3. We now pass on to the question of the Pauline or- igm of this epistle. Referring our readers for particu- lars to the able and copious discussion of this question furnished by the works of Stuart {Commentary, Introd.), Forster {The Apostol. Authority of the £pisile to tlw He- brews, etc.), and Hug, we shall attempt at present a con- densed outUne of the evidence both for and agamst the Paidine authorship of this epistle.
a. Internal evidence, i. In favor of the Pauline origin of the epistle. (1.) A person familiar with the doctrines on which Paul is fond of insisting in his acknowledged epistles will readily perceive that there is such a cor- respondence in this respect between these and the Epis- tle to the Hebrews as supplies good ground for presum- ing that the latter proceeded also from his pen. That Christianity as a system is superior to Judaism with re- spect to clearness, simplicity, and moral efficiency ; that the former is the substance and reality of what the lat- ter had presented only the typical adumbration ; and that the latter was to be abolished to make way for the former, are points which, if more fully handled in the Epistle to the Hebrews, are familiar to all readers of the epistles of Paul (comp. 2 Cor. iii, 6-18 ; Gal. iii, 22 ; iv, 1-9,21-31; Col. ii, 16, 17, etc.). The same view is given in this epistle as in those of Paul of the divine glorj' of the Mediator, specifically as the reflection or manifesta- tion of Deity to man (compare Col. i, 15-20; Phil, ii, 6; Heb. i, 3, etc.). His condescension is described as hav- ing consisted in an impo^'erishing, and lessening, and lowering of himself for man's behalf (2 Cor. viii, 9 ; Phil, ii, 7, 8 ; Heb. ii, 9) ; and his exaltation is set forth as a condition of royal dignity, which shall be consummated Ijy all his enemies being put under his footstool (1 Cor. XV, 25-27 ; Heb. ii, 8 ; x, 13 ; xii, 2). He is represented as discharging the office of a "mediator," a word which is never usc^d except by Paul and the MTiter of this epis- tle ((ial. iii, 19,20; Heb. viii, 6); his death is represented as a sacrifice for the sins of man ; and the pecidiar idea
announced in connection with this, that he was pre-
task had it fallen to his lot. P.eyond this, however, I figured by the sacrifices of the Mosaic dispensation (Rom, their arguments seem to us signally to fail. What | iii, 22-26 ; lCor.v,7; Eph.i,7; v,2; Heb,vii-x). Pe-
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO 145 HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO
euliar to Paul and the author of this epistle is the phrase " the God of peace" (Rom. xv, 33, etc. ; Heb. xiii, 20) ; and botli seem to have the same conception of the spir- itual " i?ifts" (I Cor. xii, 4 ; Heb. ii, 4). It is worthy of remark, also, that the momentous question of a man's personal acceptance with God is answered in this epis- tle in the same peculiar way as in the acknowledged epistles of Paul. All is made to depend upon the indi- vidual's exercising what both Paul and the author of this epistle call "faith," and which they both represent as a realizing apprehension of the facts, and truths, and promises of revelation. (Bleek and Tholuck have both endeavored to show that the tticftiq of the Epistle to tlie Hebrews is not the same as the Tri'trne of Paul's acknowledged writings, but, in our view, with singu- lar want of success. Tholuck's chief argument, which he urges as of more weight than any Bleek has ad- vanced, is, that the writer has not here contrasted voiioq and TTioTit,', the fpy« vofxov and the 'ipya iriaTnaQ, as I'aul would have done. But how can this be said when the i^reat lesson of the epistle is, that alumyn, even timlei- ih- lii'i- it.fi'If, TriariQ was the medium of acceptance and the chiunel of divine blessing to men? When Paid says. '• ^\'e walk by faith, not by sight" [2 Cor. v, 7], and the writer to the Hebrews says that faith, by which the just live, is the evidence of things not seen [x, 28; xi, 1], what essential difference in their notion of faith and its working can be discerned ?) By both, also, the power oF this gracious principle is frequently referred to and illu-itrated by the example of those who had distui- guished themselves in the annals of the Jewish race (cump. Kom. iii, 4 ; v, 2 ; Heb. iii, 6 ; Gal. iii, 5-14 ; Heb. X, 3d; xi, 40). (2.) Some of the figures and allusions employed in this epistle are strictly Pauline. Thus the word of God is compared to a sword (Eph. vi, 17 ; Heb. iv, 12) ; inexperienced Christians are children who need rnH/c, and must be instructed in the elemeiit s,vfhiist those of iiviliircr attainments are full-grown men who require Strom/ meat (1 Cor. iii, 1, 2 ; xiv, 20 ; Gal. iv, 9 ; Col. iii, 14; lleb. V, 12, 13 ; vi, 1); redemption through Christ is an introduction and an entrance with confidence unto God (Uoni. V, 2; Eph. ii, 18; iii, 12; Heb. x, 19) ; afflictions are a contest or strife, ayuiv (Phil, i, 30 ; Col. ii, 1 ; Heb. X, 32) ; the Christian life is a race (1 Cor. ix, 24 ; Phil, iii, 14; Heb. xii, 1) ; the Jewish ritual is a Xarpeia (Kom. ix, 4; Heb. ix, 1,G) ; a person under the constraint of some unworthy feeling or principle is " subject to bond- age" (Gal. V, 1; Heb. ii, 15), etc. (3.) Certain marked characteristics of Paul's style are found in this epistle. This department of the internal evidence has more, per- hai)s, than any other been canvassed by recent critics, and in some cases opposite conclusions have been drawn from the same phenomena. Thus the occurrence of HTTri? \tyoi.iiva in this epistle has been adduced by the German scholars ar/ainst the Pauline origin of it, whilst Stuart and Forster have both rested on this fact as strongly in favor of that conclusion ; and as it appears to us with justice, for if it be made out from Paul's ac- knowledged writings that the use of unusual words is a characteristic of his style (and this has been placed by these -wTiters beyond all question), it is obvious that the occurrence of the same characteristic in this epistle, so far from being an argument against, is, as far as it goes, an argument yy/- oiu* ascribmg it to Paul. On argu- ments, however, based on such minute phenomena, we are not disposed to rest much weight on either side. Every person must be aware that an author's use of words is greatly modified by the circumstances under which he writes, or the design he has in writing; and the literature of every countrj' presents us with numer- ous cases of authors whose works, \\Titten at different periods, and with different designs, present far greater diversities of expression than any which have been puintcd out between the Epistle to the Hebrews and the acknowleged epistles of Paid. Hence cautious crit- ics have declined to rest much in questions of literary parentage upon what Bentlev caUs {Dissert, on Phala- IV.— K