Exercitations on the Epistle to the Hebrews

§ 16 Various Answers have been given to this Objection, some of them of no more validity, than its self. Hierom replies, it hath no mans name prefixed, therefore we may by as good Reason, Say it was written by no man, as not by Paul; which Instance though it be approved by Beza with other learned men, and not sufficiently answered by Erasmus with a contrary instance, yet indeed it is of no value; for being written, it must be written by some body, though not perhaps by St. Paul. Some have thought, that it may be, the Inscription inquired after was at first prefixed, but by some means or other hath been lost. But as there are very many Arguments and Evidences to evince the weakness of this imagination, so the beginning and entrance of the Epistle is such, as is uncapable of any contexture with such a Salutation, as that used in other Epistles, as is also that of St. John, so that this Conjecture can here have no place.

§ 16 Various Answers have been given to this Objection, some of them of no more validity, than its self. Hierom replyes, it hath no mans name prefixed, therefore we may by as good Reason, Say it was written by no man, as not by Paul; which Instance though it be approved by Beza with other learned men, and not sufficiently answered by Erasmus with a contrary instance, yet indeed it is of no value; for being written, it must be written by some body, though not perhaps by St. Paul. Some have thought, that it may be, the Inscription inquired after was at first prefixed, but by some means or other hath been lost. But as there are very many Arguments and Evidences to evince the weakness of this imagination, so the beginning and entrance of the Epistle is such, as is uncapable of any contexture with such a Salutation, as that used in other Epistles, as is also that of St. John, so that this Conjecture can here have no place.

§ 17 Some of the Ancients, and principally Theodoret insist upon the peculiar allotment of his Work unto him among the Gentiles. Paul was the Apostle of the Gentiles, in an especial manner; and if in Writing unto the Hebrews he had prefixed his name unto his Epistle, he might have seemed to transgress the Line of his Allotment. And if it be not certain that the Apostles by common consent cast their Work into distinct portions, which they peculiarly attended unto; as the Ancients generally concur that they did, (and there was not reason wanting why they should do so) yet it is, that there was a special Convention and agreement between James, Peter, and John on the one side, and Paul and Barnabas on the other, that they should attend the Ministry of the Circumcision, and these of the Gentiles. Hence Paul finding it necessary for him to write unto the Hebrews, would not prefix his name with an Apostolical Salutation unto his Epistle, that he might not seem to have invaded the Province of others, or transgressed the Line of his Allotment. But I must acknowledge that notwithstanding the weight laid upon it by Theodoret and some others, this reason seems not unto me cogent unto the end for which it is produced. For (1.) The Commission given by the Lord Christ unto his Apostles, was Catholic, and had no bounds but that of the whole Creation of God capable of instruction,