احنا كابناء كنيسة اسكندرية لا يوجد لدينا اى تقليد اخر لهذة الرسالة عن كاتبها سوى القديس بولس الرسول هذا التقليد مستمر من القرن الثالث ومن قبله كلمينضدس فى القرن الثانى والى يومنا هذا
ولا نقبل اى تقليد اخرى غير تقليد كنيسة اسكندرية العريقة بخصوص هذة الرسالة
يقول البرت بارنز " هقوم بحذف اسم الكتاب والمؤلف منعا لزيادة حجم الكلام " فى تعليقاته على كنيسة اسكندرية
The testimony of the church at Alexandria was uniform after the time of Origen, that it was the production of Paul. Indeed there seems never to have been any doubt in regard to it there, and from the commencement it was admitted as his production
شهادة كنيسة اسكندرية كانت موحدة من بعد زمن اوريجانوس بان هذة الرسالة هى من انتاج بولس ويبدو انه ليس هناك اى شك باعتبارها كذلك ومن البداية كان الاعتراف بانها من انتاجه
* بالنسبة لاوريجانوس بالرغم من اعترافه بانها افكار بولس وكلن لغة كاتب اخر وقال جملته اللادرية الشهرية " الله وحده يعرف من كاتبها " قد اوردت جملة له فى رسالته لافريكانوس يؤكد له انه فى وقت اخر سيكتب له عن تاكيد تاليف بولس لرسالة العبرانين بما يدل بقوة انه مقتنع بهذا التقليد السكندرى الاصيل بانها من انتاج بولس
السؤال لماذا تقليد كنيسة اسكندرية بالذات يحمل كل هذا الثقل العالى بالنسبة للتقاليد الكنسية؟؟؟؟؟؟؟؟؟
يجيب البرت بارنز ويقول
The testimony of that church and school is particularly valuable, because (a) it was near to Palestine, where the epistle was probably sent; (b) Clement particularly had travelled much, and would be likely to understand the prevailing sentiments of the East; (c) Alexandria was the seat of the most celebrated theological school of the early Christian ages, and those who were at the head of this school would be likely to have correct information on a point like this; and (d) Origen is admitted to have been the most learned of the Greek Fathers, and his testimony that the “sentiments” were those of Paul may be regarded as of peculiar value
1-قربها من فلسطين حيثما ارسلت الرسالة
2- كلمينضدس بالاخص كان بيسافر كثيرا ويفهم كل الاراء ووجهات النظر السائدة فى الشرق
3-اسكندرية كانت مقر المدرسة اللاهوتية الاكثر شهرة فى العصور المسيحية الاولى والذين على راس هذة المدرسة لابد وان لديهم معلومات صحيحة عن هذا الموضوع
4-شهادة اوريجانوس ان وجهات النظر تعتبرها لبولس ذات قيمة مميزة وخاصة
باختصار الرسالة ارسلت لفلسطين واقرب مكان لفلسطين هو اسكندرية وخصوصا ان اباء اسكندرية كانوا دائما فى ترحال فى الشرق للاطلاع على التقاليد المختلفة وهذا ما اكدوه بان هذة الرسالة لبولس بالاضافة ان مدرسة اسكندرية ذات الاهمية القصوى فى تاريخ المسيحية فى القرون الاولى لا يفوت عليها امر مثل هذا ولابد وان لديها تقليد صحيح بخصوص هذا الشان عن كاتب الرسالة وهذا ما اكدته تقليد كنيسة اسكندرية ان رسالة العبرانين من انتاج بولس الرسول .
It was inserted in the translation into the Syriac, made very early in the second century, and in the old Italic version, and was hence believed to be of apostolic origin, and is by the in******ion ascribed to Paul. This may be allowed to express the general sense of the churches at that time, as this would not have been done unless there had been a general impression that the epistle was written by him. The fact that it was early regarded as an inspired book is also conclusively shown by the fact that the second epistle of Peter, and the second and third epistles of John, are not found in that version. They came later into circulation than the other epistles, and were not possessed, or regarded as genuine, by the author of that version. The epistle to the Hebrews is found in those versions, and was, therefore, regarded as one of the inspired books. In those versions it bears the in******ion, “To the Hebrews.”http://www.arabchurch.com/forums/#_ftn1
رسالة العبرانين ادمجت ضمن الترجمة القديمة للعهد الجديد الى السريانية التى صنعت مبكرا فى القرن الثانى وايضا فى النسخة الايطالية القديمة لذا فهو كان من المؤكد معتبره من اصل رسولى وعن طريق الكتابة نسبت الى بولس
وهذا يسمح للتعبير عن الشعور العام للكنائس فى ذاك الوقت ان هناك انطباع عام بانه كتبت بواسطة القديس بولس الرسول
*ملاحظة بسيطة اى واحد عنده نسخة خابوريس وهى تعتبر مخطوط للتراجم السريانية هيجد فيها رسالة العبرانين مدرجة ضمن رسائل البولس
This epistle was received as the production of Paul by the Eastern churches. Justin Martyr, who was born at Samaria, quotes it, about the year 140. It was found, as has been already remarked, in the Peshito—the old Syriac version, made in the early part of the second century. Jacob, bishop of Nisibis, also (about A.D. 325) repeatedly quotes it as the production of an apostle. Ephrem Syrus, or the Syrian, abundantly ascribes this epistle to Paul. He was the disciple of Jacob of Nisibis, and no man was better qualified to inform himself on this point than Ephrem. No man stands deservedly higher in the memory of the Eastern churches. After him, all the Syrian churches acknowledged the canonical authority of the epistle to the Hebrews. But the most important testimony of the Eastern church is that of Eusebius, bishop of Cesarea, in Palestine. He is the well-known historian of the church, and he took pains from all quarters to collect testimony in regard to the Books of ******ure. He says, “There are fourteen epistles of Paul, manifest and well known: but yet there are some who reject that to the Hebrews, alleging in behalf of their opinion, that it was not received by the church of Rome as a writing of