"was written to Hebrews, particularly, but this. So that thefe must be "the Hebrews of the above named countreys." To which I answer, that St. Peter's epiftles were not fent to Jews, but to Gentils, or to all Chriftians in general, in the places above mentioned, as will be clearly fhewn hereafter. When St. Peter fays, as Paul has written unto you, he may intend Paul's epiftle to the Galatians, and (x) fome other epiftles, writ to Gentils. If he refers at all to this epiftle to the Hebrews, it is comprehended under that expreffion ver. 16. as alfo in all his epiftles. 4. Obj. This epiftle to the Hebrews feems to have been writ in Greek. But if it had been fent to the Jewish believers in Judea, it would have been writ in Hebrew. To which I anfwer, that allowing the epiftle to have been writ in Greek, it might be fent to the believers in Judea. If St. Paul wrote to the Jewith believers in Palestine, he intended the epistle for general use, for all Chriftians, whether of Jewish or Gentil original. Many ) of the Jews in Judea understood Greek. Few of the Jews out of Judea understood Hebrew. The Greek language was almost univerfal, and therefore generally ufed. All St. Paul's epiftles are in Greek, even that to the Romans. And are not both St. Peter's epiftles in Greek? and St. John's, and St. Jude's? Yea, did not St. James likewife write in Greek, who is fuppofed to have refided at Jerufalem, from the time of our Lord's afcenfion to the time of his own death? His epiftle is infcribed to the twelve tribes, fcattered abroad. But I prefume, that they of the twelve tribes, who dwelt in Judea, are not excluded by him, but intended. Nor could he be unwilling, that his epiftle fhould be read and understood by thofe, who were his special charge. The epiftle writ by Barnabas, a Levite, or afcribed to him, was writ in Greek. Not now to mention any other Jewish writers, who have ufed the Greek language. II. Thus we are unawares brought to the inquirie, In what language in what language this epiftle was writ. For there have been doubts about it among both ancients and moderns. So that we are obliged to take fome particular notice of this point. But I fhould have deferred the confideration of it, till we had obferved the writer of the epiftle, if the juft mentioned objection had not brought this inquirie in our way in this place. Ι it was writ. And it may be recollected, that (z) I formerly alleged divers learned and (x) Videtur refpicere Petrus ad Rom. ii. 4. ubi de Dei longanimitate fimilia habet his que docet hic Petrus dicereque ad Afiaticos fcriptam epiftolam, que ad Romanos data, eo quod epiftolæ Pauli, quanquam ad fingulas ecclefias, et homines fingulos, miffa, omnium Chriftianorum illius ævi communes jure haberentur. Cleric. H. E. A. 69. p. 459. (y) Ils n'ont point eu d'autre raifon de croire, que S. Paul avoit écrit en Hebreu, que celle qu'il écrivoit à des Hebreux. Or cette raifon, toute vrai femblable qu'elle paroit, n'eft point convaincante, parcequ'il eft certain, que la langue Grecque étoit entenduê dans la Judée, quoiqu'elle ne fut pas là langue vulgaire. Tous les auteurs du nouveau Teftament ont écrit en Grec, bien qu'ils écriviffent pour tous les fideles, foit Hebreux, foit Gentils. Beauf Pref. fur l'epitre aux Hebreux. num. xv. (x) See Vol. viii. p. 189. ... and judicious moderns, who have been of opinion, that Greek, and not Hebrew, was the original language of this epiftle. To them I now add feveral others: (a) James Cappell, (b) S. Bafnage, (c) Mill in his Prolegomena to the New Teftament, and (d) the late Mr. Wetstein, and also (e) Spanheim in his Differtation concerning the author of this epiftle, which well deferves to be confulted. One argument for this, both of (ƒ) Spanheim, and (g) Wetstein, is taken from the Greek paronomafias in the epiftle, or the frequent concurrence of Greek words of like