Daniel Wallace, writing for bible.org, begins his introduction to Hebrews with a quote from Philip Hughes:
If there is a widespread unfamiliarity with the Epistle to the Hebrews and its teaching, it is because so many adherents of the church have settled for an understanding and superficial association with the Christian faith. Yet it was to arouse just such persons from the lethargic state of compromise and complacency into which they had sunk, and to incite them to persevere wholeheartedly in the Christian conflict, that this letter was originally written. It is a tonic for the spiritually debilitated.… We neglect such a book to our own impoverishment…
It is true that the Epistle to the Hebrews has been the battleground of discordant opinion and conjecture: its author is unknown, its occasion unstated, and its destination disputed. But these are matters at the periphery, not the heart of the book’s importance. All are agreed on the intrinsic nobility of its doctrine.
So we begin a study of Hebrews with this introduction, noting even the difficulty of introducing such a book as this one. The Church has settled, says Hughes, for somewhat of a superficial faith, and since this book was written to combat such a condition, urging its audience to perseverance, it goes unstudied by those who lack a desire to have their condition remedied, by those who settle, so to speak, in the wilderness without striving to reach the Promised Land in this life. But why? Hughes points out that anonymous authorship, unknown audience, and an uncertain date of authorship have rendered the book impotent by those who lack the passion to seek the Lord while He may be found. Nevertheless, the Epistle to the Hebrews is from impotent, and we press on with not only an introduction, but a full study.
Indeed the author is anonymous, perhaps because the original letter was written on a scroll, with the author’s name on the reverse side from the content of the letter. Future copies of the letter would have easily omitted any reverse-side writings, especially when the intended audience was familiar with the author, as was likely the case here (Hebrews 13:19,22-23). The earliest citations of Hebrews, from Clement of Rome (96 AD), Origen, Tertullian, and the like, do not reveal the author, though several men (and even a woman) have been suggested.
The first candidate for authorship of Hebrews is the Apostle Paul. Hebrews was included in a compilation of Paul’s works by 200 AD, but Origen denied Pauline authorship. Hebrews has the theological depth of Paul, but it is constructed more elegantly that Paul’s other works; some suggest a different amanuensis was used, but others deny that even this change would make such a significant difference. The author is clearly associated with Timothy in Hebrews 13:23, as Paul was, but the hint of Timothy’s imprisonment there (2 Timothy 4:9-13,21) seems to exclude Paul from authorship, for Timothy experienced no imprisonment that we know of during Paul’s lifetime; in other words, Paul would have likely been executed prior to Timothy’s imprisonment and subsequent release. It ends in typical Pauline fashion (Hebrews 13:25), but it does not begin that way. And Hebrews 13:7 seems to hint that Paul and Peter had already been executed by the time this letter was written. Today’s most adamant proponent of the Pauline authorship of Hebrews is perhaps R.C. Sproul, Jr.
Second, a widely held thought, is that the author is Barnabas. This suggestion was original to Tertullian. As a Levite from Cyprus, Barnabas would have been more knowledgeable than most on the topics covered in Hebrews, namely the Jewish sacrificial system, and he would have been able to convey his thoughts in educated Greek, familiar with Alexandrian and Hellenistic style. Some experts see a hint in Hebrews 13:22, which mentions the “word of consolation,” or encouragement; of course, Barnabas was known as the “son of encouragement,” or consolation (Acts 4:36). And among other things, Barnabas, no doubt familiar with Stephen’s speech in Acts 7, saw himself not only as Paul’s partner, but also as a mediator between Paul and the Jews (Acts 9-15), who could have – and more importantly would have – used the language of Stephen’s speech to continue gospel ministry, even after he and Paul went their separate ways (Acts 15:36-41). The primary argument against Barnabas as the author of Hebrews is the simple fact that he isn’t mentioned as such. How could it be that his name would appear on apocryphal literature without being found on a truly Biblical work that was authentically his? Another argument against Barnabas as the author of Hebrews is his own execution, thought to have occurred on his native isle of Cyprus in 61 AD, surely earlier than the writing of Hebrews took place.
Third, a more recent suggestion, by none other than Martin Luther, is that Apollos wrote Hebrews. Apollos, like Barnabas, has a number of things in his favor. He was closely associated with Paul, Timothy, and their companions; he carried the Alexandrian / Hellenistic flavor; he was highly trained and educated, and as a skilled orator, certainly could have written a work so eloquent and elegant as Hebrews; he also would have been familiar with the Septuagint, which is quoted with regularity in the Hebrew Epistle. In fact, the only reason to deny Apollos as author, other than the reason we exclude Barnabas (that he is not specifically named as such), is that it would be hard-pressed to see how Apollos, who, as noted in Scripture, ministered to Gentiles in Ephesus and Corinth, would have had such a relationship with Jewish Christians that would lead to him writing this letter to them.
