SECT. III.

Is the Epifle to the Hebrews quoted 2 Pet. iii. 15, 16?

T. PETER in his fecond Epiftle, ch. iii. 15, 16.

STa

fays, And account that the long fuffering of our Lord is our falvation: even as our beloved brother Paul alfo, according to the wifdom given unto him, hath written unto you, as alfo in all his Epiftles, in which are fome things hard to be understood.' In this paffage it has been very generally fuppofed, efpecially in modern times, that St. Peter by the words, as our beloved brother Paul hath written unto you,' meant the Epiftle to the Hebrews: and hence the inference has been drawn, not only that the Epistle to the Hebrews was fent to the fame communities, as the fecond Epistle of Peter, namely to thofe in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Afia, and Bithynia, but likewife that St. Paul was the author of it. Now they who argue in this manner manifeftly argue in a circle: for, as St. Peter fpeaks in exprefs terms of an Epiftle written by St. Paul, we cannot apply the paffage to the Epistle to the Hebrews, without previously affuming that St. Paul was the author of it. But this is the thing to be proved.

Further, if it could be proved even to a demonftration, that St. Paul was the author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews, yet as he was the author of fo many other Epifties, we cannot conclude, that St. Peter meant the Epiftle to the Hebrews in particular, unless it can be fhewn, that the fubject, for which St. Peter quotes St. Paul, is difcuffed in this Epiftle. But this is fo far from being true, that of the matter, on which St. Peter difcourfes in the place, where he makes the quotation, not a fyllable is to be found in the Epiftle to the Hebrews. For St. Peter does not fpeak in this place, as many imagine, of the juftification of a finner before God for the fake of Chrift, a fubject which is certainly difcuffed

6

in the Epistle to the Hebrews: but on the contrary, he treats of a very different matter. The words, account that the long fuffering of our Lord is our falvafion,' (την τε Κύριε ήμων μακροθυμίαν σωτηρίαν ήγεισθε), are explained by what St. Peter had faid, ver. 9. The Lord

is not flack concerning his promife, as fome men count flackness, but is long fuffering to us-ward, not willing that any fhould perifh, but that all fhould come to repentance.' It is evident therefore that St. Peter fpeaks, not of juftification through Christ, but of the prolongation of the day of judgement, on which many Chriftians in the first century entertained very extraordinary notions. For they imagined, that, according to Chrift's prophecy, it would take place in the age, in which they lived: and finding that it did not take place, they began to doubt of the truth of the Chriftian religion. Hence St. Peter affures them that one day is with the Lord as a thoufand years, and a thousand years as one day:' that they ought neither to be impatient nor incredulous, because the day of judgement was poftponed, fince this very prolongation afforded them an opportunity of repenting, and might be regarded therefore as the means of their falva

On this fubject not a fyllable is to be found in the Epiftle to the Hebrews. On the contrary, we find in it affurances of the coming of the Lord, which they, to whom the Epiftle was written, would furvive: not indeed to judge the world, but to judge Jerufalem *.

Other commentators, who acknowledge that St. Peter in the paffage in queftion is fpeaking of the day of judgement, appeal to Heb. xii. 25-29. where the fubject likewife relates to the general judgement and the end of the world. But this argument is likewife insufficient; for though, in this paffage of the Epiftle to the Hebrews, as well as in 2 Pet. iii. 15. the fubject relates to the day of judgement, yet the modes of reafoning on it in the two paffages are very different. St. Peter fpeaks of the prolongation of the day of judgement, and argues from it to the mercy and long fuffering of God: but we

• Heb. x. 25. 35, 36, 37.

find

find nothing of this kind in Heb. xii. 25-29. Befides, St. Peter adds in the paffage in queftion, as alfo in all his Epiftles; the fubject therefore, which he difcuffes, muft not be confidered as particularly diftinguishing any one of St. Paul's Epiftles from the reft. The claufe 'in which are fome things hard to be understood' has likewife been applied in proof of the opinion, that St. Peter meant the Epiftle to the Hebrews, because this is a difficult and obfcure Epiftle. But, not to mention that the Epiftles to the Romans, the Corinthians, the Ephefians, and the Coloffians, are equally difficult, St. Peter did not make this affertion of any of St. Paul's Epiftles in particular. The two claufes in connexion are, As alfo in all his Epiftles, fpeaking in them of these things, in which are fome things hard to be understood.' Here the relative which,' if it refers to Epiftles,' according to the reading of many Greek manufcripts, which have ais, refers to St. Paul's Epiftles in general: and if it refers to things' according to the reading of other Greek manufcripts, which have vois, it has no reference whatever to St. Paul's Epiftles. Befides, the fecond Epiftle of St. Peter was not written to Hebrews, or circumcifed Jews, but to uncircumcifed Jewish profelytes, as will be fhewn in a fubfequent chapter: and therefore by the expreflion as our beloved brother Paul hath written unto you' St. Peter must have meant a different Epiftle from the Epiftle to the Hebrews.

