Each party, however, continued to maintain its tenets. One of the more important rationalistic works which appeared during this period was Was heisst glauben, and wer rind die Unglatibigen ' by David ' Schulz, 1830 ; while Neander and Schleiermacher took the opposite side with much learning and success.
Up to the year 1835 this second form of Rationalism had been applied only partially, and chiefly to portions of the Old Testament ; but it was then carried out in its full extent with reference to the books of the New Testament, by Dr. David Frederick Strauss, in his Das Leben Jean kritisch bcarbeitet,' in 2 vols. The first edition appeared in 1835-36 ; a second was published in 1837, and a third in 1838. This work, the production of a man of great learning, profound reflection, and critical skill, called forth a host of polemical works, but the best efforts against it were made by the Supernaturalistic ' schooL ILationalism in its first form seems to have received its death blow from this work and the various controversial writings of Strauss and others, while the new school made rapid progress. The con test between it and the Supernaturalists was however, with few ex ceptions, conducted in a calm and purely philosophic manner. Both parties were honest enough to give way whenever any of their disputed points were proved to be untenable. This is manifest from the .' Life of Christ' published by Seamier, and from the different editions of the work of Strauss.
Notwithstanding the wide breach between the two parties, approxi mations were made on both sides, so that the Supernaturalists as well as the Rationalists might each be divided into two parties. Some of the latter, such as Paulus, Wegscheider, Gesenins, Schultheis, Schulz, and others, continued to consider reason as their only guide in matters of religion, and rejected every supernatural revelation : others, the so called Supernaturalistic Itatiormlista, admitted indeed LI supornntural revelation, but considered reason as the only moans of recognising and acknowledging it; they thi; still allowed reason to be the supreme judge in matters of religion. To this class of Rationalists belong 13retselmeitler, Von Ammon, Rohm°, Hese, Koster, and others. A similar division exists among the Supernaturalist.% The view which the ILationaliats had taken of the Scriptures con tained some elements which led to a new crisis in German theology. Some parts of the Scriptures, from which the Rationalists, with all their ingenuity, saw no hope of eliciting a genuine history, they had ventured to declare to be a mere legend, tradition, or mythus. This view was gradually applied to a great portion of the Old Testa meet, as in Bauer's Rehr:nacho Mythologic, Leipzig, 1802. The various and profound investigations into ancient profane history had led to similar results in other departments, and the hollowness of the Rationalist interpretation was either loudly proclaimed or tacitly acknowledged by all parties. The consequence WAS either a return to
the Supernaturalistic view, or further progress in the path which had been opened by the Rationalists themselves. Those Rationalists who could not do the former now applied the principle, to which they had formerly recourse only in cases of extremo difficulty, to the whole body of the early and miraculous portions of the Scriptures, which they placed on the same footing with the early and fabulous stories of ancient Greece and Rome, and considered as a mythical history not written by eye-witnesses or contemporaries, and only recorded after it hail been handed down by tradition through many generations. According to this view, all the events in the Bible are either natural events, such as occur in the history of other nations, and which must be examined according to the general principles of historical criticism, or they are of a miraculous and supernatural character, and must for this reason be rejected as not historical, like the fabulous accounts of ancient mythology. As the Rationalistic school directed its first attacks against the deists, so the mythical school, though diametrically opposed to the Supernaturalists, directed its main efforts against Rationalism. We must nevertheless consider this last school as esson. tially Rationalistic, or as a second form of Rationalism, in as far like Rationalism in its first form, it takes reason for its sole guide, and denies all supernatural revelation. The only difference is that it denies the Biblical records to be the works of eye-witnesses and eontempo• relies, and hence draws the conclusion that it is utterly impossible ts (licit from those portions which are supposed to consist of mythica: stories anything like a true and connected history.
Rationalism in the German sense never made much way in England being chiefly confined to a portion of the Unitarian sect. But of latt years more recent principles of historical and philological evidences with the incontestable facts established by geological and palmonto logical in vestigation,thave led to closer though more reverent approaches to it from various quarters. The moat remarkable is what is knows as the new school of divines at Oxford, of whose views the fullest development is afforded by the works of the late Baden Powell and the Rev. B. Jowett; and the • Essays and Reviews' issued by these gentle MCP, and the Rev. J. Temple, Dr. Williams, Rev. Mr. Wilson, Mr Ocodwin, and Rev. Mr. Pattison, in 1860. The more orthodox view o the question has not been wanting of numerous supporters.
Details of the various opinions of many of the writers mentioned it this article will be found under their respective names in the Moo. Dtv. and tinder Mtneetzs there is given a list of foreign writers, nearly al of whom are purely rationalistic.