Finally, a host of other names have been suggested and neglected: Silas, who not only served alongside Paul, but also could have served as Peter’s scribe for 1 Peter, which does bear some similarity to Hebrews in terms of linguistic style; Philip (as noted by William Ramsey, though no reasoning is given other than familiarity with Stephen in Acts 6-7); Clement, who quotes from this letter in his letter to the Corinthians; Luke, solely because of the more polished Greek writing style, but he was Greek and not Jewish and seems to have intentionally omitted the concept of substitionary atonement (Mark 10;45; Matthew 20:28), a prominent theme in Hebrews; and Priscilla, based primarily on the strange reality of anonymity, but the audience almost certainly knew the author and would not likely have accepted instruction of this magnitude from a woman (furthermore, the author of Hebrews uses a masculine pronoun to refer to himself). Daniel Wallace concludes, with reasonable evidence, that we have dual authorship of Hebrews. He gives the many uses of “we” by the author(s) as a suggestion that Barnabas and Apollos worked together on the letter.
While I wouldn’t deny dual authorship, the martyrdom of Barnabas in 61 AD lends ample reason to doubt Wallace’s suggestion. However, let it be known that few, if any, scholars put forth John Mark, who wrote his gospel and worked alongside Peter and Paul, as a possibility, likely because of the writing style. Why couldn’t that have changed, as Mark surely did, over the years? Scholars do not think the beloved apostle John could have been the author of Hebrews, though the themes are similar there to his other works, perhaps because he was a direct disciple of Christ, while it seems the author of Hebrews was not (Hebrews 2:3). Epaphras, Paul’s aid in Asia Minor, and specifically the Lycus Valley, where Colossae was located, is rarely suggested as possible author, though he too, from what we know of him, would have been more than capable of such a work – especially with divine assistance. In fact, the similarities of Hebrews to other Biblical works point us not to a human author but to the reality that Hebrews is a divine work, rendered through the pen of an anonymous human author by none other than the Holy Spirit. Why is Hebrews so similar in content, style, or both, to James, John, Peter, Paul, Luke, and even the speech of Stephen? Because the Holy Spirit was working in all of them!
That brings us to the timeframe for Hebrews, and there are general bookends (Paul’s death and Clement’s citations) placed to claim that Hebrews had to be written between 64 AD and 96 AD. As the issue continues to be studied and narrowed, looking at the text of Hebrews, most reliable scholars currently agree that it was written in the mid-to-late 60’s AD (summer 65 or 66 AD), prior to the end of the Jewish sacrificial system, which came in 70 AD with the destruction of the Temple by Titus and the Romans.
Having addressed authorship and time of authorship, we turn to audience identification, which proves to be the most difficult of the three. Along with other reasons, and despite the fact that some scholars think Italy to be the audience’s location, Hebrews 13:23-24 seems to indicate that the author is in Rome, which means the audience is not, negating Rome as a possibility. And along with doubt that Timothy was well known in Palestine, Hebrews 12:4 seems to negate Jerusalem, due to the fact that persecution of Christians was steepest there.
Again we consult Daniel Wallace, who bases his two suggestions on the authorship question. If Apollos was primary, and Barnabas secondary, author, Wallace, citing other minor evidences, considers a split faction within the broad church at Corinth as the likely destination of Hebrews. If, however, Barnabas was primary, and Apollos secondary, then Wallace points to a small, Jewish Christian congregation in Asia-Minor, specifically in the Lycus Valley, near Colossae, which Paul had not personally visited but entrusted to men like Timothy, Epaphras, Tychicus, and Onesimus. While I don’t necessarily agree with the authorship verdict of Wallace, I can appreciate both of his thoughts on intended audience, for both the large but divided congregation at Corinth and the small, rural congregations of the Lycus Valley in Asia Minor were struggling with escaping the Jewishness of Judaism in favor of the freedom of Christianity. And therefore, with this thought in mind, we turn now to the purpose for the Epsitle to the Hebrews.
Amending Wallace’s argument here with a quote/paraphrase, we can say that the occasion for this epistle may well be the influence of Judaizers on the Jewish Christians in the Lycus Valley. These Judaizers had almost certainly gained strength after the death of Paul and arrest of Timothy, for their influence, based as it was in Ephesus, had a powerful effect on all of Asia Minor. With Paul’s death, and Timothy’s imprisonment, the Judaizers could attack with a vengeance – even to the point of claiming that the Gentile mission had no basis at all. It needed to be proven that Christ was the end of the Law. What was at stake was whether the Gentile mission would be perceived as having a sociological basis or a theological one. If it were merely a sociological basis, then salvation by grace was a fluke, an ingenious concoction of a powerful mind. But now that he was dead, the “real” gospel of the Judaizers could take root. This church had already separated themselves from the main body of believers and was beginning to defect back into Judaism. The pressure was on – not just from the Judaizers, but also from the reports from Rome about Nero’s pogrom against Christians.
