Bipartite or Tripartite Nature of Man?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

The author of Hebrews said that s/he got their revelation of Christ from those who'd been eyewitnesses: "This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him" (2:3[NIV]); which strongly contrasts with Paul's gospel narrative: "I didn't receive it from any man" (Gal 1:12).

It doesn't prove that Paul didn't write Hebrews, but it leans in that direction.

You know what WL's reasoning was? "Only Paul could have written a book like Hebrews"... that was it... and on such slender reeds the LC's conceptual edifice was built.

There's no conflict here in verse 2.3. Yes, Paul saw the Lord directly, but that does not negate the fact that "this salvation first announced by the Lord" in the gospels (referring especially to the teachings of Jesus) "was confirmed to us by those who heard Him," referring to the 12 Apostles, Mary and the other women, and perhaps other disciples. The "us" referred to Luke and Paul, and possibly others who assisted in the research, as also Luke implies in his gospel (1.1-4) and Acts (1.1).

The chief critique against Paul's authorship was the excellent grasp of the Greek language. Luke is always considered a potential author because the writing matches his other books, but the chief critique against Luke's authorship was his lack of O.T. knowledge. Both Paul and Luke were close to Timothy. (13.23)

So unless someone can poke a hole in my assertion that Paul authored the rough draft of the book and Luke wrote the final version, that's my story, and I'm sticking to it. I arrived at my conclusion not from Lee, but by reading historians such as Schaaf. (Volume I, #100, pp. 808-824) Sorry if you don't like it.