death, and was heard in that he feared," i. e., was delivered from the grave; 13: 20, "That brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus." "In these words," says Neander, "it is implied that Christ, by his resurrection, became the leader from death to life of the church of God, formed by him as the Redeemer, and laid the foundation for its salvation; and therefore God, in raising him from the dead, proved himself to be the God of salvation." But we will not dwell longer upon a point so palpable to the careful reader.

2. It is maintained that the opposition between faith and the works of the law is not exhibited in the Hebrews. But is it so exhibited in the Epistle to the Thessalonians? Besides, such an exhibition as is made in the Romans and Galatians, where the question whether the law is to be observed by the Gentiles, is discussed, would be entirely out of place in the Hebrews; since he addresses those who are in danger of being led away from the simplicity of Christian worship by the ceremonies of the temple, and the more imposing Jewish ritual, which, as he shows, are not sufficient to make satisfaction for sin, but merely point to the real source of justification. Nothing is plainer than that the same faith, under different forms, is implied in both. Only in the one case the representation is, that it cannot be attained by the observance of law; and in the other, by the Jewish rites and sacrifices. Ebrard well says : "Those to whom the Hebrews was addressed, were not work-righteous," as the Galatians and their false teachers were; on the contrary, they were earnestly desiring atonement (the necessity of which they did not doubt), but they could not believe that the one sacrifice was sufficient. Thus in their case the opposition could not be between ἔργα νόμου and πίστις, but only that between the σκιὰ νόμου and the τελείωσις. In dealing with such readers, Paul also could certainly not write otherwise than is written in the Epistle to the Hebrews. For no one will fail to perceive that the difference between the

Planting and Training, VI. 2. p. 220.

doctrinal system of the Epistle to the Hebrews and that of the Epistle to the Romans is only a formal one."

3. The author of the Hebrews is accused of an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament. If this is to be understood literally, all the answer we need to make is to deny the accusation. Allegory is no more found in the Hebrews than in the acknowledged Pauline epistles. So Ebrard, Davidson, and all other modern critics, except those who are especially desirous of disproving the Pauline authorship of the Hebrews. But if it is meant merely that typology, i. e., a giving of a greater prominence to the types of the Old Tes tament is more conspicuous in the Hebrews than in the Pauline epistles, it is not only granted, but claimed as an indirect proof of Paul as the author. It could be no objection unless it could be shown that it was not only not found in the writings of Paul, but not found where it would be naturally expected. But so far is this from the reality, that we find, as has been said, "not only just such, but a bolder" instance of this typology in Gal. 4: 22 sq. Now, in the Hebrews, the typical character of the Hebrew worship is the basis of the whole writing. It was the main object of the epistle to show that the Jewish ceremonies point forward to something more perfect; that this perfection, Teλeiwois, was found in Christ and his worship; that is, that they were mere types. How could the gifted, the learned apostle have attained his object more directly and naturally than it is done in the Hebrews? A candid examination of the use made of the Old Testament types shows, not that Paul did not write the epistle, certainly; nor, directly, that he did; but that it is worthy of him as author.

Some few other objections have been adduced under this head: such as, that nothing is said in the Hebrews of "the kingdom of God," of "Satan's kingdom," or that the author is the "apostle to the Gentiles;" but they are so palpably without support, after an examination of the object and aim of the Hebrews, and a comparison of the other epistles,

1 Comm. App. p. 412, 13.

against which the same accusation might be made, that one cannot find the excuse of a man, or even a skeleton of straw, to beat down.

General Characteristics of Form in the Hebrews and acknowledged Epistles of Paul.

The general characteristics of form are the same in the Hebrews and in the acknowledged epistles of Paul. This is not so positive and direct as, by itself, to compel us to attribute it to the great apostle; much less is it such as would indicate the hand of an imitator. Still it is sufficient to remind the careful reader of relationship to the most characteristic of all the Pauline epistles, the Romans, and next to that, the Galatians.

