4. News and greetings (13:23-24)

  2. Recent scholarship argues it is a sermon.

    1. It lacks an epistolary opening (sender identification & addressees)
    2. It is called a “word of encouragement” (13:22; cp. Acts 13:15 where Paul’s sermon is called that).

Why not both? It is a sermon sent as an epistle.

Date: AD 65–70

Section titled “Date: AD 65–70”

It must be within the window: AD 60–96:

  1. Can’t be before AD 60 (author is a 2nd gen Christian, after apostles—2:3)
  2. Can’t be after AD 96 (because Heb is quoted in 1 Clement 36)

To narrow it down, we need to inquire about its date relative to the destruction of the temple by the Romans in AD 70.

  1. Arguments for post-destruction date (after AD 70)

    1. No reference to temple, only tabernacle.
    2. High Christology (1:1-3) - not convincing if you believe in early high Christology.

  2. Arguments for pre-destruction date (before AD 70) - this is where I land.

    1. Present tense verbs of priestly sacrifice (8:4; 9:6-9; 10:11; 13:10).
    2. If temple were already destroyed, temple sacrifice would not have been a temptation to draw them away from Christ.
    3. If temple were already destroyed, why would Heb need to say, “We have an altar” (13:10).
    4. Argument from silence: Heb would surely have appealed to the destruction of temple if that argument were available to him.
    5. References to persecution (10:32-34; 12:3-4; 13:3) make the years (AD 65-70) just before the Jewish War attractive.

Ethnicity of the Audience

Section titled “Ethnicity of the Audience”

There are two main possibilities:

  1. Gentile Christians

    1. This is a minority view among scholars.
    2. First argued in 19th cent.
    3. Turning away from living God (3:12)
    4. The elementary principles (6:1)

  2. Jewish Christians

    1. This is the majority view among scholars (and my view as well)
    2. Title: “To the Hebrews” (Πρὸς Ἑβραίους)
    3. No mention of circumcision as an issue (contrast Galatians).
    4. “Dead works” (6:1; 9:14) = sacrifices, ceremonial washings, etc.
    5. Crucifying Christ again (6:6) implies they were Jews.

Purpose and Occasion

Section titled “Purpose and Occasion”

  1. They were Jews who had come to faith in Christ (6:4-5).

  2. They were on the verge of apostasy by returning to a non-Messianic Judaism that looked to the Jerusalem temple and its priesthood and sacrifices.

    1. Danger of “drifting away” (2:1)
    2. Danger of not “holding fast to the end” (3:6, 14; 6:11)
    3. Danger of “falling away” from Christ (3:12; 6:6)
    4. Comparison with apostasy under the old covenant: “How much worse punishment?” (2:2-3; 10:28-29; 12:25)
    5. Under new covenant, disobedience = unbelief (3:18-19; 4:11)
    6. Call to endurance (10:36; 12:1)

  3. What was the attraction of temple sacrifice?

    1. Authority of the Scriptures (hence the author’s emphasis on God’s speaking in Christ as more authoritative than his former speech).
    2. A divinely appointed and tangible way of dealing with consciousness of guilt.
    3. A visible and earthly cult, in contrast with Christianity’s spiritual cult that rests on pure faith (“conviction of things not seen,” 11:1).

  4. Why did they feel pressure to revert to non-Messianic Judaism?

    1. The Romans recognized Judaism as legitimate religion, but Christianity was illegal and persecuted (beginning in AD 64).
    2. Social pressure from both pagan and Jewish community.
      1. Reproach (ὀνειδισμός) (10:33; 11:26; 13:13)
      2. Shame (αἰσχύνη) (12:2)
      3. Hostility (ἀντιλογία) (12:3)

Literary Characteristics of Hebrews

Section titled “Literary Characteristics of Hebrews”

  1. Most literary Greek style in NT

    1. Beautiful opening period (1:1-4), rivaled only by Luke 1:1-4.
    2. Alliteration (1:1)
    3. Paronomasia (5:8; 13:14)
    4. Hyperbaton (separation of words that are syntactically connected, displaying intricate craftsmanship)—occurs 66x (S. M. Baugh, “Hyperbaton and Greek Literary Style in Hebrews,” Novum Testamentum 59.2 [2017]: 194-213)

  2. Rhetorical techniques

    1. A fortiori arguments: “how much more” (9:14; 10:29).
    2. Lists (e.g., 11:32-38; 12:22-24).
    3. The hortatory subjunctive: “let us” (e.g., 10:22-24).
    4. Rhetorical questions (e.g., 1:5, 13; 2:2-3).

