The Religion of the Apostles: Orthodox Christianity in the First Century

by Stephen De Young

Father Dr. Stephen De Young traces the lineage of Orthodox Christianity back to the faith and witness of the apostles, which was rooted in a first-century Jewish worldview. The Religion of the Apostles presents the Orthodox Christian Church of today as a continuation of the religious life of the apostles, which in turn was a continuation of the life of the people of God since the beginning of creation.

Genres: Religion, Christianity, Theology, Christian, History, Nonfiction, Church History

320 pages, Paperback

Published May 4, 2021

Reviews

[Michael O'Brien · Rating 5 out of 5]

Visiting Archangel Gabriel Antiochian Orthodox Church for evening vespers while in Lafayette, LA, for my semiannual flight simulator training, I found this book in their parish book store. I purchased it, thinking it was about Early Christian worship practices in the First Century. It does to a certain extent, but that's not what its point is.

The conventional wisdom of both Protestantism, in general, and Roman Catholicism is that the practices of the Torah were replaced by Christianity as part of a new covenant between God and man.
That is what I was taught as a young Evangelical decades ago, and, in general, heard taught in various ways during the subsequent decades. Fr. Stephen rejects this outright.

I wondered in the beginning of reading this where he was going with this argument. Fasting figures prominently throughout Orthodox Christianity as it did during the earliest times of Christianity --- so I was thinking that he was, perhaps, heading towards claiming that these were some update of Jewish dietary laws. But his arguments are better than that.

Instead, he explores the history of the Torah. As he shows, there are portions that specifically applied to Israelites. There are others that it specifically indicates apply to both Israelites and Gentiles within Israel. He then shows how this, in the light of the Council of Jerusalem, the first great Church council, how the Apostles came up with the requirements given to new Gentile Christian believers while not requiring them to adhere to Jewish dietary laws or become circumcised and that these restrictions were not arbitrarily arrived at --- that these come directly from the Torah's requirements of non-Jews living in Israel. Which would explain then how Apostles Paul and James, on the face of it, on opposite sides could, having realized this, come to a common understanding as they did at the Council.

Overall, Fr. Stephen, from my perspective, plows new ground by showing Orthodox Christianity in a new light --- not as a break from an Old Testament past that is dead and irrelevant, but one with a seamless connection to it that lives today in the faith and tradition of the Church. I found it a refreshing and original analysis that I'd not heard before in all my decades of studying Christian theology.

I highly recommend this book for those interested in learning about the Early Christian Church and for those interested in theology. It was a good for book for looking at the history of this watershed in Christianity from a fascinating view!

[Charles Haywood · Rating 4 out of 5]

Myths about Christianity abound, and some myths even pass as common knowledge. One myth is that Christians, after Jesus Christ started a new religion, worshipped in a very simple manner, revolving around undeveloped doctrines of love and sharing. Only later, we are often told (by both devout Protestants and by unbelievers, advancing different agendas) was this plain worship larded up with new doctrines and liturgies, which are encrustations on true Christianity. Stephen De Young works hard to explode all parts of this myth, explaining in The Religion of the Apostles that the beliefs and worship of the first Christians were essentially identical to those written down some years later, and were not, in most important ways, new at all.

De Young, an Orthodox priest whose book God is a Man of War I discussed a few months ago, doesn’t claim to be a neutral observer. This is a work of apologetics, which uses intense Scriptural analysis, along with recorded history, in an attempt to demonstrate that Orthodox doctrine and worship, as practiced today, are both correct and largely indistinguishable from the worship of A.D. 50 or so. I’m not a neutral observer, either, although I’m certainly (especially relative to De Young) an uneducated one, but I don’t think this book is the last word in either Biblical interpretation or history. Still, I think De Young makes a reasonably compelling case for his claims, many of which revolve around the little-understood relationship of early Christianity to Judaism.

Christians are aware of different strains of Jewish belief at the time of Christ; the conflicts described in the New Testament between Pharisees and Sadducees are familiar even to casual Christians. It is less clear to Christians that none of these strains of Judaism bear much resemblance to Judaism today, rabbinic Judaism. What we think of as Judaism only developed after A.D. 70, following the destruction of the Second Temple, and took centuries to fully develop. Not a few of rabbinic Judaism’s rules and doctrines were entirely new and designed in direct opposition to Christianity, the result of centuries of Jewish-Christian conflict (in which the Jews gave as good as they got). To be sure, all religions develop to some degree, and Judaism has faced far more challenges than most, so substantial changes over time are no real surprise. But still, what is mostly forgotten today is that Second Temple Judaism, which was dominant when Christ walked the Earth, was very different from rabbinic Judaism, in both doctrine and practice. De Young’s core claim is that Christianity is a continuation, and fulfilment, of Second Temple Judaism; it is rabbinic Judaism that is a drastic break from both Second Temple Judaism and Christianity.

The religion of the Apostles was not shallow and simple, but deep and complex. As with Judaism of the time, it was intricate in belief and ritual, with many of those beliefs and rituals being identical between Christianity and Judaism. To take a high-profile example, Saint Paul did not convert to Christianity, and he never described his turn to preaching Christ as a conversion to a new religion. Rather, De Young shows how Saint Paul, when he went by Saul, appears to have been a proponent of Jewish “chariot” mysticism, which centered around the visions of the prophet Ezekiel. This was a strong current in first century Judaism, though later rejected by rabbinic Judaism. The Second Temple tradition, of focused meditation and a belief in communication with angels and multiple heavens (as Saint Paul refers to in II Corinthians 12) was wholly compatible with Christ’s revealing himself as God to Saint Paul on the road to Damascus. Christ did not appear to Saint Paul and offer him a new religion, but additional, fresh facts about what he already strongly believed. That is to say, Saint Paul practiced “Old Testament Christianity,” not some newfangled religion for which he had thrown over the Judaism of his youth.

As this discussion shows, De Young spends quite a bit of time on demonstrating the continuation between Old and New Testament beliefs—not by reinterpretation of the Old Testament through a new, Christian, lens, but showing actual unbroken continuation of beliefs often incorrectly thought to have been introduced by Christianity. Perhaps the central dichotomy today drawn between Judaism and Christianity is that Judaism is said to be unitarian monotheistic, one God in one Person, as supposedly shown by the Old Testament, while Christianity believes in the Trinity, one God in three Persons, revealed in the New Testament. But Second Temple Judaism, while it did not believe in the Trinity as such, according to De Young clearly understood that there were two Persons in God, two hypostases. “Rather than enacting a new vision of God, the New Testament clarifies and affirms the nature of the God spoken of in the Old.”

To demonstrate, De Young translates and analyzes numerous Biblical passages. For example, he shows how the “Angel of the Lord” several times referred to in the Old Testament is viewed as both Yahweh and as a person distinct from Yahweh who interacts with Yahweh and humans, and is also referred to as the “Word of the Lord” (often causing confusion among those who thinks this means merely some auditory phenomenon). This Person on more than one occasion takes physical form, unlike Yahweh, and once this is realized, “many New Testament passages considered allegory or reinterpretations of the previous revelation can be seen to be quite literal.” For example, Moses is told that he will speak to God “face to face” (Exodus 33:11), yet in Exodus 33:20 it is said Moses cannot see the face of God and live. Similarly, the Book of Daniel shows a vision of the Son of Man, a divine being distinct from Yahweh, with whom Jesus explicitly identified himself. The logical conclusion is that God has two hypostases, and the one that God permits men to see face-to-face is the Angel of the Lord, the Word of the Lord, the Son of Man. Although the Jews debated who this Person was precisely, for Christians it is this Person, of course, who became incarnate as Jesus Christ, completing his partial earlier revealings. The innovation was rabbinic Judaism’s insistence on unitarian monotheism, although Christianity certainly further developed the understanding of God’s hypostases.

