[Footnote 367: Dialogue 8. The dialogue takes up a more positive attitude than the Apology, both as a whole and in detail. If we consider that both works are also meant for Christians, and that, on the other hand, the Dialogue as well as the Apology appeals to the cultured heathen public, we may perhaps assume that the two writings were meant to present a graduated system of Christian instruction. (In one passage the Dialogue expressly refers to the Apology.) From Justin's time onward the apologetic polemic of the early Church appears to have adhered throughout to the same method. This consisted in giving the polemical writings directed against the Greeks the form of an introduction to Christian knowledge, and in continuing this instruction still further in those directed against the Jews.] [Footnote 368: Dial. 2. sq. That Justin's Christianity is founded on theoretical scepticism is clearly shown by the introduction to the Dialogue.] [Footnote 369: Dial. 8: [Greek: houtos de kai dia tauta philosophos ego].] [Footnote 370: Dial., l.c.: [Greek: parestin soi ton Christon tou Theou epignonti kai teleio genomeno eudaimonein].] [Footnote 371: See particularly the closing chapter.] [Footnote 372: Suppl. 2,] [Footnote 373: Suppl. 4.] [Footnote 374: Suppl. 5-7.] [Footnote 375: Suppl. 24 (see also Aristides c. 13).] [Footnote 376: Suppl, 7 fin. and many other places.] [Footnote 377: _E.g._, Suppl. 8. 35 fin.] [Footnote 378: The Crucified Man, the incarnation of the Logos etc. are wanting. Nothing at all is said about Christ.] [Footnote 379: Suppl. 7.] [Footnote 380: Cf. the arguments in c. 8 with c. 9 init.] [Footnote 381: Suppl. 11.] [Footnote 382: Suppl. 23.] [Footnote 383: Suppl. 18, 23-27. He, however, as well as the others, sets forth the demon theory in detail.]