Against the genuineness have appeared Ewald, Renan, Hausrath, Hilgenfeld, Ritschl, Pfleiderer, Weizsacker, Holtzmann, von Soden, Schmiedel, von Dobschutz and many others.
Schmiedel suggests, in the allegorical style of Philo, and he was evidently a man of unusual magnetic force.
Schmiedel in the Encyclopaedia Biblica, s.v.
As to the author's antecedents, critics have ceased to hold that he could not have been a Jew-Christian (so Bretschneider, 1820), and admit (so Schmiedel, (1901) that he must have been by birth a Jew of the Dispersion, or the son of Christian parents who had been such Jews.
Schmiedel, Das vierte Evangelium gegeniiber den drei ersten (Halle, 1906).
Theologie, 1886, pp. 456 seq.) and Schmiedel (Encycl.
Scholars of such opposite schools of thought as Schmiedel 3 and Lindsay 4 maintain that the epistle contains the most explicit references to presbyters of the official type.
Work (1883); Harnack, Die Lehre der zwolf Apostel (1884); Loening, Die Gemeindeverfassung des Urchristentums (1889) Sohm, Kirchenrecht (1892); an article by Loofs, in Studien and Kritiken, for 1890 (pp. 619-638); Lindsay, The Church and the Ministry in the Early Centuries (1902); Schmiedel, article "Ministry," in Enc. Bib.
Schmiedel adheres to it.
Schmiedel, 1894 ff.), of which several translations have appeared, the latest being by W.
But this error of thought would be easily concealed from a mind with the rabbinical training of Paul's" (Schmiedel, in Hibbert Journal, 1902, pp. 548549) Cf.
Steinmetz (ibid., 1908, 177 f.); and Schmiedel in Hibbert Journal (1903), pp. 537 f heart of the gospel with all his heart, and while a certain controversial' element inevitably enters into his expositionsince he is writing with his eye on the Roman Church-any such considerations are quite subordinate to his dominating aim.
That work is assigned by Schmiedel and others to about A.D.
But as Schmiedel champions the Tubingen view in the Encyclopaedia Biblica, it cannot be overlooked.
But if indeed you truly wish to work along with Reading with Schmiedel aSoKiµov Evros (from 1 Cor.
Schmiedel asks, " How should Paul ever come to be in the 2nd, or, as far as the pseudo-Clementine Homilies and Recognitions are concerned, even in the 3rd or 4th century, the object of so fanatical a hatred?
There was one John, a Hemer01 Supplying, with Schmiedel, avWTEpa.
We may, therefore, confine our attention to the latest exposition of it by Schmiedel in the Ency.
In the narrative of Acts Schmiedel finds much to surprise him.
Yet Schmiedel speaks of this as " a well ascertained case in which an utterance of Paul regarding himself is spitefully twisted to his discredit."
70) is intended for Paul is plain, but then, as Schmiedel points out in a note, he is not identified with Simon.
" Even the style of Paul," Schmiedel assures us, " is plainly imitated in a mocking way."
Yet Schmiedel follows Lipsius " in his latest treatment of the subject " in recognizing " a Samaritan ryons named Simon as historical."
Schmiedel in Encyc. Bibl.