found. Which feems to be an argument, not eafie to be answered. Some ancient Christian writers were of opinion, that the epiftle to the Hebrews was writ in the Hebrew language, and (b) tranflated into Greek by Luke, or Clement of Rome. Jerome (i) in particular feems to have fuppofed, that this epiftle was writ in Hebrew. And Origen alfo is fometimes reckoned among thofe, who were of this opinion. But I think, I have fhewn it to be probable, that (k) he thought it was writ in Greek. It feems likewife, that they must have been of the fame opinion, who confidered the elegance of the Greek language of this epiftle as an objection against it's having been writ by St. Paui. For if the Greek epiftle had been fuppofed to be a tranflation, the fuperior elegance of the ftile of this epistle above that of the other epiftles of Paul could have afforded no objection against his being the author of it. (a) Jacob. Cappell, obfervat. in ep. ad Hebr. §. ii. et iii. (b) Ann. 61. num. vi. Indeed (c) Et fane magis adhuc futilis eft eorum fententia, qui hanc epiftolam Paulo quidem Hebraice fcriptam volunt ab alio autem aliquo traductam fuiffe in fermonem Græcum. Nihil enim clarius atque evidentius, quam eam lingua Græca primitus conceptam fuiffe. &c. Prolegom. num. 95.... 98. (d) Ad hæc obfervamus, 1. epiftolam ad Hebræos, quæ nunc Græce exftat, non eft interpretis, fed ipfius auctoris. Qui putant ad Hebræos non aliter quam Hebraice, fcribi debuiffe, manifefto falluntur. Omnes enim novi fœderis libri, etiam Matthæi, ut ad ipfum vidimus, lingua Græca fcripti funt. Hanc linguam plerique Judæi norant. Wetlen. T. Gr. T. 2. p. 385. (e) Spanh. De Auctore epift. ad Hebr. Part. 3. cap. ii. Tom. 2. p. 245. 252. (f) Nono, decretorium fere argumentum eft a Græcorum idiotifmis, hac in epiftola paffim confpicuis. Pauca hæc de multis. Auctor cap. v. verfu 8. elegantem adhibet παρωνομασίαν. Scil. Εμαθεν ἀφ ̓ ὧν ἔπαθε, qualem He braifmus non ferebat. Græci contra mire fibi in talibus placent. &c. Spanh. ubi fupr. n. xii. p. 249. (g) Porro manifeftæ reperiuntur paronomafiæ, et oμaioríтa, quæ fi in ὁμοιοτέλευτα, aliam linguam convertantur, pereunt. Hebr. v. 8.... et ver. 14. naλSTE κακέ. vii. 3. απάτως, ἀμήτως, xi. ἐπείσθησαν, ἐπειράσθησαν. xi. 10. βρώμασι και τόμασι. xiii. 14. μίνεσαν καὶ μέλλεσαν. Talia auétor potius feftatur quam interpres. Wett. ib. p. 385. (b) See ch. ii. Vol. i. p. 56. ch. 22. Vol. ii. p. 474. 492. and Vol. viii. p. 146. 147. 149. (i) Ch. 114. vol. x. p. 113. (k) See ch. 38. Fol. iii. p. 259. 260. and vol. viii. p. 189. Indeed the ancients, as Beaufobre said (1) formerly, had no other reason to believe, that St. Paul wrote in Hebrew, but that he wrote to the Hebrews. So likewife fays (m) Cappellus. The title deceived them. And because it was writ to Hebrews, they concluded it was writ in Hebrew. For none of the ancients appear to have seen a copie of this epiftle in that language. III. I now proceed to the third inquirie, who is the writer of this epiftle. And many things offer in favour of the Apostle Paul. Who was the Writer. 1. It is afcribed to him by many of the ancients. Here I think myfelf obliged briefly to recollect the teftimonies of ancient Authors, which have been produced at large in the preceding volumes. And I fhall rank them under two heads: firft the teftimonies of writers who used the Greek tongue, then the teftimonies of those who lived in that part of the Roman Empire, where the Latin was the vulgar language. There are some paffages (n) in the epiftles of Ignatius, about the year 107. which may be thought by fome to contain allufions to the epiftle to the Hebrews. This epiftle feems to be referred to by (0) Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna, in his epiftle, writ to the Philippians in the year 108. and (p) in the Relation of his Martyrdom, writ about the middle of the fecond centurie. This