All this is very interesting and compelling. Less convincing, however, is De Young’s attempt to demonstrate that Second Temple Judaism also acknowledged the Holy Spirit. This argument revolves around the “Name of God”—God’s Spirit who is also God, mentioned in more than one place in the Bible. De Young gives much less direct evidence that this meant a third hypostasis, but he nonetheless draws that conclusion, which strikes me as considerably less textually supported. Perhaps this Scriptural vagueness is inevitable; for most laymen, the Holy Spirit is the member of the Trinity who seems most abstract. Nonetheless, it seems unlikely to me that most Second Temple Jews were any kind of trinitarian. Early Christians were, however, and De Young rejects the myth that Christian trinitarianism was a later accretion to the religion—though from his Preface, the reader expects considerably more discussion of how in this matter, and others, the worship of the Apostles was indistinguishable from that of later centuries, that is, a showing that there was little evolution in belief. But the main focus remains on continuity of belief from the Old Testament, not the specifics of apostolic-era worship as compared to later worship, and moreover we get almost nothing on ritual, as opposed to doctrine.

Having addressed the Trinity directly, De Young next turns to a favorite topic of his (most notably in his podcast, “The Lord of Spirits,” and also discussed in God is a Man of War). This is the divine council, certain of the non-human entities whom God has created and who play roles in His creation—notably the roles of governance, over peoples and other elements of creation. De Young covers the corruption of some of these beings, their lordship over peoples of the earth after Babel, their desire to convince humans to worship themselves instead of God, and their fate. These pagan gods, in Orthodox belief, are real, but they are demons, or fallen angelic beings (those two are not necessarily exactly the same, De Young says, also discussing the somewhat muddled understanding of Satan in both Judaism and Christianity). Their former lordship has been given by Christ to others—including, after the Resurrection, to glorified humans, who are patrons of churches, cities, and nations, and who may become part of the divine council—most prominently the Mother of Christ, the Theotokos, a queen mother in the style of many in the Old Testament. Nearly all of the text analyzed here is Old Testament, and again familiar to Second Temple Judaism. So, for example, the Book of Daniel tells us (Daniel 12:3) that the righteous will shine forever like the stars of heaven; in like manner, Christ will glorify righteous humanity, body and soul, who will share (in some ways) the likeness of Christ himself, “beyond the ranks of angels,” as also shown in the visions of Isaiah.

In his podcast, De Young often says that in the afterlife, we will have jobs. We’re not going to sit around playing harps. What that means he does not flesh out in any meaningful way, and nobody has ever been able to give me a coherent explanation of what this might look like, especially given that time is putatively absent, or at least very different, in Heaven. I suppose we’ll find out, as with everything (after all, we see through a glass, darkly) but the claim that jobs are in our future, given that most people default to analogizing that to jobs during our mortal life, seems to me arguably more confusing than clarifying, and something De Young might do well to discuss further, perhaps in the context of the divine council.

Next, De Young covers core doctrinal topics: creation and salvation. We move somewhat away here from a direct relationship between Christianity to Judaism, but De Young continues to draw lines between the Old and New Testaments. As elsewhere, De Young here vigorously rejects the theology of atonement, which assumes God is “subject to some overarching system of rules or justice,” while in fact there is “no reason to assume that God’s ways operate according to ‘mechanisms’ intelligible to the human mind.” Moreover, atonement has no Scriptural basis. The word does not appear in the Bible, it is a sixteenth-century English neologism. Rather, Christ’s death is “the revelation of His divine glory.” (The Orthodox belief that in the three days before his Resurrection Christ was defeating Satan in a way not completely understood, as well outlined by Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev in Christ the Conqueror of Hell, is closely tied to this doctrine.) And God’s judgment, inevitable for each one of us, does not involve wrath in the way humans are angry; it is a purifying fire that has different effects on each person, who is thereby “set in order as God’s creature.” God’s punishments, including those in the Old Testament, are thus aimed at restoring “the right relationship of justice,” not some tantrum of an offended deity.

Implicit in this analysis, and ultimately made explicit by De Young, is that he is very much not a universalist. Universalism, the idea that all people are ultimately united with God, is a thread in Orthodox thinking, more so than in Catholic thinking. I used to be quite interested in universalism, but have concluded that such matters are simply above my pay grade. It certainly is the modernist Christian heresy to rule all others; most notably it rules Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart, of whom I used to be a big fan but who has on several axes gone off the rails, and who recently wrote a widely-panned book shrieking that only evil people deny universalism, That All Shall Be Saved. De Young’s position, clearly stated and supported, but not necessarily universal (ha ha) among Orthodox theologians, is that all will be raised at the Last Judgment, but that does not mean that all will then be judged righteous. Some will not shine forever like the stars of heaven, by their own choice and as a necessary consequence of God’s justice.

Finally, De Young turns back to Judaism, discussing the nation of Israel and the Law. He puts forth a lengthy analysis of the constitution of Israel by God as the chosen people, after the nations were dispersed as a result of the events of Babel, with their governance given to spirits who later became corrupt, leading then to the creation of Israel, an entirely new nation. Contrary to rabbinic belief, the prophesied rebirth of Israel comes about through the Gentiles, into whom the “lost” ten tribes had assimilated, and “the Church is the assembly of Israel, God’s people, which has been renewed and restored.” Crucially, the Church has not replaced Israel and it is not a new Israel. It is Israel, as it has developed according to God’s plan. The promise to Abraham, therefore, was not a promise exclusively to the Jews, ��but it is through Israel [as originally constituted] as the heir that the promises and blessings of God were mediated to the entire human family.” Judaism struggled with the fate of the ten tribes; Christianity saw this as merely a step toward Christ’s regathering of Israel from all the nations, formally begun at his Ascension. To be sure, not that De Young mentions it, the odious Pope Francis has rejected the Great Commission, as have a great many other Western Christians, but no matter; the commands of Christ are going to outlast this present unfaithful generation.

As to the law, the law as given to Moses was not abrogated by Christ, nor was it somehow divided into new categories of relevant and irrelevant, as some Protestants (notably John Calvin) would have it. De Young discusses the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15), and rejects the idea that it relieved Christians of the Mosaic laws. Rather, he says, those laws relating to “clean” and “unclean” foodstuffs no longer exist, because Christ has restored the creation, purifying it through his sacrifice. Along the same lines, excommunication has, for moral offenses, replaced the death penalty. De Young says “Christians, therefore, are called on to ‘keep kosher’ in a deeper and truer sense than outward compliance with the Torah’s commandments.” Similarly, circumcision, while gone as a commandment, is not “done away with. Rather, every element is filled to overflowing in such a way that Christ represents the truth and reality behind the shadow of the ordinance of circumcision (Col. 2:17). . . . Circumcision, in the Church, is not abolished but fulfilled.” In like manner, the forms of worship used by the Orthodox are not optional, but based on the commandments of the Torah, “now grasped more fully and deeply in Christ.”

