This would indeed make it impossible for Seneca, in his earlier writings, to have employed the Pauline epistles. But it would have allowed room for Paul to become acquainted with some of the earlier writings of Seneca. On this supposition it is unnecessary to date the principal epistles later than is usually done. Thus, while if a relation of dependence is demonstrated, it proves Paul to have been the dependent one, the argument defeats the principal contention of Steck, namely, that the historic Paul could not have written the Pauline epistles because he and Seneca were in part contemporaries. It is, however, highly improbable that Paul was influenced by Seneca; and Steck admits that Seneca's numerous points of contact with Christian doctrine would alone be no ground for the supposition of a nearer relationship, since the philosophy of the period, especially so far as it belonged to the development of Platonism, had reached a monotheistic theology, an anthropology which knew and employed the contrast between flesh and spirit, and an eschatology which contemplated the punishment of the bad and the rewarding of the good, all of which resembles Christianity.* Thus, all these things are confessed to be independent of Christianity; and of course he does not deny that they are original as well with Christianity as with Platonism. Where ideas are similar, forms of expression and illustrations are likely to be similar. The argument leads inevitably to the conclusion that neither Paul nor Seneca influenced each other, but that both were influenced by the surroundings in which they were brought up. This merely admits that heathen Seneca had some light, while it also admits that inspired Paul infused into his writings a personality produced by his environments. But, above all, it clearly makes unnecessary a late date for the origin of the principal Pauline letters, in cluding Galatians. We may pass by the groundless hypothesis that Christianity had a twofold origin, one in Judaism and the other in heathen philosophy. It is more important that we notice what Steck has to say in proof of the theory that the early part of the second century furnished the conditions in which Galatians might have been written. He cites from the "Dialogue with Tyrphon," of Justin Martyr (about A. D. 147), to show that there * Der Galaterbrief, etc., pp. 250, 251. + lbid., p. 378. were in Justin's time extreme parties in the Church who made the observance or nonobservance of the Jewish law essential to salvation.* But this by no means proves that a "conflict against Judaism as passionate as that exhibited in Galatians " was possible in Justin's time; for while Galatians recognizes the incompatibility of the legal with the gracious method of salva tion, it goes further by an impassioned appeal to its readers not to fall from grace, as though there was imminent danger of so appalling a calamity. Galatians turns upon an active propaganda of Judaizers. Justin Martyr quietly relates the existence of a strong prejudice between the two extreme parties. Steck also quotes from the Ignatian epistles to show that the opposition continued even after 150 A. D. These, indeed, exhibit a more or less active propaganda on the part of the Judaizers, but with none of the evidence of danger betrayed in Galatians. Steck seems to feel this, for he accuses Galatians of fighting imaginary rather than real perils of the Church. And as so often, so here, Steck displays a strange blindness to the significance of his own concessions, for he admits that even the comparatively mild expostulations of the Ignatian letters against Judaizing tendencies represent the existence of extremes which touched only a small portion of the Church, whereas the great body of believers were no longer troubled thereby. This is in direct opposition to Galatians, in which the extreme Judaizers are represented as jeopardizing the welfare of the great body of its readers, who were in serious danger of falling from grace. The situation, therefore, during the first half of the second cen. tury was not the same as that depicted in Galatians. The most that could be inferred from the utterances of Justin and the Ignatian letters is that the dispute had not yet altogether died But the danger was no longer the Judaizing of entire congregations, but only of individuals. And this corresponds to the well-known fact that before the middle of the second century there were numerous firmly established congregations of Gentile Christians, who could only be affected as the Protestant Church is to-day affected by Roman Catholicism, namely, by the occasional defection of an individual, while the main body itself is in no danger of conversion to the other. out. We have now examined the principal arguments of Steck * Der Galaterbrief, etc., p. 381. + Ibid., pp. 381, 382. and found them individually weak. Together they are as weak as they are when considered apart. Steck has honeycombed his entire work by his concessions, necessarily made if he did not wish to appear in a ridiculous light before the theological world. But his arguments against Galatians are so similar to those usually employed against the minor Pauline epistles that he is as justifiable as his critical confrères, and more consistent. If their own logic applied uniformly to the New Testament is not pleasing to them perhaps they will come after a while to see that it should not be applied at all. Such a reaction is needed, and we shall be surprised if criticism be not sobered by the recent excesses of some of its devotees. This may not be the place to moralize; but we cannot refrain from calling attention to the fact that the entire process of internal criticism is so controlled by the subjectivity