epiftle is often quoted as Paul's by (r) Clement of Alexandria, about the year 194. It is received, and quoted as Paul's by (s) Origen, about 230. It was alfo received as the Apostle's by (t) Dionyfius Bp. of Alexandria in 247. It is plainly referred to by (u) Theognoftus, of Alexandria, about 282. It appears to have been received by (x) Methodius, about 292. by (y) Pamphilus, about 294. and by (z) Archelaus,, Bp. in Mefopotamia, at the begining of the fourth centurie, by (a) the Manicheans in the fourth, and (b) by the Paulicians, in the feventh cen turie. It was received, and afcribed to Paul by (c) Alexander, Bp. of Alexandria, in the year 313. and by (d) the Arians in the fourth centurie. Eufebius, Bishop of Cefarea, about 315. fays, there (e) are fourteen epiftles of Paul, manifeft and well known: but yet there are fome, who reject that to the Hebrews, alleging in behalf of their opinion, that it was not received by the church of Rome, as a writing of Paul. It is often quoted by Eufebius himself, (1) Vol. viii. p. 190. See likewife here p. 303. note (y). (m) Qui volunt hanc epiftolam Hebraice fcriptam, hos decepit titulus. Cum enim ad Hebræos fcribebatur, Hebraice quoque fcribi debuiffe funt opinati. Sed meminiffe debuerant, etiam Hierofolymis magnum fuiffe linguæ Græcæ ufum. Cis Hierofolymam pauciffimi Judæi aliter quam Græce loquebantur. Jac. Capp. Obfervat. in Nov. Teftam. p. 109. (n) See Vol. i. p. 174. ... 176. (p) P. 223. (s) Vol. iii. p. 237. 249. 250. (u) Vol. v. p. 162.... () Vol. v. p. 3:6. (a) Vol. vi. p. 336. (c) Vol. vii. p. 250. 164. (0) See Vol. i. p. 213. 214. (r) Vol. ii. p. 474. and 503. 504. (b) P. 428... 432. (e) Vol. viii. p. 1oo. 101. See also p. 110. VOL. II. (f) himfelf, as Paul's, and facred fcripture. This epiftle was received by (g) Athanafius, without any hesitation. In his enumeration of St. Paul's fourteen epiftles, this is placed next after the two to the Theffalonians, and before the epiftles to Timothie, Titus, and Philemon. The fame order is obferved (b) in the Synopfis of Scripture afcribed to him. This epiftle is received as Paul's by (i) Adamantius author of a Dialogue against the Marcionites in 330. and by (k) Cyril of Jerufalem, in 348. by (1) the council of Laodicea, in 363. Where St. Paul's epiftles are enumerated in the fame order, as in Athanafius, just taken notice of. This epiftle is alfo received as Paul's by (m) Epiphanius, about 368. by (n) the Apoftolical Conftitutions, about the end of the fourth centurie, by (0) Bazil, about 370. by (p) Gregorie Nazianzen, in 370. by Amphilochius (9) alfo. But he fays, it was not received by all, as Paul's. It was received by (s) Gregorie Nyffen, about 371. by (t) Didymus of Alexandria about the fame time, by (u) Ephraim the Syrian, in 370. and by (x) the churches of Syria, by (y) Diadore of Tarfus in 378. by (z) Hierax, a learned Egyptian, about the year 302. by (a) Serapion, Bishop of Thmuis, in Egypt, about 347. by (b) Titus, Bp. of Bofira, in Arabia, about 362. by (c) Theodore, Bp. of Mopfueftia, in Cilicia, about the year 394. by (d) Chryfoftom, at the year 398. by (e) Severian, Bp. of Gabala, in Syria, 401. by (f) Victor of Antioch, about 401. by (g) Palladius, author of a Life of Chryfoftom, about 408. by (b) Ifidore of Pelufium, about 412. by (i) Cyril, Bp. of Alexandria, in 412. by (k) Theodoret, at 423. by (1) Eutherius, Bp. of Tyana, in Cappadocia, in 431. by (m) Socrates, the Ecclefiaftical Hiftorian, about 440. by (n) Euthalius, in Egypt, about 458. and, probably, by (0) Dionyfius, falfely called the Areopagite, by (p) the Author of the Quæfti ones et Refponfiones, commonly afcribed to Justin Martyr, but rather writ in the fifth centurie. It is in (q) the Alexandrian manufcript, about the year 500. and (r) in the Stichometrie of Nicephorus, about 806. is received as Paul's by (s) Cofmas of Alexandria, about 535. by (t) Leontius of Conftantinople, about 610. by (u) John Damafcen in 730. by (x) Photius, about 858. by (y) Oecumenius, about the year 950. and by (x) Theophylact in 1070. I thall not go any lower. I fhall (g) Vol. viii. p. 227. and 232. (i) P. 256. (4) Vol. viii. p. 270. 