Maybe, but most of these “fulfillments” are, in logical and practical terms, indistinguishable from abolishment. It is no doubt true that “Through Christ, in the life of the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, the commandments of the Torah can finally be fully lived out.” Yet some of this seems like hand waving and conclusory thinking. I am pretty sure there are other commandments in the Torah that are simply treated as a nullity by Christians and not by observant Jews. Certainly many modern Christians want to nullify all of the law, most especially the rules on sexual morality, and claim the mantle of Christ for their heresy, but that does not change that there do seem many other laws that are a dead letter. It’d require someone who knows a lot more than me to engage with De Young on this point, but I’m by no means convinced.

And that brings up the biggest problem with this book. Everything De Young says is very interesting, and to a devout Christian helpful to expand and root his faith. But I’m not sure that De Young really conclusively proves much he sets out to prove. The vast majority of his exegesis is exactly that—interpretations of Scripture, through an orthodox Orthodox lens. Even though De Young is very familiar with the Church Fathers, there are very few references to their writings, and I think their (often diverse) thoughts on many of these matters, and the development of those thoughts, would have greatly fleshed out the analysis. Worse, there is almost zero engagement with anyone who disagrees with the author’s interpretations, and history, and I am sure there are many such. Thus, it seems to me this book is a place to start, not the last word. Oh, I’m sure the myth of a primitive, nearly puerile, early Christianity, one lacking in ritual and demanding little of its followers except sharing, is exactly that. But I expect there is much more to the story, a good deal of which we will never know, at least on this Earth.

[Joshua · Rating 4 out of 5]

Covers some of the same material as Michael Heiser's Unseen Realm from an Eastern Orthodox perspective, but in a more theologically coherent framework.

The only criticism I have of this and similar works that rely heavily on historical approaches to make theological points is that they come across as somewhat arbitrary. They present beliefs as idiosyncratic artefacts of a time and place, but do not strongly link them to how reality actually works. Metaphysics is essential to grounding this kind of theology in reality, and understanding it on an intuitive level.

[Allison · Rating 5 out of 5]

Disclaimer: I received a complementary copy of this book in exchange for my honest review.


Religion of the Apostles is a new book by Father Stephen DeYoung. He is one of the two hosts of The Lord of Spirits, a podcast on Ancient Faith Radio and that's where I first heard about the book. Father Stephen takes the reader on a tour of the ancient world, particularly Second Temple Judaism. This gives new insight into what the apostles believed and demonstrates that Orthodox Christianity is the true fulfillment of Judaism.


What I loved:
As a recent convert to the Orthodox Church and as someone with Jewish heritage, it was so meaningful to be taken through all the ways that the Old Testament has been fulfilled in Christ and the Church. Growing up, I was told that Jesus had fulfilled the Law, but no one ever explained how to my satisfaction. People would also say that Christians didn't need to keep Kosher because only the early Jewish Christians kept following the Law, not the Gentiles. So of course I was confused and wondered if I was, indeed, supposed to be keeping Kosher. Father Stephen laid all those doubts to rest by explaining how exactly all those Old Testament rules are fulfilled and how the Church is the true Israel. It was also very interesting to read about how Jewish theology was changed in reaction to Christianity.


What I didn't love:
Honestly, not much. I wish some topics were delved into a bit more deeply in the book, but they were all discussed at length in the podcast I mentioned above. If I were reading this book without having listened to the podcast already, though, I would have been a bit disappointed.


Would I recommend Religion of the Apostles?
Wholeheartedly. This is a wonderful book for anyone interested in Christian theology and the context of the New Testament. I predict that it will be quickly added to catechism class book lists.


Overall:
This book was a bit drier than other Orthodox books I've read by authors such as Frederica Mathewes-Green, but the subject was fascinating and it was well worth having to read some sections more than once. In fact, I'm looking forward to rereading Religion of the Apostles as a whole so that I can absorb even more of the information! Even though many of the topics had been covered in The Lord of Spirits, I still learned a lot from reading Religion of the Apostles. I'll definitely be keeping an eye out for more books by Father Stephen!


Rating: 5/5

[Kevin Godinho · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a phenomenal book. I often refer to Fr. Stephen as the "N.T. Wright of Orthodoxy." If you read this book, you'll see why. Fr. Stephen does a great job disambiguating many topics from an ancient Near East/Second Temple perspective. We really can't understand our faith apart from this context. I have become convinced that until we come to understand what idolatry was, how it was performed, and what it meant during the time of Moses, we will never truly understand what it means to be made in the image of God. If you want to know what I mean by that, check out this book!

[John Coatney · Rating 5 out of 5]

As someone who has been led to appreciate the value of historical-grammatical biblical criticism, who has also adopted the hermeneutical approach(es) of the Eastern Orthodox tradition(s) to which I've joined myself, I've always been disappointed by how very seldom these two ways of looking at the Scriptures have been addressed together (especially considering that the attitude towards historical-grammatical criticism has been widely accepted as potentially helpful in Orthodox circles).

I've been grateful for and appreciative of Fr Stephen De Young's teachings via several podcasts, including especially The Whole Counsel of God (also a blog), and The Lord of Spirits. To find many of the ideas he shares in these venues collected within this book has been quite helpful and edifying. Fr Stephen does an outstanding job showing how the conclusions gleaned from historical-grammatical criticism nearly always agree with and support the teachings of the Orthodox Church, through liturgical hymnography, the teachings of the Church Fathers, hagiographies, and more.

I don't necessarily agree with every point that Fr Stephen makes in this book, but that's okay. The value of this book is not so much in that everything he claims is correct, but rather that his methodology and purpose is solid, and worth emulating.

[Bekah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Here’s why I gave it three stars:

1. All this info is on the Lord of Spirits podcast. Just go listen to that. As an avid listener, nothing was new here.

2. The name feels like a misnomer. I was expecting an explanation of the historical church in the first century, not an explanation of historical worldview from ancient cultures.

The writing is also not great and is pretty dry. I love Fr Stephen, but I’d rather listen to him talk.

[J. Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don’t say this often but this is a must read.
DeYoung is great. It’s like reading the church fathers, Michael Heiser, and N.T. Wright rolled into one. Very informative and a lot of pure gold here.

[Clifton D. Healy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Father Stephen's book is a substantial argument demonstrating that Orthodox Christianity is a continuation not only of the faith and practice of the Apostles, but of the people of Israel before them, and the patriarchs before Israel. To say it another way, he shows the continuity of faith and practice from the patriarchs to Israel to the Apostles and to the Orthodox Church today. The particularity of the claim that the Orthodox Church is the continuation of this consistent faith and practice, will be perhaps offensive to those who are not members of the Orthodox Church. And it should be noted that this is not a polemical work. While Father Stephen has some critical comments regarding various Protestant interpretive methods and doctrines, these are limited to only those things that are a propos of his main argument that the Orthodox Church preserves this line of faith. Those critical comments helpfully address the problems that arise from various interpretive methods, and how his argument resolves those problems. This book is imminently readable by any general reader. Any required knowledge to understand his argument is supplied by the author. For those wanting to dig a little deeper, there is a bibliography of substantive sources. Another plus of Father Stephen's approach is his voluminous referrals to, and citations of, Scripture--there is a significant Scriptural index, and in the ebook versions tapping on the Scriptural references takes you to the place within the book where they occur. However, while I am giving this book five stars for its substantive and clear argument, there is one significant problem I have with this work: the lack of academic references. I assume this lack is intentional to keep the work on a popular level. However, Father Stephen makes what are, at least to non-specialists, novel and unique claims, or contentious claims both of which could be supported in more substantial endnotes. Hopefully in updated versions, Father Stephen will supply those much desired citations and references. Despite this reservation, however, I wholeheartedly recommend this work to Orthodox and non-Orthodox alike.

