Clivedurdle

Who wrote Hebrews?

EarlDoherty

Haven't a clue. And no one else does either.

The odd suggestion, such as Apollos, is fanciful, since there is nothing in the epistle to suggest anything in common with what we know of that figure, especially one who was a travelling apostle. The author of Hebrews is resident of a specific community that didn't seem to get out much.

It is quite likely that it was written by someone who is recorded nowhere else, and that we don't have a hope of uncovering. (It's pretty well agreed in mainstream scholarship that the final 4 verses, in which "Timothy" is mentioned are a later addition.)

Earl Doherty

Ben C Smith

Not sure, but you can read through some of the ancient guesses on my Hebrews page.

Ben.

Chris Weimer

Is it later? How much later? Is it by the same author written later, or an interpolation, according to the mainstream, of course, and not your opinion.

And is it really in fact the mainstream opinion that these are a later addition? Who are these mainstream scholars? Who espoused these views? Lane? Koester? Moffat? Attridge? Bruce? Westcott? Manson? Wilson? Michel? Ellingworth? Montifeiorre? Hughes? Lindars? Jewett? Weiss? Spicq? C. Koester? LT Johnson?

What about those who have written on integrity of the epistle, or analyzed it's structure? What about Dussat, Cranfield, Tasker, Uberlacker, Crowy, Guthrie, Backhaus?

Or how about those who specifically discussed these very last few sentences in the epistle? H. Koester, Dibelius, Wikenhauser, Schmid, Kummel, Schnelle, Brown, Martin, H. Koester?

Please, Earl, who are these "mainstream" scholars?

EarlDoherty

You're pulling a Gibson, Chris. If you think I've said something that you don't agree with, then YOU offer names and statements that disagree with me, as you see it. Don't expect me to do all the work.

Earl Doherty

Chris Weimer

Oh this is great. You make a claim, and refuse to back it up. Bullshit, Earl.

Ted Hoffman

You never asked him to back up his claims. You waxed smartass and paraded a list of scholars and asked him to choose from the list.
If you had a clue what you were doing, instead of showing us how many names you know, you would have quickly listed a list of mainstream scholars who disagree with him and conclude that his claims are incorrect.

As it is, one person who has done no known work on the subject climbs on the stage in the middle of a discussion and loudly demands to be educated. You refuse to educate him and he shouts "bullshit." So that is your method Chris: you ask for something, nay, demand for it, then if its not forthcoming, you petulantly say "bullshit" like a little child. Any ignoramus can do that.
As you are aware, this is not a very effective approach towards acquisition of knowledge. Earl's familiarity with the subject affords him the confidence to make the assertions he makes. He does not have to expend his time answering little questions from pesky students in the net, who would do well to spend their time researching rather than than posturing pretentiously.

If I were Earl, I wouldnt bother with you and your tiny little insults.

jjramsey

But presumably you already did the work, right? Otherwise, you wouldn't have made the claim, "It's pretty well agreed in mainstream scholarship that the final 4 verses, in which "Timothy" is mentioned are a later addition." You could easily rattle off the names of several mainstream scholars who prove your point, since you already either know who they are, so why don't you?

Chris Weimer

Ah, yes, the argument from authority and the ad hominem. Very well done, Hoffman! You've shown yourself a true example of scholarship.

Chris Weimer

From Gibson himself:

===========================