271. and 273. (m) Vol. viii. p. 304. and 308. (2) P. 394. (a) The fame. p. 45. (c) Vol. ix. p. 395 396. (2) P. 133. (†) P. 173. (y) P. 352. (9) Vol. ix. p. 147. 148. (u) Vol. ix. p. 191. (2) See Vol. vi. p. 83. (b) Vol. vi. p. 51. and 336. (d) Vol. x. p. 312. 335. (e) Vol. xi. p. 3. (g) P. 60. (1) P. 123. (f) Vol. xi. p. 38. (k) Vol. xi. p. 80. 84. (0) Vol. xi. p. 219. 220. (q) Vol. xi. p. 240.・・ (r) P. 249. (u) P. 393. (r) P. 249. (x) P. 401. (i) P. 75. (b) P. 69. (m) P. 452. (n) Vol. xi. P. 212. (p) See Vol. i. p. 262. the 2d ed. (s) Vol. xi. p. 269. (1) P. 383. (y) P. 410. (x) P. 418. I fhall now rehearfe fuch authors, as lived in that part of the Roman Empire, where the Latin was the vulgar tongue. Here in the first place offers Clement in his epiftle to the Corinthians, writ about the year 96. or as fome others fay, about the year 70. For though he wrote in Greek, we rank him among Latin authors, because he was Bishop of Rome. In his epiftle (a) are divers paffages generally fuppofed to contain allufions, or references to the epiftle to the Hebrews. Irenaeus, Bp. of Lyons, about 178. as we are affured by Eufebius, alleged (b) fome paffages out of this epiftle, in a work now loft. Nevertheless, it does not appear that he received it, as St. Paul's. By Tertullian, Prefbyter of Carthage, about the year 200. this (c) epiftle is afcribed to Barnabas. Caius, about 212. fuppofed to have been Prefbyter in the church of Rome, reckoning (d) up the epiftles of St. Paul, mentioned thirteen only, omitting that to the Hebrews. Here I place Hippolitus, who flourished about 220. But it is not certainly known, where he was Bifhop, whether at Porto in Italie, or at fome place in the Eaft. We have feen evidences, that (e) he did not receive the epiftle to the Hebrews, as St. Paul's. And perhaps, that may afford an argument, that though he wrote in Greek, he lived where the Latin tongue prevailed. This epiftle is (f) not quoted by Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, about 248. and afterwards. Nor does it appear to have been received by (g) Novatus, otherwife called Novatian, Prefbyter of Rome, about 251. Nevertheless it was in after times received (b) by his followers. It may be thought by fome, that this epiftle is referred to by (i) Arnobius, about 306. and (k) Lactantius, about the fame time. It is plainly quoted by (1) another Arnobius, in the fifth centurie. It was received, as Paul's, by (m) Hilarie, of Poitiers, about 354. and (n) by Lucifer, Bp. of Cagliari, in Sardinia, about the fame time, and by (0) his followers. It was alfo received, as Paul's, by (p) C. M. Victorinus. Whether (q) it was received by Optatus, of Milevi, in Africa, about 370, is doubtful. It was received as Paul's by (r) Ambrofe, Bp. of Milan, about 374. by (s) the Prifcillianifts, about 378. About the year 380. was published a Commentarie upon thirteen epiftles of Paul only, (t) afcribed to Hilarie, Deacon of Rome. It was received as Paul's by (u) Philafter, Bp. of Brefcia in Italie, about 380. But he takes notice, that it was not then received by all. His fucceffor Gaudentius, about 387. quotes this (x) epiftle as Paul's. It is alfo readily received as Paul's by (y) Jerome, about 392. And he says, it was gene ... rally (a) Thofe paffages are alleged, with remarks. Vol. i. p. 87. . . . 95. first ed. p. 85..... 94. 2d ed. And fee p. 103. firft ed. p. 101. 2d ed. ... (e) (b) See Vol. i. 368. 98. (4) See Vol. vii. p. 52. (m) Vol. viii. p. 283. (p) P. 59. (s) P. 325... 328. (x) P. 379. (n) Vol. ix. p. 42. (y) Vol. x. p. 76. 112. 113. and 119. |
