question still left open for much discussion is that concerning
the date and authorship of the first and second
"Thessalonians,"--a point of quite inferior importance, so far as
our present subject is concerned. Seldom have such vast results
been achieved by the labour of a single scholar. Seldom has any
historical critic possessed such a combination of analytic and of
co-ordinating powers as Baur. His keen criticism and his
wonderful flashes of insight exercise upon the reader a truly
poetic effect like that which is felt in contemplating the
marvels of physical discovery.

The comprehensive labours of Baur were followed up by Zeller's
able work on the "Acts of the Apostles," in which that book was
shown to have been partly founded upon documents written by Luke,
or some other companion of Paul, and expanded and modified by a
much later writer with the purpose of covering up the traces of
the early schism between the Pauline and the Petrine sections of
the Church. Along with this, Schwegler's work on the
"Post-Apostolic Times" deserves mention as clearing up many
obscure points relating to the early development of dogma.
Finally, the "New Life of Jesus," by Strauss, adopting and
utilizing the principal discoveries of Baur and his followers,
and combining all into one grand historical picture, worthily
completes the task which the earlier work of the same author had
inaugurated.

The reader will have noticed that, with the exception of Spinoza,
every one of the names above cited in connection with the
literary analysis and criticism of the New Testament is the name
of a German. Until within the last decade, Germany has indeed