Paul.” The testimony of Eusebius is particularly important. He had heard of the objection to its canonical authority. He had weighed that objection. Yet in view of the testimony in the case, he regarded it as the undoubted production of Paul. As such it was received in the churches in the East; and the fact which he mentions, that its genuineness had been disputed by the church of Rome, and that he specifies no other church, proves that it had not been called in question in the East. This seems to me to be sufficient testimony to settle this inquiry. The writers here referred to lived in the very country to which the epistle was evidently written, and their testimony is uniform. Justin Martyr was born in Samaria; Ephrem passed his life in Syria; Eusebius lived in Cesarea, and Origen passed the last twenty years of his life in Palestine. The churches there were unanimous in the opinion that this epistle was written by Paul, and their united testimony should settle the question. Indeed when their testimony is considered, it seems remarkable that the subject should have been regarded as doubtful by critics, or that it should have given rise to so much protracted investigation. I might add to the testimonies above referred to, the fact that the epistle was declared to be Paul’s by the following persons: Archelaus, bishop of Mesopotamia, about A. D. 300; Adamantius, about 330; Cyril, of Jerusalem, about 348; the Council of Laodicea, about 363; Epiphanius, about 368; Basil, 370; Gregory Nazianzen, 370; Chrysostom, 398, &c. &c. Why should not the testimony of such men and churches be admitted? What more clear or decided evidence could we wish in regard to any fact of ancient history? Would not such testimony be ample in regard to an anonymous oration of Cicero, or poem of Virgil or Horace? Are we not constantly acting on far feebler evidence in regard to the authorship of many productions of celebrated English writers
?http://www.arabchurch.com/forums/#_ftn1
رسالة العبرانين استلمت بواسطة الكنائس الشرقية بانها انتاج بولس الرسول
وذكر زمرة الاباء الشرقيين الذين شهدوا بذلك من اول القديس يوستين مرورا بيوسابيوس وكيرلس الاورشليمى وافراهام السريانى ويعقوب النيصبيصى ومجمع لاودكية وابيفانيوس وغريغوريوس النيزنزى ويحنا ذهبى الفم وارشيلاوس
وختم وقال..........
لماذا لا نقبل شهادة هؤلاء الرجال والكنائس؟
ماذا نحتاج اكثر من هذا من ادلة اذا رغبنا ان ننظر فى حقيقة من حقائق العالم القديم ؟
واكمل وقال
انا نعمل دائما على ادلة اضعف بكثير من هذا حتى الان فيما يتعلق بتحديد هوية كتابات مجهولة الكاتب
يعنى من الاخر ليه منقبلش كل دول للاقرار بهوية الكاتب
واحنا الى يومنا هذا بيكون لدينا دليل ضعيف جدا وعلى اساسه بنحدد اسم كتاب مجهول فمبالك بكل هؤلاء الذين شهدوا لرسالة العبرانين من رجال قديسين وكنائس ومجامع وفى النهاية نقول ان الكاتب مجهول؟
In regard to the Western churches, it is to be admitted that, like the second epistle of Peter, and the second and third epistles of John, the canonical authority was for some time doubted, or was even called in question. But this may be accounted for. The epistle had not the name of the author. All the other epistles of Paul had. As the epistle was addressed to the Hebrews in Palestine, it may not have been soon known to the Western churches. As there were spurious epistles and gospels at an early age, much caution would be used in admitting any anonymous production to a place in the sacred canon. Yet it was not long before all these doubts were removed, and the epistle to the Hebrews was allowed to take its place among the other acknowledged writings of Paul. It was received as the epistle of Paul by Hilary, bishop of Poictiers, about A. D. 354; by Lucifer, bishop of Cagliari, 354; by Victorinus, 360; by Ambrose, bishop of Milan, 360; by Rufinus, 397, &c. &c. Jerome, the well-known Latin Father, uses in regard to it the following language: “This is to be maintained, that this epistle, which is inscribed to the Hebrews, is not only received by the churches at the East as the apostle Paul’s, but has been in past times by all ecclesiastical writers in the Greek language; although most [Latins] think that Barnabas or Clement was the author.” Still, it was not rejected by all the Latins. Some received it in the time of Jerome as the production of Paul. See Stuart, pp. 114, 115, for the full testimony of Jerome. Augustine admitted that the epistle was written by Paul. He mentions that Paul wrote fourteen epistles, and specifies particularly the epistle to the Hebrews. He often cites it as a part of ******ure, and quotes it as the production of an apostle. Stuart, p. 115. From the time of Augustine it was undisputed. By the council of Hippo, A. D. 393, the third council of Carthage, 397, and the fifth council of Carthage, 419, it was declared to be the epistle of Paul, and was as such commended to the churches.http://www.arabchurch.com/forums/#_ftn1
الرسالة فى الغرب استملت على انها رسالة بولس الرسول بواسطة الاباء الغربيين التاليين
1- هيلارى اسقف بواتيه .......اثناسيوس الغرب
2- لوسيفر اسقف كالجراى
3-فيكتورنيوس
4-امبروسيوس اسقف ميلان
5-رفونيوس
6-جيروم
7-اغسطينوس
8-مجمع هيبو
9-مجمع قرطاج الثالث
10 مجمع قرطاج الخامس
يعنى تقريبا من بداية القرن الرابع اصبح الاتجاه العام لكنائس الشرق والغرب اباء يونان ولاتين وسريان ان رسالة العبرانين من انتاج بولس الرسول