1. The general arrangement of materials is the same. In the Hebrews, from ch. 1-10: 19, the argument and doctrine of the epistle is contained, with occasional bursts of emotion or strains of exhortation, which the strength of the writer's feelings in the consideration of his subject forces from him. From 10:20 to the end comes the hortatory and practical part of the epistle, with an expression of the author's longing for intercourse with those whom he addresses, 13: 19, 23; his desire for their prayers, 13:18; and his fervent commendation of them to the "God of peace," with a concluding "Amen," before the final salutations. In like manner, in the Romans, ch. 1-10 are doctrinal, and the remainder practical, salutatory, etc. Towards the close, his desire to see those to whom he writes appears in 15: 22 sq., 32; the same petition for prayer in his behalf in 15: 30; the same commendation to the God of peace, strictly Pauline, with the concluding Amen in 15:33; and finally, salutations to the brethren, more individual and specific than in the Hebrews, as addressed to a particular church, where were particular individuals known to him. The same thing in general may be said of the Epistle to the Galatians, and of other epistles, though in a less marked and definite manner. There is one point of difference, however, that should

here be noticed, namely, less of personal allusion, in the beginning of the Epistle to the Hebrews, than in the other epistles. In the Romans, for example, several verses are taken up in indicating the author's claims to apostleship, his interest in those to whom he writes, his desire to see them, in order to "impart some spiritual gift," or himself be "comforted together with" them. Nothing of this kind is found in the Hebrews. The author enters almost at once upon the proofs of the superiority of Christ to angels, the first head of his argument. Now, can this be tortured into an indication that Paul was not the author of the Hebrews? Let us attempt to learn from the epistle itself with what feelings the author of the Hebrews seated himself for his work. He had become impressed with the feeling that his brethren who had been converted from Judaism were not making that progress in the knowledge of Christianity which the length of time since their conversion, and their opportunities, might have enabled them to do (5:12); he also knew the danger of apostasy (6:1 sq.) to those who constantly fed upon the milk of the word, and who consequently were unskilful in the word of righteousness (5:13); he was sensible, too, of the attractions to them of the Jewish ritual, and the persecutions that assailed them (12:1 sq.); and with all this he strongly felt the ruin that apostasy would bring upon those thus situated; for it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, etc., if they shall fall away, to renew them to repentance (6:4-6). Now, imagine the apostle, imbued with these feelings, sitting down to write a general letter to these Hebrews, would it be natural for him to dwell at once upon his personal feelings, his relation to those addressed, and things of that kind? The man of argument would have recourse to that. And what more fitting to the occasion and to the character of Paul than a presentation of the glory of the person and character of our Lord Jesus Christ, "the heir of all things," "the brightness of the Father's glory," "the express image of his person," "the Creator of all things," who had now sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on

high, the Son of God, and hence superior to angels, who are his servants, "ministering spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?"

2. Clearly connected with what precedes, the absence of the name of the writer has been often adduced as against the Pauline authorship of the Hebrews. The early Fathers, as Pantaenus and Clement, recognize the fact that even in their time this had been made an objection to the Pauline authorship, but as not influencing their opinion. They accordingly give reasons for the omission, as the modesty of the apostle in writing to the Jews since he was the apostle to the Gentiles, or to avoid influence from prejudice against him, or for some such reason. These considerations may or may not have influenced him; and there may have been numerous reasons, which are not and cannot be known to us, for this suppression. It was unquestionably the practice of the age to incorporate the name in the address at the beginning of an epistle; and whether Paul or Luke or Clement wrote it, we should expect the name to be inserted, if it were commenced in the ordinary way. But who can doubt that Paul, as well as another, might omit this inscription? And if what has been said in the preceding paragraph has probability, we should certainly not expect a writer of tact to insert his name. As he begins, not with personal allusions, but with argumentation, only one who felt it necessary to adhere to the usual formulary of letter-writing would foist this in as a preface to his letter. Not so, certainly, should we suppose the apostle Paul would do.

The Manner of Quoting from the Old Testament in the
Hebrews.

The manner of quoting the Old Testament is the same in the Hebrews and the acknowledged Pauline epistles. A frequent reference to the Old Testament on such a subject as the Epistle to the Hebrews discusses, would be natural, whoever was the author; hence we at present have to do

ட்ட