[Foster Lewis · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading this book, and recommend it to anyone interested in history, worldview, and the Bible. There are a few points of contention that I will get into below, but overall this is a highly valuable and readable work.

In this book, Fr. De Young pieces together what he calls an "Old Testament Christianity," arguing that the spiritual beliefs and practices of the apostles of Christ are in seamless continuity with those of Moses and the Jewish faith up to the time of Christ. He further suggests that these practices are preserved today in the Orthodox church. De Young brings to the discussion an extremely diverse yet thoroughly interconnected knowledge base. His pedigree covers ancient near eastern and hellenistic studies, jewish and Christian theology, and strong familiarity with ancient languages and belief structures. Throughout the book he makes reference to cultural backgrounds, archaeological discoveries, modern biblical scholarship, and orthodox patristic exegesis.

There is likely much to say about his academic credentials, but the book doesn't enumerate his degrees. It does reference his podcast work, and anyone familiar with his podcasts (The Whole Council, Lord of Spirits) will undoubtedly get a lot from this book. For those unfamiliar with his podcasts or his blog, Stephen De Young has become the go-to Orthodox source for "what do I do with this weird bible passage?" Religion of the Apostles lays out a large map for interpreting confusing themes like biblical violence as well as what might be called “Christian esoterica” like angelic astronomy and demonic giants. In exploring such themes, this book brings to life a rich spiritual world as experienced historically by Christians. This worldview strongly contrasts our modern secular materialism, and offers a rich and true alternative to contemporary new age spiritualities and alternative Christianities.

***For Orthodox readers***, this book will draw your attention to the deep meanings strewn throughout the liturgies, prayers, iconography and patristic writings that you may not have previously noticed.

***For non-orthodox, Christian readers***, this book will draw your attention to the remarkable continuity of thought from Moses to the apostles of Christ, and will very convincingly explain how the earliest Christians worshipped and what they believed.

***For non-Christian readers***, this book will draw your attention to the rich history of thought and experience behind the Christian faith, and will discuss the extent to which ancient ideas have continued or changed through the modern age. Placing Christianity within the context of ancient hellenistic and near eastern religion will give you a better understanding of the meaning of this faith both at its conception and today.

There is a bottomless well of material that can be approached through this fascinating lens De Young offers, and I can only imagine that this book is the first in a long stream of works. In anticipation of future works, there are a few things that I would be remiss not to discuss. While I thoroughly enjoyed this work and can recommend it, there are some points of contention that I hope can be helpful not only to interested readers but also to the author and publishers. There is simply no good excuse for the lack of notes and citations in this book, and I’m not the first reviewer to comment on this. This book, while not academic, is nevertheless not casual reading, and there are sentences throughout which make explicit reference to "studies" and "research" to argue a point. De Young has quite evidently done extensive scholarly research, and I don't necessarily doubt the authenticity of his claims. Yet there are few notes and even less citations.

Curious readers who want to dive deeper are likely to be left unsatisfied at several points. Skeptical readers might easily dismiss the whole work as lousy scholarship based on this simple shortcoming. Adjacent to this is the awkward bibliography, which is less problematic but is just weird. The single page (front/back) bibliography includes works that are not directly used in the text (in the authors words these are general suggestions for further reading), while the text includes several works that don't show up in the bibliography.

I recognize that numerous patristic references in the text are contained under the single bibliographic entry for the multi-volume Ante-Nicene Fathers collection, however De Young’s contemporaries working in the same publishing environment (i.e. Dr. Jeannie Constantinou) provide readers with individual patristic citations according to relevant usage within the text. It's immensely more helpful for readers who want to dive into a particular topic or are returning to specific topics within the book. Again, I can't see any good reasoning for this, and I hope that future publications from this author will recognize that citations and notes are more than appropriate for the diverse audience that this book addresses. All this being said, the scriptural references included are numerous and thorough.

All in all this book is highly recommended, if not with a few qualms. I learned a lot from The Religion of the Apostles and continue to pick it up as I understand more and more about the topics it brings to light. I really look forward to future publications from this author as well as similar works from Ancient Faith Publishing.

[Christopher Hall · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent work. Fr De Young lays out in clear language the connection between the Old Testament, Second Temple religion, and Early Christianity. His Scripture index includes passages from nearly every book of the Bible. And as he goes along he frequently refers back to what he wrote in previous chapters to make it easier to follow his train of thought. I would highly recommend reading this volume for anyone interested in Scripture.

[Jeremy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Full review:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1g...


Notes:

+ Cosmic geography
- East: paradise, Eden
- North (Hebrew tzaphon-also dark, gloomy): evil

+ Sacrifices (Against penal substitutionary atonement)
- Expiation refers to an offering that purifies the offeror
- “Propitiation refers to an offering intended to please or pacify the recipient… The term propitiation carries heavy theological baggage. Specifically, it has been used as a sort of shorthand for the systematic view of penal substitutionary atonement. The word propitiation is taken, by itself, to mean appeasing the wrath of God incurred by a person or people for their sins by punishing a substitute in their place. Attempting to import this concept into the sacrificial system established in the Torah is simply impossible… Animals that are going to be a part of these offerings and meals are killed as they would be before being a part of any meal, but the Torah pays no attention to the way they are to be slaughtered… Their killing is not even ritualized. This likewise means that some sort of punishment or suffering on the part of the sacrificial animal was no part of the ritual. Even in the case of whole burnt offerings, it is not sacrificed alive but is killed first, unceremonially… At its most basic level, [propitiation] refers to an offering that is pleasing to God”

+ Jesus as the Passover (Paschal) lamb & Eucharistic meal:
- “There is very clearly no element of substitution in the Passover ritual. There is no indication that the lamb is being killed instead of a firstborn human losing his life… No attention is paid by the ritual text to the killing of the lamb. This means that its death is incidental to the ritual, not part of it. Rather, the focus is on how the lamb is to be cooked and eaten (Ex. 12:3–11)”
- “The conventional Protestant understanding of the Eucharist as a meal, not a sacrifice, is incoherent from the point of view of the apostles. Sacrifices from their perspective were communal meals, leading to the very early crisis regarding meat offered to idols (as dealt with primarily by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians)”

+ Jesus as the fulfillment of Sabbath
- “Christ rests in the Tomb on the seventh day of the week, fulfilling the Sabbath. In three days He completes the work of Creation, rising again on the first day of the week. The Sabbath was, thereby, fulfilled. The first day of the week, then, becomes the Lord’s Day. It is the day of Resurrection. Rather than participating in the reign of Yahweh as participation in future rest, the people of God now participate in the Resurrection of Christ in anticipation of their own resurrection and eternal life in the world to come. Everything that was true of the Sabbath is true of the Lord’s Day, only more so”

+ Worshiping God’s way
- “Worship ought to be the offering made to God that He wishes to receive from us. When Cain and Abel presented their sacrifices to God, one of them was accepted by God, and the other was rejected… Christ does not abolish the commandments regarding worship but fulfills them in bringing the full knowledge of God, which transforms and deepens them in a new context. We see this borne out in the practice of the apostles, who did not reject the existing Second Temple worship, which still existed in their times”

