EPISTLE TO THE. The authorship of this epistle has been greatly disputed. It has been ascribed to Luke by Origen, Jerome, and Philastrius; but, 1st, the similarity of style between this epistle and Luke's admitted writings is too general to support a claim of authorship. 2nd, Admitting Paul to have been the author of the epistle, such similarity of style as occurs between the epistle and Luke's writings could be easily accounted for by the fact that Paul and Luke were much associated together. 3d, The same resemblance between Luke and this epistle can be extended to the epistles which Paul is admitted to have written. Also Stuart and Eichhorn point out the preponderance of Jewish feelings, and familiarity with the Jewish schools, in the epistle over what is found in Luke's writings. Hence Luke is not the probable author of the epistle. Barnabas has been claimed by some as the author. This view is supported somewhat inconclusively by Ullmann and Wiehele, the latter of whom has appended a long dissertation on the subject to his Chronology of the Apostolic Age.

An Alexandrian origin has been claimed by Eichhorn, Schulz, Bleek, and others, chiefly on account of the close resemblance between this epistle and the writings of Philo, an Alexandrian Jew. Stuart, however, has shown that there is nothing in the epistle which could not have been written by a person who had never quitted Palestine. It is alleged by Bleek that the author of the epistle makes a mistake about the furniture of the tabernacle (ix. 3, 4) which a Jew in Palestine would not have made; but Deyling has shown that there the mistake belongs only to those who have discovered it. The claims of Apollos to the authorship of the epistle fall to the ground with those for an Alexandrian origin. Apollos was first suggested by Luther, and in this the Reformer has been followed by Heumann, Bertholett, De Wette, Bleek, and Tholuck. Clement, Silas, and others, have also been proposed as the authors of the epistle.

The claims of the apostle Paul are founded—1st, upon the doctrinal correspondence between this epistle and his other writings. To him peculiarly belongs the doctrine, that Judaism was typical and temporary; while Christianity was typified and permanent. The glory of the Mediator, both in his humiliation and exaltation, is described in the Epistle to the Hebrews in the same manner as in Paul's admitted epistles. The word Mediator occurs only in the Epistle to the Hebrews and in Paul's epistles; so also the expression the God of Peace. So obvious are these resemblances in Hebrews. Hebrews to what occurs in Paul's epistles, that even those who deny his claim admit that the author must have been one of his companions. But, 2d, many of the figures used in the Epistle to the Hebrews are Pauline; the Christian life is a struggle, a race; through Christ we have access with confidence to God; the Word of God is a sword; some Christians are only children, and to be fed with milk; others are men, to be fed with strong meat. 3d, Peculiarities of style favour the Pauline authorship. Paul is given to the use of unusual words in his admitted epistles; unusual words occur in Hebrews; so of paronomasia, and the tendency "to go off at a word" into a long parenthesis; also the manner of reference to Old Testament illustrations; and the multiplication of these references favours the Pauline origin. 4th, The concluding personal references of the writer of Hebrews accord with the supposition of the Pauline origin of the epistle.

The objections to the Pauline authorship are—1st, the difficulty of assigning a reason for the suppression of the name of Paul, were he the author. But the difficulty is just as great whether Luke, or Apollos, or Barnabas, or any other be supposed to have written the epistle. 2d, Eichhorn urges that the Epistle to the Hebrews is more logically reasoned than accords with the Pauline authorship. It is answered that the reasoning of the Epistle to the Romans is as closely logical as that in Hebrews. Tholuck urges that Paul nowhere calls Christ priest, shepherd, apostle, &c.; it is replied that Paul applies figurative appellations to Christ according to the peculiarities of the parties addressed. To speak of priests to Gentiles could not be done without explanation. It was quite otherwise in addressing Jews, who had a priesthood of divine appointment; so of other names.

As to external evidence, the Pauline authorship was universally received from the first by the Eastern Church. In the Western Church, however, it was not so universally adopted till the fifth century. The general result is—1st, no better claims can be urged than those of Paul; 2d, there is no decided obstacle in the way of his claims; and, 3d, both internally and externally the evidence preponderates in his favour.

The object of the epistle was to convince Jewish Christians of the superiority of Christianity over Judaism. It was written before the destruction of the temple.