of those who practice it that almost anything can be suggested, and anything suggested proved to the satisfaction of many. Steck has simply given himself up to the method a little more fully than most others. With scarcely an exception the critic starts out with well-defined ends in view, and his microscope is applied for the purpose of discovering supports for his hypotheses. By skillful manipulation these are found, or manufactured out of material little suited naturally to the purpose. The simple, straightforward utterances of the New Testament are made to bear references which their single-minded authors never dreamed of. Only when some one ventures, like Steck, to carry out the method to its logical conclusions is our attention strongly directed to the precarious character of all the results of internal criticism; and our revulsion extends not only to the attempt to rob us of the four letters which have hitherto passed as unassailable, but also to the effort of the newer critical school which rolls doubts of the genuineness of some of the minor epistles under its tongue as sweet morsels. The extreme frozen region reached by the van demands that the whole procession of adventurous explorers shall come to a dead halt. Charles W. Rishell. ART. V.—THE PREEMINENCE OF FAITH. THE preeminence of faith in all religion is shown by the fact that its very name is given to religion itself. This chief characteristic not only colors religion, but stands for it, as, for example, the Mohammedan faith-the Mohammedan religion; the Christian faith-the Christian religion. This synonymous use is not a careless nomenclature; for from the baldest, rudest naturalism to the most ethereal idealism, as well as from the vagaries of highly wrought mythologies to the sacred supernaturalism of Christianity, one element obtains, which is admittedly faith. This world-wideness of faith places it among the great characteristics of the human race, and thus relieves Christianity of any necessity for defending it as a plan peculiarly its own, arbitrarily decreed by its great Author. The rationale of faith, then, is not distinctively a Christian problem; it is a religious problem. Further, it is a problem for psychologic and philosophic investigation. In Christianity its place is of supreme importance. With hope and love it constitutes the trinity of permanent graces. Next to God, revealed in Jesus Christ, and the impartation of the divine life to men it is the chief theme of all the Bible. It is not merely an integral part; it is, rather, a pervasive element. The totality of all the Scripture teachings is called "the faith:" "I have kept the faith." It stands as the very first requisite for right approach to God: "Without faith it is impossible to please him;" "He that cometh to God must believe." Its principle underlies the progressive salvation, the deepening similarity to Christ; "From faith to faith;" "Purifying their hearts by faith." Its intensity and scope are the measure of our obligation to Christian service: "For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith;" "Whether prophecy, let us prophesy ac cording to the proportion of faith." Faith is the weapon which we may wield and always triumph: "This is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith." Faith characterizes the whole plan of God's redemption for man, whether expressed in the Old or New Testament. Even the apparently wholly sensible, that is, visible, tangible, or audible, revelations of the very earliest days had a distinct element of faith about them. The roll of the heroes of faith begins with Abel. The first declaration in Genesis and the last in Revelation are objects of faith, since "through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God," and since "Even so, come, Lord Jesus," is a believing prayer based upon the accepted promise. The Bible is a revelation which is apprehended largely by faith. Faith, to the thought of many suggests a well-meant but credulous effort of the mind to arrive at certainty with reference to the things supernatural. Its beneficial results are viewed as unreal or are declared to be the reflex action of noble aspirations. Even Christians at times give encouragement to those asserting its inferiority. We sing, "Till faith to sight improve," thereby giving the impression that the divinely appointed way of faith is a deprivation. "We walk by faith, not by sight," is quoted as a calamity rather than God's chosen. method of a holy life. Often we seek for a sign-some cross like Constantine's, flashing in starry brilliancy across the heavens; some warning like that of Belshazzar's banquet, burning its threatenings before our very eyes; or a bodily Jesus coming through closed doors. The penitent seeks to hear a loud voice; the saint longs for a prostrating, overshadowing sense of God's presence. But God speaks not now through them, for he "hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son." The Spirit takes the things of Christ and shows them unto us. They are "spiritually discerned." Is this a disparagement of the Christian's privilege in Christ Jesus? We think not. Several considerations lead to this conviction : I. Faith is the method taught by Christianity of apprehending divine truth. To others than Christians it would seem a begging of the question to prove by the Bible the superiority of faith, for the authority of the Bible is the disputed point. To show the preeminence of faith by the very book that inculcates it would be arguing in a circle. But we are viewing it from the Christian standpoint. We believe that the importance of Christian faith is minimized too much. Let us, rather, exalt it as a keener insight into the things of God than has |