+ The Church & Israel
- “The notion that the Church has ‘replaced’ Israel or is somehow a ‘new Israel’ is nonsensical once one understands the language the Scriptures speak. The Church is Israel. Specifically, the Church is the assembly of Israel, God’s people, set apart to offer worship, praise, and sacrifice to Him. It is not that God’s people have ceased to be an ethnic group or nation, but rather that they were never an ethnic entity, and only ever so briefly a national one”
- “Christ put structures of authority in place that paralleled those of the Old Covenant. The twelve, identified first as disciples and then as apostles, are directly connected to the twelve patriarchs, who were the progenitors, the fathers, of Israel (Matt. 19:28). In the same way, the apostles would become the fathers of the new assembly (1 Cor. 4:14–15). In addition, Christ appointed the seventy, giving them authority within His assembled followers (Luke 10:1–20). Preserved within the Church’s memory is the awareness that many of the early leaders of the Church whom we see emerging within the Acts of the Apostles and the epistolary literature came from this second group. This group of apostles parallels the elders (presbyteroi) appointed by Moses to assist him in governing the people, who were also seventy in number (Num. 11:16–17). This institution had endured throughout the Old Covenant and had become the Sanhedrin of the first century… Within the ministry of Christ there were new patriarchs, new elders (presbyteroi) of the people, and men and women who served Jesus and accompanied Him. These last paralleled the Levites who served in and around the tabernacle and temple and the women who served at the tabernacle’s gate (Ex. 38:8)”

+ Feast of Pentecost in OT
- When Moses sprinkled the people with the blood of the covenant (Exodus 24:8)

+ History of Samaria & the north
- Jeroboam set up… idolatrous shrines at Bethel and Dan in the north. Later generations would seek to syncretize this idolatrous form of Yahweh worship with the Baal worship of neighboring lands to the north
- Omri, the founder of a later northern dynasty, would purchase a hill and build the city of Samaria to serve as a northern capital within the territory of Ephraim, the largest and most prominent tribe of the north
- At no point in its relatively brief history was this Northern Kingdom faithful to their God or righteous in their ways. This resulted in the complete destruction of the ten northern tribes barely two hundred years after the founding of their independent kingdom


Quotes:

At no point did the apostles consider themselves to be founding a new religion, certainly not one from scratch. Instead, they integrated their firsthand experiences of Jesus Christ into their existing religious understanding and worldview. Certainly their religious life, in all its parts, was transformed, but this transformation was understood by them in terms of fulfillment, not correction, and much less re-creation.

Only within the last few decades have scholars begun to grasp that Second Temple literature lends important context to our understanding of the New Testament. Before that, scholarship had long taken for granted that the religion practiced by Judeans in the first century AD was identical to religion as practiced by later Rabbinic Judaism. This is simply not the case. Rabbinic Judaism came to flower only in the fifth century AD with the codification of the Talmud. Christianity had already emerged several centuries before Rabbinic Judaism, which was itself a reaction against Christian faith and praxis.

This appearance of the Angel of the Lord [in Judges 2, referring also to Exodus 23:20] demonstrates that even the earliest traditions of the Old Testament reveal a second hypostasis of the God of Israel, who both is Israel’s God and is Himself a Second Person of Yahweh.

Christian readers at least since St. Augustine have tended to see in Adam the archetypal sinner who passes sin on to his physical progeny. This, however, is not the way Adam was seen within the Second Temple period that formed the background for the New Testament texts. Adam was seen rather as the one who brought death to the human race. He is not so much seen as the origin of human sin as the origin of human mortality. Yes, it was his sin that brought about this effect, but the corruption in humanity was seen to be produced by subsequent events in the Book of Genesis and as a result of death and mortality, rather than the reverse.

The idea that God’s body was not to be sought out or investigated directly rejected a key element of the Christian interpretation of these Scriptures, namely that the Incarnation of Christ was a final fulfillment of a long series of bodily appearances by the Second Person of Yahweh. Even if one were to consider only the Torah, the most uncontroversial part of the Hebrew canon… Yahweh, the God of Israel, is depicted in bodily form fairly consistently throughout these books—not merely in symbolic references to God’s strong right arm, or to His sheltering Israel under His wings, or in other anthropomorphic statements regarding God that are clearly poetic imagery. Rather, the God of Israel stood, walked, interacted with humans face to face, had conversations with them, touched them with His hand, and even ate with them. The episode at the Oak of Mamre, for example, recorded in Genesis 18, is one of the strangest and most mysterious in the Scriptures. Abraham hosted, and fed, the God of Israel beside his tent.

The unitarian monotheism of Rabbinic Judaism, not the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, was the innovation in the centuries after Christ… The repeated affirmation in the synagogue that God does not have a body was an even later addition, despite its contradiction of the Hebrew Scriptures… Saints Justin Martyr and Basil the Great, as well as Origen, all testify that in their respective eras, Jewish teaching still held that God had a body or a form. Having rejected the Incarnation and repudiated the idea of the second hypostasis of Yahweh, all these bodily appearances would be treated by Rabbinic Judaism as appearances of the singular Yahweh… Rabbinic Judaism cut off huge swathes of the belief and practice of the Second Temple period in order to create a deliberately non-Christian religion that relied on a pared-down reading of the Hebrew Scriptures.

The Christ who walked in the Garden and cursed the serpent, who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, who led the people out of Egypt and commanded Joshua’s armies is the same Christ whom we encounter in the four Gospels. The Christ of love and compassion and mercy whom we encounter in the Gospels and the teaching of the apostles that make up the rest of the New Testament is the same Christ whom we encounter in the judgment of Revelation as the avenger of innocent blood… Latent Marcionism may express itself through denying that God has any wrath at all, against the consistent testimony of Scripture, the Fathers, and the liturgical tradition of the Church. It sometimes even goes so far as the heresy of universalism, the idea that all humanity finds salvation without reference to free choice. Against any such view, the Epistle to the Hebrews reminds us that Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever (13:8). His character has never changed and never will. He is the God who calls us to repentance through the certain knowledge of coming judgment and the God who pours forth His mercy and forgiveness when we turn from our sin to follow Him.

A careful reading of the text reveals that those places where total destruction was mandated were the places in which the Anakim dwelt, while those where the Anakim have not been cited were spared total annihilation. This is made especially clear by the summary of Joshua’s conquest in Joshua 11, which culminates with the statement that the mission was accomplished because Joshua had cut off all the Anakim from the land and had devoted their cities to destruction (v. 21). We are told in verse 22 that the only Anakim who survived judgment at the hands of Israel had done so by fleeing to three Philistine cities: Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod. Goliath, the giant slain by the Prophet David, came to oppose Israel from Gath (1 Sam. 17), marking him out as one of these surviving Anakim. David, as king of Israel, completed the task of the conquest and unification of the land, conquering the city that would become Jerusalem, for example. One of these tasks that fell to David and his military lieutenants was the final eradication of the giants who had escaped to the Philistine lands. These battles are described, with details concerning the size and power of these giants, in 2 Samuel 21:15–22. The texts of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Joshua do not describe a holy war or genocide directed at a particular ethnicity of human beings but a war waged by the worshippers of Yahweh, the God of Israel, against His spiritual enemies, demonic powers that had come to dominate the region of Canaan and the Transjordan.

Just as in the Old Covenant believers sought the intercession of the holy ones before Yahweh (see Job 5:1), so also, as the saints in glory serve as priests before the throne of Christ, they intercede for the faithful (Rev. 20:6).

