[4] The Apocalypse is quite different in style and in respect to pure Greek. For these reasons and others some of the early Fathers denied that the Apostle wrote it. But such was the early tradition. Justin Martyr refers to him as the author, and as Dr. Sears, in his Heart of Christ, well argues, these differences are sufficiently accounted for by the highly excited state of mind in which the Apocalypse was written; and he points out many agreements both in doctrine and mode of expression. [5] Three years, and possibly four. [A] Its omission of Peter’s want of faith, as recorded in Matthew 14-30, is an exception. [6] Wright’s Logic, etc., p. 210; Norton’s Genuineness, etc., Vol. I., p. 188; Wescott’s Introduction, cc. 3 and 4. CHAPTER XV. THE APOCALYPSE AND THE FOUR EPISTLES. While all Infidels, from Celsus before the year 180 to Waite, in 1881, have agreed that “either Jesus was not really dead, or he did not really rise again,” some[1] of them have assumed the one, and some the other alternative. Strauss, with Celsus, doubts the reality of the resurrection, rather than the death. Schleiermacher, on the other hand, held that Jesus returned again to life from a state of lethargy; and this view, although not the position generally taken by skeptics, is still held by a very few. There have been two institutions in the Christian church, the Lord’s Supper and the Lord’s day, that have testified from the beginning that Jesus was really dead, and did really rise again from the dead. They displaced the Jewish Passover and the Jewish Sabbath, both strongly entrenched in the law of Moses and long established custom. Such substitution can be accounted for, only upon the hypothesis of the fullest conviction of the death and resurrection of our Lord. The Lord’s day is referred to by Paul in First Corinthians (c. xvi.) under the designation of “the first day of the week,” and is mentioned by John in Revelation (c. i. 10), where he says, “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day.” The Lord’s Supper has great prominence given to it by Paul in the eleventh chapter of First Corinthians. Those to whom he writes are admonished not to eat “of that bread,” or drink “of that cup,” in an unworthy manner, “For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye proclaim the Lord’s death till he come.” As to the origin of this sacrament, he says, “I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake and said, Take, eat; this is my body broken for you; this do in remembrance of me: and after the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the New Testament in my blood; this do ye as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.” This Epistle was written as early as the year[2] 57, or within 27 years after the Crucifixion. It is not to be doubted that such a command would be observed from the first formation