Paul didn't write Hebrews

Stan B said:

>>"So, why didn't Paul identify himself. Because as soon as he identified himself, he would have lost most of the Jewish readers."

I don't accept your hypothesis. First, Paul never had a reputation for backing down. Second, it is not as if you could buy his book on Amazon. The only place these books/scrolls could be accessed was within the temple, churches or synagogues. So the ones who would be reading it, were Christians, and Paul was merely explaining the New Covenant contrasted against the Old with which they were well acquainted. He was the only apostle other than Matthew to write in Hebrew, and the Gospel of Mathew was also directed to the Jews.

Click to expand...

Waiting on him said:

Wasn’t there a third epistle written to Corinthians by Paul?

Click to expand...

marks said:

Just compare . . .

Hebrews 2
3 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
4 God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

Galatians 1
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.


The writer of Hebrews received his teaching from those who heard Jesus, Paul received his teaching from Jesus.

Not the same man.

Much love!

Click to expand...

marks said:

Yes, that's why I posted it!



@Enoch111 @Stranger @Ernest T. Bass @GodsGrace

But to me this represents a particular point of interpretation. There appears to be a contradiction of one views Paul as the writer, since Paul makes a point of saying he learned his gospel not from man, and the writer of Hebrews says they got it from someone else who heard it straight from the Lord.

Click to expand...

So then it comes to, if you maintain the view that Paul wrote the book, how you solve that discrepancy. In one case, it's a literary device to let the Jews identify more readily, ie, "Not from Paul!!"

In another case, it's assumed that there is more we're not being told, that is, that the writer actually learned the gospel both ways.

Click to expand...

I think Stranger is saying, it's not the Lord, as in, Jesus teaching the apostles, but it's the LORD promising the patriachs. That would then mean the written Scritpures, then, correct? In which case why not say that?

Click to expand...

Did Paul ascend into the third heaven?

Paul said he wouldn't brag about himself, but that he would brag about this other dude, who went into the third heaven.

What of that?

Much love!

Click to expand...

Stan B said:

Yeah, it sounds reasonable, if just on the basis of common sense.

But there is no need to speculate on the authorship of the Hebrews. It was given the stamp of approval over and over by the early church. But as always, there have been 'scholars' and such, whose only objective has been the discredit Scripture.

Eusebius AD 265 – 340 became Bishop of Caesarea in 313. He is known, not so much as a "Church Father" but as the "Father of Church History." His specialty was separating the true canon of Scripture from all the bogus stuff. He confirms the authorship of Hebrews in his "Ecclesiastical History Chapter III The Epistles of the Apostles." The Epistles of Paul were so well known in the church, that he didn't even bother to name them:

"The Epistles of Paul are 14, all well known and beyond doubt."

The 14 Epistles of Paul were each named a few years later by Athanasius AD367. Similar to Eusebius, He prefaces his list by almost apologizing over tedium of recording them yet once again, something that had been so frequently recorded 'from the beginning':

Athanasius Archbishop of Alexandria Easter/Festal Epistles Letter xxxix

"5. Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John."

Click to expand...

Heart2Soul said:

In my studies of Revelation...whom John wrote....I came across a bible scholar who said that John actually wrote the Epistles....something to consider.

Click to expand...

Enoch111 said:

That is called making an unjustified assumption. All that means is that the other apostles heard Christ as one group. Then later Paul heard the Gospel directly from Jesus, and here's the proof:

But I certify [GUARANTEE] you, brethren, that the Gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the [DIRECT] revelation of Jesus Christ. (Gal 1:11,12)

Click to expand...

Heart2Soul said:

Not claiming it is correct, just sharing what I read from a bible scholar's article.

Click to expand...

Heart2Soul said:

Not claiming it is correct, just sharing what I read from a bible scholar's article.

Click to expand...

Heart2Soul said:

Oh absolutely! I just thought it was something worth mentioning...from what I could gather the scholars are divided as to who wrote what.

Click to expand...

GTW27 said:

And from me, a man of no account, I just went back and read a little, and I heard The Holy Spirit flowing like a river, through Paul the tent maker. Paul was one who saw the race before us.

Click to expand...

brakelite said:

Except for some of the closing remarks, I don't think Paul wrote any of the epistles... He ducted them... And the writer of Hebreway have been of a different class writer than the previous examples.

Click to expand...

Waiting on him said:

Wasn’t there a third epistle written to Corinthians by Paul?

Click to expand...

GodsGrace said:

Mathew copied from him.

Click to expand...

GodsGrace said:

The Holy Spirit flows through all of scripture...
starting at FOUR THOUSAND years ago.

Click to expand...

Enoch111 said:

That's another *religious myth*. Why would Matthew need to copy from Mark if the Holy Spirit was giving him his words by divine inspiration directly?

All the evangelists (Gospel writers) were divinely inspired to write what they wrote INDEPENDENTLY. The first three Gospels are called the *Synoptic Gospels* because they generally run parallel to each other, but there are also significant differences in their content and chronology. And Luke really meant that he had received his Gospel *from above* (Gk anothen) and not as it has been translated "from the very first" (Lk 1:3). The Gospel of John is unique, in that it has a completely different presentation, and includes many teachings not found in the others.

Many Bible scholars have noted that the four Gospels present the four aspects of Christ which are also displayed by the cherubim.

As for the likeness of their faces, they four had the face of a man, and the face of a lion, on the right side: and they four had the face of an ox on the left side; they four also had the face of an eagle. (Ezek 1:10)

Lion's face = Kingship ---> Jesus as King of Israel in Matthew
Ox's face = Servitude----> Jesus as Servant of Jehovah in Mark
Man's face = Humanity---> Jesus as the Son of Man in Luke
Eagle's face = Deity------> Jesus as Son of God in John

Click to expand...

GodsGrace said:

But I have noticed that you're very sensitive to this...I don't really understand why.Can't you accept that these were normal men trying to put their ideas together...trying to remember what they saw and heard?

Click to expand...

GodsGrace said:

I don't know that anyone here is an expert on this...but experts have written on this.
In every epistle that Paul wrote, he introduced himself....
Paul, an Apostle of Jesus...etc.

Hebrews starts with:
God, after He spoke long ago to the Fathers...

I can't remember Paul ever speaking about the angels as in Hebrews 2:5, 9.

Your point about Paul having learned from God and the writer of Hebrews having learned from other men, IMO, is almost a give-away...although we do know that after spending years in the desert, Paul did go to Jerusalem and spoke to the Apostles, for more than one reason I'm sure.


I wonder if they knew about "literary devices" when writing epistles. I tend to think that each writer just wrote plainly from his memories about the time spent with Jesus.

I tend to believe that Paul most probably did not write this book...so for me there is no need to reconcile discrepancies.


I learned that it was Paul who ascended into heaven,,,or had some kind of vision about it anyway --- I doubt he actually went to heaven in bodily form. He was just trying to be humble and maybe wanted to avoid many questions...I don't know, however, how we can be absolutely sure of this.

Click to expand...