The earliest institution of the Torah was the seventy elders surrounding the one appointed to judge Israel, seventy in number because that was the number of the divine council assigned to govern the nations (Deut. 32:8).

In the ancient world, …polygamy was widely practiced by the nobility, which of course included kings… When references appear in the history of Judah’s monarchy to a “queen mother,” it is often presumed that this is merely a function of a polygamous monarchy. Kings could have many wives, but they could have only one mother. The reality of polygamy, however, does not fully explain the institution of queen mother within Judah because there is no parallel institution in the Northern Kingdom of Israel, let alone in many other monarchies of the ancient world that were equally polygamous. It is unique to David’s line within Judah.

There is a clear parallel between the interaction between Bathsheba and Solomon in 1 Kings 2 and that between the Theotokos and Christ at the wedding at Cana (John 2), though the Theotokos shows herself a wiser and holier woman than her ancient ancestor. In both cases, the mother of the king brings a request for aid to the king and then follows the judgment of the king. Bathsheba’s request is denied because it would have been a disastrous mistake (1 Kings 2:13–25). The Theotokos’s request for aid at the wedding feast is honored, and through it, new wine and joy are brought to the feast.

Job himself indicated that he had such a representative, referred to as his “witness” (Job 16:18–22). This understanding becomes the basis for what are today called “guardian angels,” angelic patrons who represent righteous individuals in the council of God. This tradition is directly referred to by Christ Himself in Matthew 18:10. Through Christ, resurrected human persons are now likewise members of the divine council and fulfill this same role (Heb. 11:39—12:2; Rev. 4:9–11; 6:9–11; 8:4).

The wilderness, that part of the world that resists being set in order, remains in this state of chaos and so is associated with nonbeing and death. In the Torah, it is ambiguous whether being “cut off from among the people” represents death or exile since, in context, these two states were the same thing.

In order to dwell with His people, Yahweh gave detailed instructions to Moses to pattern the tabernacle on God’s dwelling place, which he had beheld on the mountain (Heb. 8:5). God, therefore, descended His mountain to come and dwell with humanity. This foreshadowed the Incarnation of Christ, when “the Word became flesh and tabernacled among us” (John 1:14)... The Theotokos herself is poetically described as a “mystical Paradise,” because Yahweh, the God of Israel, came to dwell within her womb.

The English word atonement was created for the purposes of biblical translation and has no earlier etymological history. Wycliffe used the phrase “at one-ment” in his fourteenth-century translations of the Vulgate into Middle English to convey humanity’s being reconciled or “at one” with God. In the sixteenth century, this was combined into the word “atonement.” Because the word was coined, it offers little insight into the concept as it is employed in the Scriptures.

For some, the fire of God’s wrath is destructive, consuming them utterly. For others, it is purgative, allowing them to emerge from the Day of the Lord purified as gold from the dross, cleansed from the stain of their sins and transgressions. This latter group are those who are justified, made righteous, or made just. Rather than being consumed along with their sins and wickedness, they are purified from them as though through a refiner’s fire. This burning fire is rightly described by Scripture and the Fathers as God’s wrath… St. John the Forerunner engaged this motif when he described the wrath to come as cleansing fire (see Matt. 3:7–12). He also, however, linked this fire to the Holy Spirit, and specifically to baptism with the Holy Spirit (3:11)... It literally describes being immersed or submerged in the Holy Spirit and—as St. John clarified here—fire. Repentance is therefore tied to, and the precondition for, the cleansing fire of the Spirit. It is not seen as self-improvement or growth but as testing and refining fire. It is bringing one’s self under judgment now to remove the fire of judgment on the Day of the Lord (1 Cor. 11:31).

Because Christ is without sin, the devil has no claim over Him whatsoever (John 14:30–31). He cannot even lay claim to His body through decay (Jude 9; Acts 2:27).

Christ died not on the Day of Atonement but on the Passover… Saint Peter can, therefore, speak of us having been purchased by the blood of Christ, the Paschal Lamb (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; 1 Pet. 1:18–19). Saint Paul can say that Christ has been sacrificed for us as our Passover (1 Cor. 5:7). Saint John the Forerunner’s primary witness to Jesus Christ is that He is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29).

In the contemporary Western world, we think of sin in juridical terms and so look at God’s curse as punishment. We associate God’s curse brought about by wickedness with a person’s eternal destiny after death. Israelite religion, as well as that of the Second Temple period and early Christianity, however, had rather what might be called a “biological” view of sin. Sin is an infection. Things tainted by sin are treated in the same manner and according to the same purity regulations as those tainted by disease.

While civil, ceremonial, and moral may seem like logical or helpful categories, these distinctions are not found in the Scriptures, neither in the Torah itself nor in the New Testament. The Torah and its commandments are a coherent whole—there are no actual divisions in the text that make some commandments important for Christians and others obsolete. What divisions or categories can be assigned are only heuristic or descriptive.

[Todd Decker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good. De Young's project is to show how first-century Christianity was continuous with Second Temple Judaism, i.e. Judaism between the construction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem, c. 515 BCE, and its destruction by the Romans in 70 CE. This is distinguished from subsequent Rabbinic Judaism that developed later and that had some significant differences. His aim is apologetic but the information that he presents on Second Temple Judaism is consistent with academic scholarship on the topic. As an apologetic his book is intended to support the Orthodox Christian tradition. But one need not be a part of that tradition, or even a Christian, to appreciate and learn from the book's content. It is, in the first place, informative and successfully so. It is secondarily persuasive. It contains a wealth of valuable information. Though not an Orthodox Christian myself, as a Christian with ecumenical interests I find many of his arguments persuasive and think that the Orthodox tradition gets a lot right. Some the topics treated in the book include: the Divine Council, the Angel of the Lord, the Wisdom of God, the primordial chaos before Creation, and God's continuing covenant with Israel. In general I think it's important to connect Christian theology to its Jewish roots and I appreciate that this book, making extensive use of the ancient texts, pushes hard in that direction.

[Kevin · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The primary aim of this book is to demonstrate the absolute continuity of ancient Israelite religion, the religion of the Second Temple, first-century Christianity, and the religious life preserved and practiced in the Orthodox Church. The structures, patterns, and teachings now extant within the Church were already present in the Church of the first century because they had been present already in the religion in which the apostles were raised and which they practiced throughout their lives. They worshipped in the temple and in the synagogues. They prayed according to traditional hours of prayer. They offered incense and lit lamps at morning and evening. They strove in the power of the Spirit to keep the commandments of Christ, given by Him to Moses at Sinai. They worshipped the Holy Trinity, known through the Hebrew Scriptures but now known to them personally in the Person of Jesus Christ and the coming of the Holy Spirit. They saw the religious ritual that structured their lives as the means of spiritual warfare against the powers of evil. They saw at the end of their lives the hope of receiving a good judgment before the throne of Christ and being granted to participate in His rule over the creation in this age and the age to come." p.269

This book clears up so many misunderstandings and misinterpretations of the Scriptures while at the same time deepening our readings of obscure passages and our worldview as a whole. I am sure there are many things to learn here whether it'd be your first or hundredth Christian book.

[Anthony Remender · Rating 5 out of 5]

“You can’t prove the Apostles were Orthodox!”

“Brother, we can prove Abraham was.”