So Hebrews has a primary intention, to warn Jewish Christians from falling back into Judaism, to keep those who have been saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, according to the Scriptures alone, for the glory of God alone, from apostasy into thinking that legalistic Judaism, with all its rituals and traditions and feasts and sacrifices, is what saves them. But there’s a secondary intention in the writing of Hebrews: to show that the gospel for the Gentiles is divinely theological in nature, not merely a manmade sociological concept, which therefore demands that Jewish Christians embrace the gospel mission for the sake of Gentiles.
Noting the influence of Paul’s Galatian Epistle on the author of Hebrews, commentator Ben Witherington asks, “Could it be that Hebrews provides for us the earliest example of an interpretation of Paul for a later and perhaps different audience?” Sure enough! For it seems we find in our study that the author of Hebrews basically uses Paul’s letter to the Galatians as a springboard into vindicating Paul’s intentions. Wallace, finding it ironic that Jewish Christians intending to serve their own seem to end up serving Gentiles, arm-in-arm and like-minded with Paul across the board, says, “It can be seen how much this book (Hebrews) was intended as a theological vindication of Pauline theology for all Jewish Christians everywhere.” Wallace concludes with the grand theme of Hebrews, which we should join John Piper in cherishing: “the absolute supremacy of Christ – a supremacy which allows no challenge, whether from human or angelic beings.”
Again we let Wallace set forth a basic outline of Hebrews as we move forward: “The epistle to the Hebrews, which is really a homily with some final epistolary material tacked on to the end, divides naturally into two parts. First is the doctrinal section in which the author(s) detail(s) the theological basis for Christ’s superiority over the Old Testament (1:1–10:18). Second is the pragmatic section in which the practical effects that Christ’s superiority should have in the believer’s life are enumerated (10:19–13:17).” There is urgency throughout the letter that can be missed because of the elegant language. Hebrews is nothing like James in that regard. But the message is similar – faith without deeds is dead. We are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. But that “faith alone” is not a faith that is alone. True saving faith includes transformation, good deeds which God prepared in advance for us to do (Ephesians 2:10). Though the author of Hebrews warns against legalism, a works-based salvation, he has no intentions of allowing for an antinomian gospel. Christ is superior to Moses and the law; and Christ saves by grace. But that grace doesn’t mean anything goes; that grace is transforming. If you’ve experienced that grace, then there’s nothing else to rely on. But, as Peter said, be eager to make your calling and election sure. The warnings of Hebrews are real, and they aren’t there to say that you will lose your rewards if you aren’t a faithful Christian. But we’ll talk more about the warnings when we come to them in our study.
The first section mentioned above is theological and can be broken into five parts. First, the theologically deep introduction points out that Jesus Christ, as the Son of God, is a better conveyor of God’s word to His people than were the prophets. Second, Christ is also superior to angels (“don’t drift” is the warning here). Third, Christ is superior to Moses (as our Prophet; “don’t defect” is the warning). Fourth, Christ is superior to Aaron (as our High Priest; “don’t degenerate is the warning). Fifth, Christ’s new covenant ministry, including His “once for all” atoning blood sacrifice, is superior to the old covenant ministry, which included regularly offered blood sacrifices that never actually atoned for sin. “Don’t despise” is the warning issued here.
The second section mentioned above is practical and can be broken into four exhortations. First, we must enter completely into the new sanctuary. Second, we must endure persecution from outside ourselves, remembering those who have come before us and endured significant persecution with great faith – apart from works of law. Third, we must endure discipline from within ourselves, for the Father disciplines His children in order to grow them in grace and conform them to the image of Christ. There is another warning here – “don’t deny.” Fourth and finally, we must love our neighbors as ourselves, showing concern for the community of believers, which is the Body of Christ, of which we are a part.
Hebrews reads like a speech, with the exception of the end of chapter 13. Perhaps it was intended as a speech. If so, the orator was brilliant with word choice and outline technique. Could this be the work of Apollos, who was an excellent orator following in Paul’s steps theologically? We won’t know for sure until we get to heaven, but regardless of the author’s identity, the audience’s identity, or the time at which the words were spoken or the letter was written, the Epistle to the Hebrews is worthy of study, for though most of us American Christians are not Jewish, we do need the urgent warnings to cling to that which is better. Christ is superior to anything and everything else. Would we invest in knowing Him more by studying the Epistle to the Hebrews?