Theology Club: WHO WROTE HEBREWS ??

[musterion]

2:3 How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him.

I'm pretty much with Lighthouse on this. The writer is looking back to the salvation spoken of by Christ "according to the flesh" (see red above). Paul instructed the exact opposite per his received gospel (2 Cor 5:16).

I also cannot fathom why Paul would choose not to sign this letter, if he in fact wrote it.

Hebrews is written to Jews, using wholly Jewish references, by a clearly saved Jew, but one who was familiar with previously unrevealed aspects of the cross - suggesting he had deep knowledge of Paul's revelations. But that in no way demands Paul himself wrote it.

PS

The writer's hypothetical of whether his readers "have neglected"[the literal Greek] rather than "have rejected" so great salvation is right in line with multiple warnings from the Gospels and elsewhere of the dire threat of believing but not abiding and thereby falling away from the Messianic faith of that day. This is yet another clue to the circumcision orientation of this letter. Christians under grace can shamefully neglect their salvation in Christ; many if not most do. They will be chastised by the Father and will lose rewards at the Bema lest they repent -- but they remain eternally secure in Him. That does not appear to be the case with the Hebrew readers of this letter.

 

[Nick M]

I like my stance on who wrote Hebrews , and it is Paul with OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE !!


DAN P

Hebrews 2

2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him,

And now Paul.

Galatians 1

11 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.

I agree about overwhelming evidence, but it shows Paul did not write it. And I otherwise agree with a great amount of Dan's content.

 

[Tambora]

Hebrews 2

2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him,

And now Paul.

Galatians 1

11 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.

I agree about overwhelming evidence, but it shows Paul did not write it. And I otherwise agree with a great amount of Dan's content.

That a pretty good case against the authorship being Paul.

 

[glorydaz]

The writer's hypothetical of whether his readers "have neglected"[the literal Greek] rather than "have rejected" so great salvation is right in line with multiple warnings from the Gospels and elsewhere of the dire threat of believing but not abiding and thereby falling away from the Messianic faith of that day. This is yet another clue to the circumcision orientation of this letter. Christians under grace can shamefully neglect their salvation in Christ; many if not most do. They will be chastised by the Father and will lose rewards at the Bema lest they repent -- but they remain eternally secure in Him. That does not appear to be the case with the Hebrew readers of this letter.

It seems to me that the Jews must endure to the end, and "might overcome when they are judged", and we see that difference here. What do you guys think of the part where the circumcision are justified by faith and the uncircumcsion through faith?

Romans 3:1-4
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

Romans 3:29-30
Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,​

 

[musterion]

It seems to me that the Jews must endure to the end, and "might overcome when they are judged", and we see that difference here. What do you guys think of the part where the circumcision are justified by faith and the uncircumcsion through faith?

Romans 3:1-4
What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

Romans 3:29-30
Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,​

One standard MAD answer to the issue of faith itself (not the only answer, I'm sure, but the one that comes to my mind first)...and you probably already know it...is that God has ALWAYS required faith, from the beginning. As one writer always put it, "God wants to be believed." [I would say He demands it, and justifiably] Anyway, the issue isn't the requirement of faith but the varied expressions of that faith which God has required throughout human history. That distinction is a critical part of all dispensationalism, though standard dispies tend to be rather sloppy with distinguishing what was required, promised or warned about under one economy with the revealed content of other economies. The result is some people juggling copperheads, others believing they've permanently replaced Israel forever, and still others insisting you can be in Christ one day and the Lake of Fire the next.

As to the difference between "through faith" and "by faith," it would depend on if those are indeed two different words in the Greek. If they are, then there's something there we need to recognize. If they're not, it's a translation error that's easily accommodated. But I don't know which it is and have to go do laundry now and can't look it up.

Sorry if neither is a good answer.

 

[glorydaz]

One standard MAD answer to the issue of faith itself (not the only answer, I'm sure, but the one that comes to my mind first)...and you probably already know it...is that God has ALWAYS required faith, from the beginning. As one writer always put it, "God wants to be believed." [I would say He demands it, and justifiably] Anyway, the issue isn't the requirement of faith but the varied expressions of that faith which God has required throughout human history. That distinction is a critical part of all dispensationalism, though standard dispies tend to be rather sloppy with distinguishing what was required, promised or warned about under one economy with the revealed content of other economies. The result is some people juggling copperheads, others believing they've permanently replaced Israel forever, and still others insisting you can be in Christ one day and the Lake of Fire the next.

As to the difference between "through faith" and "by faith," it would depend on if those are indeed two different words in the Greek. If they are, then there's something there we need to recognize. If they're not, it's a translation error that's easily accommodated. But I don't know which it is and have to go do laundry now and can't look it up.

Sorry if neither is a good answer.

No problem. I appreciate your response. I don't know, myself, but it does seem as though more is required of the Jews than is required of the Gentiles. Those Jews who still believe in God, but have not accepted the righteousness of faith apart from the law. I don't know.

 

[Damascusroad]

Paul wrote it.

 

[intojoy]

WHO WROTE HEBREWS ??

Hi to all , and this will be controvery forever as to who wrote Hebrews .



Many , like myself believe it was Paul , and some believe it was Peter or Apollos an maybe Baranabas , but is PURE spectulation !



#1 , The closing words of this letter are common to all of Paul's letters , " Grace be with you all !! Heb 13:25



#2 , The mention of Timothy in Heb 13:23 !





#3 , Paul was the one that knew all aspects of the Law of Moses and was qualified to write to his brethren , Gal 1:14 !



#4 , Peter said that Paul had written a letter to his people and was considered as SCRIPTURE , 2 Peter 3:15-16 , and if it was not Hebrews , then where is it ??



