SUBSIDIARY NOTE ON EXERCITATION IL BY THD EDITOR,
Tun progress of discussion on the interesting question in Biblical literature with which the preceding Exercitation is occupied, would form matter of a very long historical ex- cursion. It must suffice for our purpose to indicate its principal outlines; referring, for our authorities and sources of information, to the introductory dissertations of Hallet, Tholuck, and Stuart, together with Davidson’s ‘‘ Introduction to the New Tes- tament,”’ and Forster’s work on “The Apostolical Authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews.”
There are three leading opinions entertained in regard to the authorship of the Epistle :—T. Some ascribe it to other authors than Paul; II. Some ascribe it directly and exclusively to Paul ; III. Some ascribe it to Paul in concert or conjunction with an- other author, and this other author is hela to be,—1. according to some, Apollos; and 2. according to others, Luke.
I. In the first class six different names are mentioned as the authors of the Epistle : —1. Crument of Rome, in the judgment of Erasmus and Patrick Young; 2. Terrun- LIAN, according to Sixtus Senensis; 3. Barnabas, according to Tertullian, Schmidt, Cameron, Twesten, Ullman, Wieseler; 4. Luxs, according to Origen, §. Crell, Grotius,
SUBSIDIARY NOTE. 93
and Koehler; 5. Siias, according to Mynster and Bochme; and, 6. Arontos, according to Luther, Le Clerc, L. Miller, Heumann, Semler, Ziegler, Dindorf, Schott, Bleek, Feilmoser, De Wette, Credner, Roth, Reuss, Olshausen, and Tholuck.
In regard to all these views, it may be observed in general,—first, That none of them, if we exclude the opinions of Tertullian and Origen, rests on a respectable historical basis; secondly, That even in the case of Origen, his assertion cannot be taken as directly and absolutely ascribing the authorship of the Epistle to any but Paul; thirdly, That their very contrariety and multitude imply the uncertainty of the evi- dence adduced in their favour; fourthly, That they are mostly dependent on internal evidence, and that, with the exception of one or two of them, this evidence is vague and slender ; and fifthly, The opinion that Apollos was the author, which, of all the six, has the greatest weight and number of suffrages, is supported chiefly by the argument, that the Epistle, from its typical explanation of the Jewish ritual, has an Alexandrine hue and colouring, and that it resembles the writings of Philo. In reply, first, it has been proved that typical interpretation prevailed in Palestine as well as Alexandria; secondly, Paul, in an epistle undoubtedly his,—the Epistle to the Galatians,—deals with the principle of allegory, upon which the idea of alleged resemblance to Philo is founded ; and thirdly, on the same inconclusive grounds, part of the Gospel of John has been ascribed to a Philonian origin.
Il. The evidence that Pavuu was the author is both external and internal. The exter- nal evidence is as follows :—
1. In the Wesdern church, from the fourth century, this view was held by Hilary, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, Rufinus, Chromatius, Innocent of Rome, Paulinus, Cassian, Prosper, Eucherius, Salvian, and Gelasius.
2. In the Alexandrine church, by Pantsenus, Origen, Dionysius, Theognostus, Peter, Alexander, Hierax, Athanasius, Theophilus, Serapion, Didymus, and Cyril of Alex- andria.
8. In the Greek church, the synod at Antioch a.p, 264, Gregory Thaumaturgus, tho council of Nice a.p, 315, Gregory of Nazianzum, Basil the Great, the council of Lao- dicea A.D. 360, Gregory of Nyssa, Titus of Bostra, Epiphanius, Chrysostom, and Theo- dore of Mopsuestia, assign it to the same author.
4. In the Syrian church the same opinion generally prevailed, as appears from Justin Martyr, Eusebius of Ceesarea, Cyril of Jerusalem, Jacob of Nisibis, Ephraim Syrus.
5. In the African church, the council of Hippo a.p. 398, the third council of Carthage A.D. 897, and the sixth council of Carthage a.p. 419, decide in favour of the same view.
The internal evidence has réference to,—
1. Particular facts mentioned in the Epistle :—(1.) chap. xiii. 28; (2.) chap. xiii. 18;19); (8.) chap. x. 34 (but the true reading, rois decuioss, NOL rois Decpwois wov, destroys the inference founded on this expression) ; (4.) chap. xiii. 24. hese facts, the first as indicating friendly relations to Timothy, the second as accordant with Paul’s mode of
_ giving such promises elsewhere, and the last as marking a locality where Paul was for a time under restraint, have a Pauline complexion.
2. The general plan of the Epistle, as doctrinal and practical, and concluded with re- quests for an interest in the prayers of those to whom it was written.
8. Doctrinal contents :—(1.) On Christ's person. Compare chap. i. 8, with 2 Cor. iv. 4; Col. i. 15; Phil. ii. 6. (2.) On Christ’s work as mediator:—the office of mediator, chap. viii. 6, ix. 15, xii. 24; 1 Tim. ii. 5;—his humiliation, chap. ii. 9, xii. 2, 3; Phil. ii, 8;—his death, chap. ix. 26, 28, x.12; Rom. vi. 9, 10;—results of his death, chap. ii. 14; 1 Cor. xy. 54, 55; 2 Tim. i. 10;—his resurrection and exaltation, chap. ix. 26, 28, vii. 26, iv. 14; Rom. vi. 9,10; Eph. iv. 10:;—his intercession, chap. vii. 25; Rom, yiii. 34 ;—his session and reign at the right hand of God, chap. i. 3, x. 12, ii. 8, ix. 28; 1 Cor. xv. 25; Tit. ii. 13; 2 Tim. iv. 1, 8. (3.) Blessings and privileges of believers;— access to the Father, chap. x. 19, 20; Eph. ii. 18; Rom. v. 2;—Pauline triad of faith, hope, and love, chap. x. 22-24 ; 1 Cor. xiii. 18 ;—importance of faith, chap. ii. 1-4, x. 38, xi. 39; Rom. iv. 8; Gal. iii. 6-14. (4.) These truths, as entering into the essence of the gospel, may not so clearly establish the identity of the writer as certain special topics, which Moses Stuart sums up thus :—superior light under the gospel, chap. i. 1, 2, ii, 1-4, viii. 8-11, x. 1, xi. 89, 40; Galviv. 1-9; 1 Cor. xiv. 20; Eph. iv. 11-13 ;— superior motives to virtue and religion, chap. ii. 9, ix. 14, xii, 18-24, 28, viii. 6-12; Gal. iii. 28, iv. 1-8; Rom. viii. 15, 17; 1 Cor. vii. 19 ;— superior efficacy of the gospel in promoting the happiness of mankind, chap. xii. 18-24, ix. 9, x. 4, 11, ix. 11-14, y. 9, vie 18, Gi 14, 15, vii. 25, ix. 24; Gal. iii. 10; 2 Cor. iii. 7-9; Gal. iii..11; Rom, iii. 20, iv. 24, 25; Eph. i. 7; Rom. v. 1, 2;—the Jewish dispensation was a type