Seriously, this is an incredible book. As it exemplifies perfectly, Orthodox theology fully relies on and embraces the Old Testament in a way no other Christian tradition does. Focusing on his wheelhouse, the spiritual realm and operations of the divine beings therein, Fr. De Young opens the readers eyes to a completely new way of seeing how God works through His divine council, of which the Church and its saints are now a part. Systematically addressing every single point of, he shows not just Orthodoxy’s continuity with the Apostles but with the Patriarchs and prophets millennia before. Orthodox Christianity, as it does in this book, will not fail to provide any outsider with a completely new way to look at Scripture and its God.

[Irina Hayaser · Rating 5 out of 5]

An amazingly concise book on such a vast subject - connecting the dots and clearly showing the continuity between the Old and the New Testament, while dismantling the secular, materialist worldview which many Christians have. Through The Religion of the Apostles, and of course The Lord of Spirits podcast, I received the best answers possible, on my problems and questions regarding the Old Testament.

[Jaden Weatherly · Rating 4 out of 5]

this was an audiobook listen; definitely a book that i hope to reread with a physical copy. Fr Stephen argues that the Orthodox Christian faith is the continuation of the Apostolic faith, which in turn is the fulfillment of 2nd temple Judaism. i think he makes a lot of great points, especially as there is a lot of alignment with Heiser’s “The Unseen Realm,” but, i walk away still Protestant. however, like i said, i want to reread this as i think it deserves the attention.

[Zane Theophan V · Rating 5 out of 5]

Best book I've read connecting the Old Testament religion with its continuation in the Orthodox Church. Made several remarkable points about the divine council, the angelic falls, and sacrifice that I'd never considered. I'd recommend this to anyone

[Michael T Moos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Solid.

[Joshua · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was stunning. De Young waded into territory I’d felt a marked disconnect in, this is, the synergy between the first century jewish communities that the church was birthed from, and my understanding of the church in general. Well, de Young went there, and he went there majestically.

[Faid · Rating 5 out of 5]

Τρομερά βοηθητικό στην κατανόηση των πεποιθήσεων και πρακτικών στην Ορθόδοξη Εκκλησία. Ο Χριστιανισμός δεν είναι μια καινούρια θρησκεία που ξεκίνησε με τον Χριστό, αλλά η συνέχεια της πίστης του λαού του Θεού στην Παλαιά Διαθήκη.

[Aleksander Brobak · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think any Christian in the western world would do well reading a book like this, as it highlights important factors completely neglected in modern day Christianity.
However, I will mention that although Stephen De Young is very knowledgeable he does at times write as if the reader already has a great deal of knowledge and will cite passages without actually reading them - as well as delving very deep into some topics with the expectation that the reader knows the context already. I wish that he would perhaps spend a little more time explaining certain points from the very beginning, as the book ends up feeling like it is for "advanced" people of the faith.

[Sarah Geana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Religion of the Apostles by Fr. Stephan De Young blew my mind. I was baptized and raised Orthodox Christian and attended St. Vladimir’s Seminary and the gem that is this book raised questions and offered enlightenment to a level I had never experienced before. I highly recommend this book.
It is so easy to accept prevailing viewpoints especially regarding history. Religion of the Apostles undertakes the monumental task of avoiding common assumptions regarding the origin of the Christian church and instead takes extraordinary effort to both look deeply at the details and back out for a wider perspective, using common sense. I really appreciate the level of research that went into this book. You just have to listen and hear the number of citations nearly on every page to appreciate how deep Fr. Stephen went in researching for this topic.
Our modern world is full of skepticism and cynicism. To try to read the Bible or appreciate the early Church from this perspective inevitably falls short. Reading this book introduced me to the rich and vibrant mystical experience that was much more common in the early centuries. Their common experience was one of angels and demons, gods and demi-gods. It is tempting to throw all that away with our modern scientific rationalistic mindset but after reading this book, there is no going back.
Just to point out for the audiobook version specifically; Fr. Stephan’s reading was clear. The book itself did start out a bit slow and then quickly got interesting. The citations did break up the listening quite a bit at times. But it did also impress me with his scholasticism.
All in all, I recommend anyone who is ready to gain a broader perspective on the origins of Christianity to read this book. You will not be disappointed.

[Bekah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Usually dense & academic books are a slog to wade through, but Fr. De Young’s prose is so clear, simple, and engaging—plus the content was incredibly fascinating—that I really enjoyed it. Even though it took me ages. But I annotated my way to the end 👊🏻

[Nat (Photini) C. · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a former Protestant Christian I always thought that the ancient Church was casual, unstructured and without firm theology. I thought that came much later with Catholicism and with the Catholic Church adding much to the Church that was against Scripture and not needed. I thought the Protestant Reformation got back to the correct “stuff” and refined theology and made it rich.
In this book, Stephen DeYoung makes a compelling case otherwise.
With a plethora of Scripture citations, this book shows how the origin of then Christian Church didn’t just start with the birth of Christ, but rather reaches back to the Old Testament and shows how important the OT is and how God’s law still applies today! It also shows the dangers and false assumptions we have made trying to apply Rabbinic Judaism to the Jews of Christ’s time. Shows how this all evolved and changed in a reaction to Christianity.
This book is a MUST for someone wanting to understand the tip of the iceberg that is the history of the Christian Church.

[Aaron Munro · Rating 5 out of 5]

Strong Theology

I have searched for theological coherence all my adult life. This book has most (of not all) of the missing “puzzle pieces.” Combined with The Language of Creation by Matteo Pageau, re-enchantment has begun!

[Navel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Did you ever grow up being taught or understanding that there was a sort of "void" between later years of the old covenant and the new covenant?

Fr. Stephen demonstrates the continuity between the old testament era and the new testament era.

Dinged a star for the dearth of footnotes

[Nathaniel Spencer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Given my growing mancrush on Fr. Stephen DeYoung's brain, via the nearly always mindblowing Lord of Spirits podcast (if you haven't heard it stop reading this and go listen right now), I probably shouldn't be allowed to write this review because I risk lapsing into lengthy, effusive DeYoung hagiography. Nevertheless I'll try and keep it shortish.

To start, the introduction asks provocatively, "was St. Paul a convert?" The answer forms the basis for his arguments, which are many. As a work of apologetics, Religion of the Apostles seeks to correct some basic bad assumptions promulgated, either by scholarship or popular tropes, to discredit Christianity in general or Orthodoxy in particular.

Before the last few decades, DeYoung asserts, the assumption was that the Judaism of the first century was basically the same, or in direct continuity with, rabbinic Judaism of the fifth century, whereas Christianity was a new and different religion. Yet evidence appears to be stacking up to the contrary. Paul, when describing his experience and calling at conversion, is exactly in the pattern of the Old Covenant prophet, such as Ezekiel or Jeremiah. Christ, the Word of God as Christians had it, "came to" Paul and appointed him to bring a message to God's people and beyond. What ends up emerging is that the continuity between ancient Israelite religion and first century Christianity was far more striking than people give it credit for.