  3. Rich use of OT

    1. Exclusive use of LXX
    2. OT quoted ~38 times
    3. Extended expositions of key OT passages
      1. Psalm 2:7 (ch. 1)
      2. Psalm 8:4-6 (ch. 2)
      3. Psalm 95:7-11 (chs. 3-4)
      4. Psalm 110:4 (chs. 5-7)
      5. Jeremiah 31:31-34 (chs. 8-10)
      6. Habakkuk 2:3-4 (chs. 10-11)
      7. Proverbs 3:11-12 (ch. 12)

Overall Redemptive-Historical Perspective

Section titled “Overall Redemptive-Historical Perspective”

The main thesis of Hebrews is the contrast between the old covenant and the new, which is a transition from the earthly to the heavenly, from the transitory to the permanent. The opening verses (Heb 1:1-4) provide the basic redemptive-historical outlook of the whole epistle:

God speaking in the Old Covenant God speaking in the New Covenant
Long ago In these last days
At many times and in many ways [Definitively, once for all]
To the fathers (patriarchs) To us
Through the prophets In his Son

  1. The author of Hebrews fleshes this out by looking at five aspects of the transition from the old to the new:

    1. Chs. 3-4: The Land of Canaan → eternal inheritance
    2. Chs. 5-7: Levitical Priests → High priest after order of Melchizedek
    3. Ch. 8: Old Covenant → New Covenant
    4. Ch. 9: Man-made tabernacle → Heaven itself
    5. Ch. 10: Repeated sacrifices → One sacrifice for all time

  2. The earthly cultic system (land, priesthood, covenant, sanctuary, sacrifices) is viewed as a holistic entity that was temporary and provisional, pointing ahead to the heavenly cultic system which supersedes it. Interestingly, the author thinks that the outer and inner sanctuaries of the earthly tabernacle function as a “symbol” (parabolē) of the earthly and heavenly sanctuaries respectively (Heb 9:8-9).

    The earthly cultic system The heavenly cultic system
    Type and shadow Reality and fulfillment
    Temporary and passing away Eternal
    Provisional Final
    Made nothing perfect Grants eschatological perfection
    Could not deal with sin Deals with sin
    Merely cleanses the flesh Cleanses the conscience
    Visible, grasped by sight Invisible, grasped by faith

  3. The linchpin of everything is the critical role of the priesthood. The priests of the Old Covenant were the “mediators” of the old covenant, “for on the basis of the Levitical priesthood the people received the law” (7:11).

    1. This implies that the covenant was a covenant of works. The people could not be placed under the covenant of works without a priesthood to offer sacrifices for the sins of the people.
    2. But the problem is twofold:
      1. the priests themselves were sinful and mortal,
      2. and the sacrifices they offered were incapable of dealing with sin.
    3. Hence the need for a priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek.
      1. Christ has both a superior person (not a mere man but the Son of God who took on flesh)
      2. and a superior sacrifice (not the blood of bulls and goats but the sacrifice of himself).
      3. Accordingly, Christ is the “surety” (7:22) and “mediator” (8:6; 9:15) of a better covenant.

  4. Hebrews 11 brilliantly shows that the heavenly cultic system is not only grasped by faith, but that it was even grasped by faith, in an anticipatory manner, by the Old Covenant saints themselves! If the Christians to whom the epistle is addressed are tempted to revert to Judaism, they have two reasons not to:

    1. The heavenly cultic system is better than the earthly one and is grasped only by faith.
    2. Even the Old Covenant believers knew that and looked ahead to the heavenly system by that same faith.