, in connection with its peculiar style and diction and the
peculiar range of the topics discussed in it, have produced a diversity
of opinion on the question whether Paul was its author, at least its
author in the immediate sense in which he was the author of the
preceding epistles. For the full discussion of the arguments on both
sides the reader must be referred to the commentaries, some of which are
accessible to all. Our limits will only permit us to indicate certain
facts and principles which have a bearing on the authorship of the
epistle and its canonical authority.

The unanimous belief of the _Eastern_ church, where we must suppose that
it was first received and whence the knowledge of it was spread abroad,
ascribed it to Paul as its author either immediately or virtually; for
some, as Origen (in Eusebius' Hist. Eccl., 6. 14) accounted for its
peculiar diction by the supposition that Paul furnished the thoughts,
while they were reduced to form by the pen of some other person. Another
opinion was that Paul wrote in Hebrew, and that our present canonical
epistle is a translation into Greek (Eusebius' Hist. Eccl., 3. 38;
Clement of Alexandria in Eusebius' Hist. Eccl., 6. 14). In the _Western_
church Clement of Rome did indeed refer to the epistle as authoritative,
but without naming the author. Yet its Pauline authorship was not
generally admitted, nor was it received as a part of the sacred canon
till the fourth century, when here too the opinion of the Eastern church
was adopted. The Muratorian canon, which represents the belief of the
Western church before the fourth century, omits this epistle. The Syriac
Peshito, on the other hand, inserts it in accordance with its uniform
reception by the Eastern church. This uniformity of belief in the
Eastern church must have had for its starting point the Hebrews to whom
the epistle was sent; and it is a strong argument for the supposition
that it did originally come to them under the sanction of Paul's name
and authority; whether dictated to an amanuensis, as were most of his
epistles, or written with his knowledge and approbation by some inspired
man among his attendants and fellow-laborers who was thoroughly
conversant with his views on the subjects treated of in the epistle.
This is as far as we have any occasion to go, since we know that the
gift of inspiration was not confined to the circle of the apostles.

As we cannot affirm that _all_ who were associated wi