For instance, the book begins by covering the claims of Trinitarian Christianity: that God exists as three divine Persons which are all co-eternal but distinct. This would have been unthinkable to any decent faithful Jew of Jesus' day, and thus it would be impossible for the claim of Jesus' deity to gain any purchase; high Christology is a later, gentile development, it is assumed. What DeYoung shows is that far from being the unitarian monotheists we imagine (monotheism as a term didn't exist until the 19th c.), Israelites indeed believed something like (at minimum) "binitarian" Godhead, though naturally their verbal expression of such was markedly different from the later Nicene formula in Greek. Terms like the Word of YHWH, the Spirit of YHWH, and the Wisdom of YHWH all represent straightforward references to a personage that is both YHWH and yet distinguished from YHWH, rather than a quality or an expression. Many of the OT narratives bears this out: “The Word of the Lord came to Isaiah" is phrased exactly that way because it concerns, not a voice from the heavens as we might imagine, but the arrival of someone. John's famous Gospel prologue about the Word (logos) refers not to a Greek philosophical principle of rationality or force in which the world subsists, but to exactly what we would expect a Jewish narrative to refer to: the Law and the Prophets, the Jewish Scriptures. The Word of YHWH which visited the prophets has now arrived in the flesh, to be encountered. In effect, John sets up his Gospel by insinuating that in this new event of Jesus the Messiah, "the Word of God came to" the whole world as he once did for select prophets. But this wasn't a revolutionary idea John was introducing, it was right within the mold of thoughts about deity that Jews had been having for generations: a divine son/word/wisdom existed that could be encountered as YHWH but who was also distinct. The Trinity, in other words, was not particularly new.

This is a glimpse of the tip of the iceberg. Fr. DeYoung's book proceeds through numberless Biblical questions and canned modern assumptions about Christianity, dismantling things and rebuilding new, better ways of understanding what the Scriptures say. Time and again we find that Christianity of the first century is in direct continuity with the Judaism that came before it, albeit sometimes in strange ways, and that later mainstream Christianity is simply the confirmation of that original strain of faith. Highlights covered in the book include angels and demons, the divine council, the Temple, atonement, creation, sin and evil, and the saints; each receiving explanations designed to disarm common criticisms that Christianity is just a mass of later accretions unrelated coherently to the Bible or to the ancient Israelites.

I should mention here that I am not an Orthodox Christian, though I am a fan of DeYoung's podcasts and have a growing agreement with much of what I hear there. That said, this book's apologetic element per Orthodoxy specifically was interesting, but was probably the lesser part of what interested me about Religion of the Apostles. I do enjoy learning more about liturgical forms, but I don't exactly have a dog in that fight (defending Eastern Orthodoxy). Nevertheless DeYoung’s skillful handling of pervasive tropes about Christianity was professional, deft, compelling, and all-around impressive. It's really not suprising that he (along with his co-host Fr. Andrew Damick) has gained the following he has, although it still seems thus far to be limited to the Orthodox and Ortho-curious. I would be surprised if we don't hear of Fr. Stephen DeYoung's work being pulled into wider Christian conversations soon enough.

[Petar Jovanovic · Rating 5 out of 5]

The following is the review of the e-book and the audiobook, so keep that in mind. The Religion of the Apostles: Orthodox Christianity in the First Century by Stephen De Young had several aims. I am paraphrasing: “To outline the contours of the religious practice and beliefs of the Jewish people in the first century AD; to rectify the assumed discontinuity between Old and New Testamental beliefs, practices and scriptures, and to be used in the Orthodox Christian apologetics”. The book achieved and exceeded its aims, at least this is my humble opinion, but it is not without its faults, about which I will speak later. Additionally, the book’s aim, which was unmentioned but fulfilled anyway, is to give Orthodox Christians grounding in their beliefs and practices. Too many of us gather as the one Body and participate in the life of the Orthodox Church without understanding the modes of that participation. I have seen criticism levelled against the book, and those mainly revolve around not providing enough references. If you are looking for a scholarly book full of references and footnotes (the book is not without them), this is not the book for you. The book was not written to be a scholarly reference for somebody’s doctoral thesis. The book had different aims.
As mentioned above, the book does have some issues. The issues are mainly in its pacing and the presentation of the material. However, this criticism I would not entirely place on the author, much of it has to do with the material, which gets complicated at times. The book starts very well. It presents the material very cleanly and concisely, which for me was a refreshing change. Too many authors in the field of religious studies try to be “scholarly”, which comes off as pretentious. Part 2 is where the trouble begins. Part 2 very soon becomes repetitive and a bit tiresome. While Part 3 is too complicated, to the point of feeling like reading somebody’s PhD thesis, which makes a reader lose focus. This is particularly obvious in the audiobook version, with the listener (me) losing focus in Part 3, hearing every third word or so. However, as mentioned before, much of it has to do with the subject matter of this particular section. This section answers questions that many regular non-western Orthodox parishioners (people with roots in the Middle East, Balkans, Russia) have never raised during their religious lives. Part 4 is where the book goes back to its beginnings, slowing the pace down and being much clearer.
From the technical perspective, the e-book is well-formatted, and the audiobook is well-narrated by the author himself, with the occasional “end quote”, which would pop out sound-wise and was clearly recorded later in the process.
To summarise, the book is excellent, and the benefits to the Orthodox readers and listeners are immeasurable. First, because the book shows us two fundamental things:
1. That the first Christians did not “invent” anything.
2. That the first Christians did not “corrupt” anything.
Second, because it shows us that the first Christians listened to the voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Repent (in Greek “metanoite” – change your mind, your worldview), for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!”. And then listened to the call of the Apostles and their descendants through the ages, until today: “Taste and see that the LORD is good”.
However, the book is not without its problem, which will be negligible after a careful re-reading. The first of many, I am sure.

[Amber · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Religion of the Apostles: Orthodox Christianity in the First Century” by Fr. Stephen De Young was an eye-opening read that I am sure I will refer to many times in the future. The author is well respected in the Orthodox Christian community, and I’ve heard his work referenced quite a few times in my studies over the past couple of years. He does great work educating readers/listeners of his blog and podcasts on scripture that has become obscure the further we get from the time they were written. This book continues that tradition and enlightened me on aspects of early Christianity (and some of the Old Testament) that always puzzled me. His work creates a more full picture of what it means and has always meant to be a follower of Jesus. Overall, I am glad I read the book.
Although I did enjoy the book, I am not sure it perfectly accomplished what it set out to do. From my understanding, this book was meant to be a book that could take more academic topics about the beginnings of Christianity and make them more accessible to non-academics. In some sections, I feel like this goal is accomplished. My understanding overall of early Christian thinking is much more informed than it once was. On the other hand, there are parts in which the author does not seem to find this balance. There are sections that are both too detailed for the average reader and not detailed or have enough citations for the academic. By staying in the middle ground, perhaps this information was not presented to its greatest advantage. Either way, the subject matter of this book is very interesting, and I am sure will be much discussed in the years to come.
Another note I have is not a critique of the book itself but a warning for potential readers. There are some topics (such as discussion of Nephilim) that were very new for me. My religious background before I entered the Orthodox church tended toward fundamentalist thinking that was both confusing and detrimental to my faith. I am not by any means saying that this book promotes that sort of thinking! I will say that aspects of it could be manipulated or misinterpreted by those that already have a tendency towards thinking that way already. Especially if they don’t read the whole book carefully. There were several moments when I had to take a step back from the book to properly absorb the information I had just heard and discuss it with someone more knowledgeable than myself. Much of the information in this book is absolutely beneficial for all Orthodox Christians to better understand Christianity. Some of the information people may not be ready for or should approach with guidance. This is of course left to each individual and their spiritual father or mentors.
Yet again, let me reiterate how informative this book was for me. It will take a long time before I am able to fully process it all. I absolutely recommend it to those who are ready for it!

****One more side note about the audible version. I noticed that some of the sound production was a little strange. For example, the separate addition of the “end quote” audio that was clearly recorded at a different time. The audible was not terrible to listen to, but I just overall got the impression that the work was rushed.