[223] C.M. 354. I find that Volkmar (there cited) had in one of his later works put the theory that the traitor, whom he held to be an invention of the later Paulinists, would be named Juda as typifying Judaism. The myth-theory is not necessarily committed to the whole of this thesis, but the objections of Brandt (Die evang. Gesch. pp. 15-18) seem to me invalid. He always reasons on the presupposition of a central historicity, and argues as if Mark could not have been interpolated at the points where Judas is named. [224] C.M. 208, notes. [225] Der vorchristliche Jesus, 1906, Vorwort by Schmiedel, p. vii, and pp. 27-28. Ecce Deus, 1912, pp. 18, 332. [226] Ecce Deus, pp. 16, 18, 50 sq., 70, 135; Der vorchr. Jesus, p. 40. But see Ecce Deus, pp. 66 and 196, where the thesis is modified. [227] In the Literary Guide of June, 1913, Professor Smith defends his thesis against another critic. The reader should consult that article. [228] S.H.C. 33 sq. [229] Id. 35-36. [230] On this problem cp. Prof. Smith, Ecce Deus, 251 sq.; and Prof. Drews, Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus, Eng. tr. p. 19. [231] Enoch, xxxviii, 2; liii, 6. [232] Id. xl, 5, and often. [233] Id. xlvi, 2, 3, etc. [234] Id. xlviii, 10; lii, 4. [235] Id. lxii, 5. [236] Schodde's introd. p. 51. [237] Dr. Rendel Harris, Odes of Solomon, 1909, introd. p. 72. [238] Harris, as cited, pp. 118, 125, 128, etc. [239] Dr. Harris pronounces that an account in the Odes of the Virgin Birth (xix) must be later than the first century (p. 116). But this begs the question as to the source of that myth. [240] Apropos d'hist. des religions, p. 272. [241] Refutation of all Heresies, v, 5 (11). [242] Cp. Drews, The Christ Myth, p. 54; and 2nd ed. of original, p. 24. [243] Drews, p. 59; Loisy, p. 273. [244] C.M. 316 sq. [245] C.M. 363. [246] Id. 364. [247] Hæres. XXX. [248] S.H.C. 6; C.M. 316. [249] C.M. 314. [250] Der vorchristliche Jesus, pp. 42-70; Ecce Deus, pt. vi. [251] C.M. 314. [252] Paper on "The Syriac Forms of New Testament Names," in Proc. of the British Academy, vol. v, 1912, pp. 17-18. [253] C.M. 312. The thesis was put by me twenty-eight years ago. [254] Der vorchr. Jesus, p. 54 sq. [255] C.M. 316. [256] Der vorchr. Jesus, pp. 56, 65. [257] Cp. Philo Judæus, De Profugis:--"The Divine Word ... existing as the image of God, is the eldest of all things that can be known, placed nearest, and without anything intervening, to him who alone is the self-existent." [258] Friedländer's thesis that the Minim were early Gnostics seems to be completely upset by Mr. Herford, Christianity in Talmud, p. 368 sq. [259] Id. pp. 255-266. [260] The fact that the Talmudic allusions to the Minim include no discussion of the Christist doctrine of the Messiah (Herford, pp. 277, 279) goes to show that a Messianic doctrine had been no part of the early cult, and that among the Jesuists who kept up their connection with Judaism it gathered, or kept, no hold.