the epistolary closing of hebrews and pauline imitation 271
it is the purpose of this essay to reexamine hebrews’ postscript in order
to assess its value in discussions regarding the epistle’s relationship to
paul. after a survey of previous scholarship on heb 13:20–25 and pauline
pseudepigraphy, this essay will argue two things. first, despite appeals to
the contrary, hebrews 13 is best understood as original to the composition
and not a later addition. a shift in the discourse in this last chapter is a
common feature of letter closings and does not necessarily indicate an
addition or change in author. second, a comparative reading of hebrews’
letter closing with other new Testament and ancient closings will show
that there is not enough distinctly pauline parallels to warrant the conclu-
sion that the author of hebrews was attempting to pass his letter off as
from paul. while certain formal parallels do exists, many of these parallels
are found within other new Testament and ancient letter closings.
Definition of Pseudepigraphy
it is important to first define what i mean by Pauline pseudepigraphy before
moving forward in our discussion.8 what classifies as pseudepigraphy is
often debated or, even worse, simply assumed in new Testament scholar-
ship. of particular importance for our study is whether a document needs
to contain a false name to be considered pseudepigraphy. as mentioned
above, several scholars restrict the term to compositions written under a
false name.9 since hebrews lacks a formal ascription, considerations of
the epistle’s pseudonymity must allow for the author to appeal to a false
8 The range of terms to refer to pseudepigraphy (including “pseudepigrapha,” “pseud-
onymity”) needs clarification. i use “pseudepigraphy” and “pseudonymity” interchangeably,
although i agree with Clarke’s distinction: “ ‘pseudonymity’ and its cognates emphasize the
author as subject, whereas ‘pseudepigraphy’ and its cognates emphasize the literature as
subject” (Clarke, “problem of pseudonymity,” 441). further, since “pseudepigrapha” is often
used to refer to a particular body of literature, i will avoid using the term except in this
use. for a helpful definition of relevant terms, see Klauck, Ancient Letters and the New
Testament, 400–402.
9 porter, for example, writes: “whereas there are a number of works that are formally
anonymous in the new Testament... only those with explicit claims to authorship can be
considered [pseudepigraphy]” (porter, “pauline authorship and the pastoral epistles,” 113).
on the other hand, Kurt aland has argued that anonymity and pseudepigraphy are closely
connected (the latter is derived from the former) and that most early Christian writings
were anonymous. at a later date, according to aland, titles and names were added—not
in order to deceive, but to confirm their apostolic and spirit-filled character (Kurt aland,
“The problem of anonymity and pseudonymity in Christian literature of the first Two
Centuries,” JTS 12 [1961]: 39–49). in response to aland, see metzger, “literary forgeries
and pseudepigrapha,” 16–18.