This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Religion: Interfaith High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope of Interfaith work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive. Christianity Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Bible Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Religious texts (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts Ancient Near East Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ancient Near East–related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Books This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

This paragraph made no sense to me. If it makes sense to someone else, please insert it again.

-Removed Paragraph- This is one of the few Epistles in the Bible that have no distinct author. Yet there is good reason for this. If Paul had written it was not becoming that he should write, "Paul an Apostle of Jesus Christ.." in the introduction because Jesus Christ is seen as the Apostle in this Epistle. Hebrews 3:1, "Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of [the] heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Jesus."

— Matthew Hambrick 21:45, April 14, 2006.

I thought this paragraph was biased and therefore I removed it, but left a few aspects of it. If I was wrong please replace it.

Some, such as John A. T. Robinson, place the entire New Testament at a much earlier date. Robinson argues, for example, that there is no textual evidence that the New Testament authors had knowledge of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple by the Romans in AD 70. Especially in light of Jesus' prediction of the destruction of the Temple, the New Testament would be expected to reflect this. Other scholars, such as Hank Hanegraaff, have argued for an early date for the New Testament on similar lines of evidence. The exact date of authorship rarely makes a significant difference in the interpretation of a book, with the exception of the Book of Revelation.

— Matthew Hambrick 22:19, May 25, 2006.

in the wiki it states, At present, neither modern scholarship nor church teaching ascribes Hebrews to Paul.

but the source is from 1993. i argue that this sentence is removed or reworked. thoughts? 104.175.178.167 (talk) 07:25, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Show us that things have changed since then. But we only accept relatively recent sources written by full professors who are mainstream Bible scholars. Otherwise, don't try, don't waste our time.

In the mainstream academia Paul wrote Hebrews is seen as a childish and fanciful idea. tgeorgescu (talk) 11:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

chapter 7 v 202.9.74.6 (talk) 03:38, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In May 2013 with this revision the following text was added, without citation:

However, the author's use of the masculine gender participle when referring to himself in cf 11:32 makes it unlikely it could be Priscilla or any other woman.

In May 2017, the claim having been there with "citation required" for years, was removed with this revision.

In August 2021 the claim reappeared with this revision, attributed to a printed source.

In the article on Priscilla and Aquila: Hoppin and others suggest that Priscilla was the author, but that her name was omitted either to suppress its female authorship, or to protect the letter itself from suppression.^[1][2]

So I think that it is too much to say "a majority of scholars hold that the author was presumably male" (the citations do not support "a majority of"), and we should also allow for the masculine form being used (originally, or as altered by a copyist) to hide its female authorship, which at the time could have been used to detract from its authority and/or acceptance. Jinlye (talk) 11:59, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. I have removed that sentence as unsupported by its citation; if you're going to claim that a majority of scholars say something, your source needs to support that. Someone can re-add it as a point against Priscilla's authorship if it really is a significant point in the discussion (i.e., not WP:UNDUE), and as long as they don't push the claim too far. Smdjcl (talk) 18:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What does this phrase mean? "written in deliberate imitation of the style of Paul,[8][9] "

I ask since the Greek style of Hebrews (as noted below) is considerably different and higher than Paul's Greek, and we don't have a sermon by Paul. So, this doesn't seem to make sense to me.

ABS (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section on Audience is weak at best. Would it be better to remove it now, until substantial improvement can be made?

ABS (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]