See my Differtation on the Epiftle to the Hebrews, § 3, 4. .

SECT. IV.

The Epistle to the Hebrews was written for the use of the Chriftians in Jerufalem and Palefline.

A

MONG the various opinions relative to the community or communities, to which this Epiftle was fent, the most ancient is, that it was defigned for the ufe of the Jewith converts, either at Jerufalem, or in. Palestine at large. And this opinion I fhall adopt as preferable to every other, without entering into the minute difcuffion of the question, whether it was fent to Jerufalem alone, or to other cities in Palestine: for this is a question of little or no importance, fince an Epistle, intended for the ufe of Jewish converts in Jerufalem, muit have equally concerned the other Jewish converts in that country.

It is true, that there is no initiatory formule in this Epiftle, which perhaps was omitted through the negligence of the tranflator: and therefore in the Epiftle itfelf there is no title, to which we can appeal. But the fuperfcription in all the manufcripts is Ἡ προς Εβραίος to: and the fuperfcriptions to the feveral Epiftles of the Apoftles have hitherto remained free from that fufpicion of fpurioufnefs, to which the fubfcriptions are very juftly expofed. Now in the language of the New Teftament, the Hebrews are Jews, who ufed the Hebrew language, and the term is ufed to diftinguish them from thofe who fpake Greek, and were called Hellenists: But Hebrew-fpeaking Jews, to whom this Epiftle was addreffed, cannot well be any other than the Jews of Palestine. It is true, that the Jews, who were scattered through the Parthian Empire, likewife fpake Hebrew, or more properly, Chaldee: but as no man can fuppofe, that this Epiftle was fent to perfons, who lived beyond the Euphrates, it would be a waste of time, to fhew that the

Compare Acts vi. 1. with my Differtation on the Epistle to the Hebrews,

8.

the word' Hebrews' does not denote the Parthian Jews", That the Epiftle was written to Hebrews, is agreed on by all antiquity. Clement of Alexandria fays that it was written for the Hebrews in the Hebrew language '; on which words no other meaning can be put, as far as I am able to judge, than that it was written in Hebrew, for the benefit of those, whofe native language was Hebrew, And in this manner I understand all the ancient writers, who say that the Epistle was written in Hebrew. But where are we to feek for Hebrew-speaking Jews, to whom this Epiftle could be fent, except in Palestine ? This question I will not answer decidedly in the affirmative, as an indubitable historical fact, but only as a probable opinion, efpecially fince Chryfoftom delivers it only as fuch. For he fays in his Preface or Hypothefis to his Expofition of this Epiftle, Why did he write to the Jews, whofe teacher he was not; And where were they to whom he wrote?' In my opinion at Jerufalem, and in Palestine*,

This moft ancient opinion or report is corroborated by the contents of the Epiftle itself. In other Epiftles, which were addreffed to mixed communities, we meet with frequent exhortations to brotherly love and unity between the converts from Judaism and Heathenism, who are reprefented as equals, and as brethren: but in the Epistle to the Hebrews are no fuch exhortations, which agrees with the hypothefis, that it was sent to Chriftian communities in Palestine, because these were not mixed communities, but confifted wholly of Jewish converts. It is true that the author fpeaks of brotherly love,

I will obferve however, that if this Epiftle had been fent to Parthian Jews, who became converts to Chriftianity, the Hebrew original would hardly have been loft; for in the countries, which bordered on the Euphrates, the Christian religion was propagated at a very early age, And in this cafe likewife, the author of the Syriac verfion would have tranflated this Epiftle, not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew.

1 Eufeb. Hift. Ecclef. Lib. VI. cap. 14. The ages Elging swisohni Παυλο μεν είναι φησι, γεγράφθαι δε Εβραίοις Εβραικη φωνη.

* Τίνος εν ένεκεν, εκ ων των Ιεδαίων διδάσκαλος, επιστέλλει αυτοίς, σε και πες ελλην; Εμοι δοκεί, εν Ιεροσολύμοις και Παλαιστινη