the epistolary closing of hebrews and pauline imitation 275
Clare rothschild’s 2009 monograph Hebrews as Pseudepigraphon fol-
lows wrede in arguing that the author of hebrews wrote the postscript
in an attempt to pass the composition off as a pauline letter. however,
unlike wrede, rothschild contends that the author did not decide to
do this mid-composition, but intended this from the very beginning in
order to accomplish pauline attribution.29 The postscript, according to
rothschild, is a “deliberate forgery” claiming pauline authorship with the
intention of being published as a part of an existing pauline corpus.
The closing verses of hebrews (and often the entire thirteenth chapter)
have become an essential crux in discussions of the epistle’s status as pau-
line pseudepigraphy. Two factors are typical of the various arguments for
hebrews’ pseudonymity: (1) 13:20–25 is seen as a later addition by some-
one other than the author, and/or (2) the postscript was written in such
a way as to imitate paul’s letters. as we have seen, not all arguments for
the pseudonymity of hebrews contain both of these factors, but each does
incorporate at least one into their reasoning. it is to these two factors that
we now turn.
Hebrews 13 as a Later Addition
The major arguments for seeing heb 13:20–25 as a later addition to the
epistle concern the flow of the discourse along with a change in vocab-
ulary and style. first, a shift is often identified either at 13:1, 20, or 22.
wherever one recognizes a shift, many scholars note the change from
the more oratorically-toned and tightly structured chs. 1–12 to the mostly
exhortative and epistolary form of the last chapter.30 second, it is noted
that hebrews 13 contains many terms and phrases not found elsewhere in
hebrews.31 it is further highlighted that many of these terms are distinc-
tively pauline and it is thus suspected that the final chapter was a later
addition written in an attempt to appear pauline.
29 rothschild understands her argument to be the “natural move in the line of rea-
soning begun by wrede” (Hebrews as Pseudepigraphon, 4). for a more detailed descrip-
tion of rothschild’s thesis with critical engagement, see bryan r. dyer, “The epistle to the
hebrews in recent research: studies on the author’s identity, his use of the old Testa-
ment, and Theology,” JGRChJ 9 (2013): forthcoming.
30 overbeck, Zur Geschichte des Kanons, 16; Torrey, “authorship and Character,” 147ff.;
wedderburn, “ ‘letter’ to the hebrews,” 390.
31 wrede, Das literarische Rätsel des Hebräerbriefs, 39–63; Torrey, “authorship and
Character,” 147; grässer, An die Hebräer, 1:17–18.