Hebrews 12:2 (“fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith…”) comes from the anonymous Epistle to the Hebrews. Evangelical Christians affirm the book’s inspiration and place in the canon, but its human authorship has been debated from the earliest centuries. Here is a concise evangelical summary of the evidence and the leading candidate many evangelicals now consider most likely.

Context and why authorship matters to evangelicals
– Hebrews is a theologically rich, pastoral sermon that presumes an audience with a Jewish background and stresses Christ’s priesthood, sacrifice, and supremacy.
– For evangelicals theologically, the book’s authority does not depend on knowing the human author. Still, determining the likely author can illuminate historical background, interpretive emphases, and pastoral intent.

Background on attribution
– The letter circulated anonymously. Early church response was mixed: some in the Eastern church treated it as Pauline (or as Paul’s circle), while others were unsure. Origen famously said, “Who wrote the epistle, God only knows.” Later tradition in the West at times credited Barnabas or Clement.
– Modern evangelical scholarship has tended away from uncritical Pauline attribution because of differences in language, style, and theological expression. That has opened the way for other historically plausible candidates.

The leading evangelical candidate: Apollos (why many consider him the most likely)
– Biblical portrait: Acts 18:24–28 describes Apollos as “an eloquent man, competent in the Scriptures,” “mighty in the Scriptures,” trained in the way of the Lord, and effective in argument; he was Alexandrian or at least familiar with Alexandrian learning. That portrait fits the Hebrews writer’s polished Greek, rhetorical skill, and deep use of the Septuagint (Greek OT).
– Theological fit: Hebrews displays a learned, Hellenistic-Jewish approach to Scripture and typology (temple/priests, sacrifice, covenant language) that fits someone like Apollos, who knew Scripture well and could argue persuasively to a Jewish-Christian audience.
– Evangelical supporters: many conservative scholars who reject Pauline authorship find Apollos a plausible identification because he explains both the anonymity and the style/content.

Paul as a traditional evangelical view (reasons for and against)
– For: Early church traditions in some regions attributed Hebrews to Paul; several evangelicals historically defended Pauline authorship. If Paul wrote Hebrews (perhaps via an amanuensis), it fits a unified Pauline corpus for readers who value traditional attribution.
– Against: Hebrews’ polished Greek, different vocabulary and style, lack of Paul’s customary autobiographical greetings and theological markers, and its distinctive approach to covenant and priesthood make direct Pauline authorship unlikely to many scholars.

Other candidates sometimes suggested
– Barnabas: early Western tradition sometimes named him; he was a Levite and missionary companion of Paul—fits some Jewish-Christian sensibilities.
– Luke, Clement of Rome, Priscilla (or Priscilla and Aquila) and others have been proposed; each proposal has pros and cons but none has decisive evidence.

Summary conclusion (evangelical perspective)
– Most evangelicals today who reject direct Pauline authorship favor an educated, Hellenistic Jewish Christian—Apollos is the leading candidate because of Acts’ portrait and the letter’s style and content.
– At the same time, many evangelicals affirm Hebrews’ full authority and inspiration regardless of whether its human author is known. The theological focus of Hebrews 12:2—Christ as pioneer/finisher of faith—is central to evangelical devotion and doctrine whatever the human author’s name.

If you want, I can:
– List specific evangelical scholars and their positions on Hebrews’ authorship,
– Walk through the internal textual clues in Hebrews that point toward Apollos or away from Paul,
– Or summarize Hebrews 12:2’s meaning in light of the likely author’s background.