Page 725
THE [note a] EPISTLE OF PAƲL THE APOSTLE TO THE HEBREVVES. (Book Hebrews)
[ a] * 1.1 VVHether this Epistle were written by Saint Paul hath not only of late but antiently been doubted. And as the Title or Superscription which is in our Copie, pretending not to be a part of the Epistle, is not sufficient to conclude any more than that it was in that time when this title was prefix'd believed to be Saint Pauls; so there is no doubt but that it went without any Superscription or known Author more antiently; and so hath left some place to variety of conjectures, who the Author should be. Saint Chrysostome in his Proeme to the Epistle to the Romans expresseth his opinion of it, that it was by Saint Paul written at Rome in his bands; (but that cannot well be imagined, when he tels them c. 13. 23. that with Timothy, if he come shortly, he will see them; for that signifies the Author to be at liberty when he thus purposed.) Long before him Clemens Alexan∣drinus (as we see in Eusebius l. 6. c. 11.) renders reasons why Saint Paul prefix'd not his name in the front of it, as in all other Epistles of his he had done, Paul an Apostle, &c. which though it be an evidence of that an∣tient writers opinion, yet it is also of its being questioned in that time, and is also an acknowledgement that it was not own'd by Saint Paul at the time of writing it, or then publickly acknowledg'd to be his. Others were antiently inclinable to father it on Barnabas, others on Clemens Romanus, others on Luke; which is a farther argument of the uncertainty of it. And for the last of them, there is a passage c. 2. 3. which is conceived to make it more probable to be written by him then by Saint Paul: For speaking of the so great salvation, whe∣ther that be the Gospel and doctrine of Christ, or whether the deliverance of the faithfull out of their perse∣cutions, (see c. 2. Note b.) he saith of it, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, it was confirm'd to us by them that heard it; whereas it is known of Saint Paul, Gal. 1. 12. that he professeth not to have received the Gospell by man, nor to have been taught is, but by the revelation of Iesus Christ; and so likewise of the deliverance of the faithfull, of which he so often speaks so confidently, there is no doubt, but among the many revelations which he had received 2 Cor. 12. 7. this was also revealed to him. But to this the answer is easie. First, that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not to be restrained to the writer only, but so as to comprehend those to whom he writes, as we see it used Tit. 3. 3. and Eph. 2. 5. we being dead in trespasses, &c. for it followes immediately, by grace ye are saved; and so we is all one with ye. And secondly, it is no new or strange thing for Saint Paul to confirm the truth of the Gospel by the testimony of others, and tradition from them which saw and heard. See 1 Cor. 15. 3. &c. Other 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are added by the learned Hugo Grotius, from the observation of the style and idiome, which render it probable to be written by Saint Luke. But as all which can be said in this matter can amount no higher than to probable or conjecturall; so is it not matter of any weight or necessity that it be defined who the Author was, whether Saint Paul, or Saint Luke, a constant companion of his for many years, the author of two other books of the sacred Canon. That* 1.2 which Theophylact conceives in this matter, is not improbable, viz. that S. Paul wrote it in Hebrew, as being to the Hebrewes, but that S. Luke, or, as some say, Clement, translated it into Greek; and consequently that there is not so much force in the Argument taken from the diffe∣rence of the style, to conclude against its being written originally by S. Paul, as there is in the sublmity of the sense and matter, to conclude that none but S. Paul was the Author of it. And as for the Author, so for the place from whence it was written, it is uncertain also, the ordinary Copies reading, in the Subscription, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, from Italy, but the Kings MS. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, from Rome. And the argument which is produced in favour of the former, because chap. 13. 24. in the saluations are mention'd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is ordinarily rendred, they of Italy, is not of much force; because that may more fitly be rendred, they from Italy, that is, those that came from thence to Rome, or to any other place where the Author now was at the writing of it. So again that Timothy was the bearer of this Epistle, (as is affirmed in the Subscription) it is not certain, nor, if we will judge by c. 13. 23. probable: for there mentioning Timothies being set at liberty, it is added, with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you, which referres to the Authors intention to bear Timothy company to them, which is not well reconcileable with Timothy's carrying this Epistle from him.* 1.3 So that in all these circumstances there is very little certainty. As for those to whom it is written, the Hebrews, they are the Jewes Christian, which the Author had known in Iudea and Syria, (which all belonged to Ierusalem as the chief and principal Metropolis) who being persecuted by the unbelieving Jewes, were by the infusions of the Gnosticks inclined to great caution and complyances, and consequently began to forsake the Christian assemblies, and to fall off from the profession of the faith: which being the occasion of this monitory Epistle, the subject of it consequently is, to confirm them in the truth of the Gospel against the Jewish pretensions, to represent the great danger and sin of falling off, and to fortifie them with constancy and perseverance by many examples of faith and patience, putting them in mind of the deliverance from their persecutors, which should now very shortly befall them, c. 10. 37. That this Epistle was written in Hebrew is phansied by some, but without any reason; the Hebrewes