#5 , Paul did have a ministry to the children of Israel , Acts 9:15 !



#6, Paul wrote that the Law of Moses has been set aside in Heb 9:15 and the only one !



#7 , There are many Pauline expressions that are PARTICULAR to Paul in Hebrews , about 92 of them !



dan p

Cannot be Paul because the writer identifies himself as part of the second class of apostles. Paul was among that first tier category of apostles who were eyewitnesses of the physically resurrected Messiah.


how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will. (Hebrews 2:3, 4 NASB)


Pray for the peace of Jerusalem

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

Hi to all , and this will be controvery forever as to who wrote Hebrews .

Many , like myself believe it was Paul , and some believe it was Peter or Apollos an maybe Baranabas , but is PURE spectulation !

#1 , The closing words of this letter are common to all of Paul's letters , " Grace be with you all !! Heb 13:25

#2 , The mention of Timothy in Heb 13:23 !


#3 , Paul was the one that knew all aspects of the Law of Moses and was qualified to write to his brethren , Gal 1:14 !

#4 , Peter said that Paul had written a letter to his people and was considered as SCRIPTURE , 2 Peter 3:15-16 , and if it was not Hebrews , then where is it ??

#5 , Paul did have a ministry to the children of Israel , Acts 9:15 !

#6, Paul wrote that the Law of Moses has been set aside in Heb 9:15 and the only one !

#7 , There are many Pauline expressions that are PARTICULAR to Paul in Hebrews , about 92 of them !

dan p

Yes, I think you're right. I believe Paul wrote Hebrews but did not put his name in the book because there were many Hebrews who still distrusted him from his days as Saul. The message was more important than credit to the author. I lot of old Bibles attribute the book to Paul, as well as John MacArthur.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

God wrote it!

The first word in Paul's 13 epistles is "Paul......"

The first word in Hebrews is?

 

[intojoy]

Yes, I think you're right. I believe Paul wrote Hebrews but did not put his name in the book because there were many Hebrews who still distrusted him from his days as Saul. The message was more important than credit to the author. I lot of old Bibles attribute the book to Paul, as well as John MacArthur.

The writer identifies himself as a second generation apostle. Is that what Paul was? No. He was an eye witness of the resurrected Christ, he was first generation


Posted from the TOL App!

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

The writer identifies himself as a second generation apostle. Is that what Paul was? No. He was an eye witness of the resurrected Christ, he was first generation


Posted from the TOL App!

I don't believe you can call Paul an eyewitness. His ministry was special and directed at the Gentiles. What scripture are you referring to?

Posted from the TOL App!

 

[intojoy]

I don't believe you can call Paul an eyewitness. His ministry was special and directed at the Gentiles. What scripture are you referring to?

Posted from the TOL App!

I forget. But I was taught that there are two categories of the first century apostles. The first had to have seen the resurrected person of Yeshua. That means all who saw him after he arose are candidates for this first order and everyone else that received this gift were second hand apostles. I'd have to dig thru my mountain of notes (I should) and get scriptural refs. But we could probably screwgle it as well. What the writer says in Hebrews shows he heard the gospel from other apostles. Paul heard it from The Lord personally.


Posted from the TOL App!

 

[Totton Linnet]

The writer identifies himself as a second generation apostle. Is that what Paul was? No. He was an eye witness of the resurrected Christ, he was first generation


Posted from the TOL App!

He wasn't an eyewitness Pip but he was not 2nd generation either....he was one born out of time.

Paul had a different mindset to the writer of Hebrews.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

I forget. But I was taught that there are two categories of the first century apostles. The first had to have seen the resurrected person of Yeshua. That means all who saw him after he arose are candidates for this first order and everyone else that received this gift were second hand apostles. I'd have to dig thru my mountain of notes (I should) and get scriptural refs. But we could probably screwgle it as well. What the writer says in Hebrews shows he heard the gospel from other apostles. Paul heard it from The Lord personally.

Posted from the TOL App!

I really need to see some Biblical references. The word apostle only appears once in Hebrews, I quote below:


<DIR>Hebrews 3:1 -Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession;
Hebrews 3:2 - He was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was in all His house. [HCSB]

</DIR>

 

[intojoy]

I really need to see some Biblical references. The word apostle only appears once in Hebrews, I quote below:
<DIR>Hebrews 3:1 -Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider Jesus, the Apostle and High Priest of our confession;
Hebrews 3:2 - He was faithful to Him who appointed Him, as Moses also was in all His house. [HCSB]
</DIR>

And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:28 NASB)

And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; (Ephesians 4:11, 12 NASB)

I'll look for the notes on what constituted eye witness apostles and secondary apostles, thx for your interest.




Posted from the TOL App!

 

[intojoy]

how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord,



it was confirmed to us by those who heard,


God also testifying with them, both




by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will. (Hebrews 2:3, 4 NASB)

Both Yeshua (first preacher) and the Apostles including Paul

Both were accompanied by signs/miracles


Posted from the TOL App!

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:28 NASB)

I agree with the scripture you quoted, but first, second and third, are used here as numbers in a list.

And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; (Ephesians 4:11, 12 NASB)

No argument here, but it doesn't support your comment.

I'll look for the notes on what constituted eye witness apostles and secondary apostles, thx for your interest.

Posted from the TOL App!

Whenever you find the time. I had not encountered your comment before. Doesn't mean you're wrong.

 

[intojoy]

He wasn't an eyewitness Pip but he was not 2nd generation either....he was one born out of time.



Paul had a different mindset to the writer of Hebrews.

Paul was such an eye witness that he was blinded baby!


Posted from the TOL App!

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

I don't believe you can call Paul an eyewitness.

:noway:

He saw the LORD brighter than the noonday sun.