Hebrews as Pseudepigraphon: The History and Significance of the Pauline Attribution of Hebrews (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament)

The history of scholarship on Hebrews attests a tension between the originality and Pauline character of its epistolary postscript (13:20-25). Generally speaking, scholars accepting the postscript's originality reject its Pauline character, while those rejecting its originality accept its reliance on Paul's letters. The Pauline character of the postscript is especially problematic for implying Paul's authorship of the book-a thesis that is all but dispensed with today. Clare K. Rothschild argues that if Hebrews's postscript is both original and imitative of Paul's letters, and if such imitation on the part of the author of Hebrews deliberately identifies the author as Paul, the entire book of Hebrews merits consideration as a pseudepigraphon. Examining Hebrews from this perspective, Rothschild makes the case that neither the postscript nor the rest of Hebrews was composed de novo . Rather, it deliberately adopts words and phrases-including citations from the Jewish scriptures-from a collection of Pauline materials, in order to imply Paul's authorship of a message that stands in continuity with esteemed Pauline traditions. Furthermore, the longstanding tradition of Hebrews's Pauline attribution suggests that it never circulated independently of other works attributed to Paul but was composed to amplify an early corpus Paulinum . This is the first ever monograph to examine the history of Hebrews' Pauline attribution and the significance of this attribution for our understanding of the book and its author's indebtedness to Pauline traditions. Cover Dedication Acknowledgments Table of Contents Abbreviations and References Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Historical Overview of the Pauline Attribution of Hebrews 1.3 Isolating the Postscript 1.4 Outline of the Present Investigation 1.5 Summation Chapter 2: Early Reception History of Hebrews: Rejected in the West? 2.1 Introduction Chart I 2.2 What Was Rejected and What Constitutes Rejection? 2.2.1 Introduction 2.2.1.1 Two Purported Major Witnesses to Hebrews’s Censurein the West 2.2.1.2 Muratorian Fragment 2.2.1.3 Gaius of Rome 2.2.1.4 Minor Witnesses to Hebrews’s Purported Western Censure 2.2.1.5 Major Witness to Hebrews’s Western Acceptance prior to Augustine and Jerome 2.2.1.6 Summation 2.2.2 Introduction 2.2.2.1 Evidence of Hebrews’s Citation in the West prior to Augustine and Jerome 2.2.2.2 Summation 2.3 What is the Significance of Augustine’s and Jerome’s Testimonies concerning Hebrews? Summation 2.4 Reception of Hebrews in the East 2.4.1 Introduction 2.4.2 Theodore of Mopsuestia 2.4.3 Other Canon Lists 2.4.4 Other Eastern Witnesses 2.4.5 P 2.5 Summation Epilogue: East versus West Chapter 3: History of Scholarship: status quaestionis of the Pauline Attribution of Hebrews 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Heb 13:20–25: The Role of the post scriptum in the History of Hebrews’s Pauline Attribution Chart II 3.2.1 Secondary Authorship 3.2.2 Primary Authorship 3.3 Summation Chapter 4: Literary Dependence: The Imitation of Paul in Hebrews 4.1 Introduction 4.2 The Imitation of Paul in Hebrews 13:20–25 4.3 The Imitation of Paul: Beyond the Postscript 4.3.1 Introduction 4.3.2 Hebrews 13:1–19 and Pauline Traditions 4.3.3 Scriptural Allusions in Hebrews and Paul’s Letters Chart III 4.3.3.1 Comparison of Exact Correspondences 4.3.3.2 Comparison of Inexact Correspondences 4.3.3.3 Summary 4.3.4 Hebrews 1–12 and Pauline Traditions 4.3.5 Conclusion 4.4 Summation Chapter 5: Hebrews as Pseudepigraphon 5.1 Introduction 5.2 History of Research 5.3 Characteristics of the Classification “Pseudepigrapha” 5.3.1 “What’s in a Name?” 5.3.2 Intent to Deceive 5.3.3 Criteria of Pauline Pseudepigrapha 5.4 Pseudonymity: A “Rhetoric of Allusion” 5.4.1 Introduction 5.4.2 Active versus Reflexive Interpretation: A Hermeneutical Model 5.4.3 Allusion as Revelation Production 5.4.4 Summation 5.5 Hebrews, Pseudonymity and the Formation of the Pauline Canon 5.5.1 Introduction 5.5.2 Early Christian Assumptions concerning Hebrews’s Pauline Authorship 5.5.3 Assumption Hebrews Circulated Independently 5.5.4 The Earliest Letter Collections of Paul 5.5.5 Conclusion 5.6 Hebrews and Acts 5.7 Summation Chapter 6: Prophecy and Authorship in Hebrews 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Prophecy in Hebrews: Form-Critical Method 6.2.1 Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World 6.2.2 Protocol Chart IV 6.3 Analytical Interpretation 6.4 Summation Chapter 7: Reductio ad Absurdum 7.1 Introduction 7.2 Contradictions 7.2.1 γενεαλογία 7.2.2 άμαρτία 7.2.3 θυσία 7.2.4 άρχιερεύς 7.2.5 πόλις 7.2.6 ὕψηλός 7.2.7 πιστός 7.2.8 νόμος 7.3 Summation Chapter 8: Conclusion Plates Bibliography Indices References 1. Hebrew Bible 2. Other Jewish Sources 3. Greek and Latin Texts 4. New Testament 5. Early Christian Literature and the Ancient Church Modern Authors Subjects HauptbeschreibungThe history of scholarship on Hebrews attests a tension between the originality and Pauline character of its epistolary postscript (13:20-25). Generally speaking, scholars accepting the postscript's originality reject its Pauline character, while those rejecting its originality accept its reliance on Paul's letters. The Pauline character of the postscript is especially problematic for implying Paul's authorship of the book-a thesis that is all but dispensed with today. Clare K. Rothschild argues that if Hebrews's postscript is both original and imitative of Paul's letters, and "Clare K. Rothschild offers the first comprehensive study of Hebrews' Pauline attribution, arguing the text was originally composed to amplify an early collection of Paul's letters."--Provided by publisher