52 He did not, unfortunately, follow it up with the work on the Ethics. 53 The eschatological character of the Pauline mysticism is also pointed out by Paul Wernle in his suggestive study _Der Christ und die Sünde bei Paulus_ (1897, 138 pp.), but he does not follow out the idea in all its consequences. A certain recognition of the “physical” character of the doctrine of redemption is also arrived at by Adolf Deissmann. In his study, _Die neutestamentliche Formel “in Christo Jesu”_ (1892, 136 pp.) he comes to the conviction that Paul had created the formula on the analogy of a linguistic usage already obtaining in non-biblical Greek, and intended in using it to indicate the relation to Christ as an existence within the pneumatic Christ which was to be locally conceived. He does not, however, think of explaining it from eschatology. The old psychologising and spiritualising methods are in no way departed from by W. Brandt. In his work, _Die evangelische Geschichte und der Ursprung des Christentums_ (“The Gospel History and the Origin of Christianity,” 1893, 591 pp.; on Paul, pp. 515-524), he maintains that it was the visions of the disciples which first made Jesus into the Messiah. Paul, he thinks, “in his profound reflexion over his conversion, came to think of this revolution in his life as a dying and rising again of his inner man.” 54 Georg Heinrici, _Auslegung der Korintherbriefe_ (I Cor., 1880, 574 pp.; 2 Cor., 1887, 606 pp.). 55 P. W. Schmiedel, “Auslegung der Briefe an die Thessalonicher und Korinther,” in Holtzmann’s _Handkommentar,_ vol. ii. section i.; 1st ed., 1891; 2nd ed., 1892. 56 _Dogmengeschichte,_ 3rd ed., 1894, vol. i. On Paul, pp. 83-95. Friedrich Loofs in his _Dogmengeschichte_ (1890, 443 pp.) takes up no definite attitude towards the Pauline problem. Reinhold Seeberg, too _(Dogmengeschichte,_ first half, 1895, 332 pp.), does not go into the doctrine of the Apostle. 57 R. A. Lipsius, “Auslegung der Briefe an die Galater, Römer und Philipper,” in Holtzmann’s _Handkommentar,_ vol. ii. section i. 1st ed., 1891; 2nd ed., 1892. This commentator’s position is indicated by the following remarks: “The great antithesis between flesh and spirit gradually forces out the Jewish conceptions one after another, though it is not right to say that Hebrew ideas are driven out by Hellenic ones. When Paul goes outside the circle of Old Testament views he does so in consequence of a deeper ethical grasp of the originally Hebrew antithesis between flesh and spirit, not by a borrowing of Greek ideas.” 58 _Das apostolische Zeitalter,_ 1886, pp. 105-151. 59 It is most clearly developed by Holsten on pp. 37 and 38 of the second part of his _Evangelium des Paulus,_ 1896. 60 Vol. i., 1880; vol. ii., 1887. See especially the Introduction and the Epilogue to vol. ii.