In a time where people seeking definitive answers on truth are lacking, Stephen Dempster takes bold initiative to seek the hermeneutical lens through which the Old Testament should be read and studied. In Dominion and Dynasty, he confidently and definitively claims a literary approach to reading the Old Testament as the best and most faithful hermeneutical method and then argues this approach will result in readers discovering the duality of dominion and dynasty. Dempster demonstrates how God works in those themes to restore the relationship between his people and himself that was shattered in the Garden of Eden. Dempster has several degrees which he earned from the University of Western Ontario, University of Toronto, and Westminster Theological Seminary. He taught religious studies at Crandall University in New Brunswick, Canada, from 1984 until he recently retired in 2021 and was honorably named Professor Emeritus.
Dempster certainly does not claim he has discovered the final answer on how to perfectly read and interpret the Old Testament, but he also does not avoid being definitive about his conclusions. Dempster’s decisive conclusion is that dominion and dynasty are the important means through which God works his redemptive plan for his people in the Old Testament and, therefore, these themes represent the biblical theology of the Old Testament. The dynasty or genealogy of Israel, originating in the seed of Eve, is likely a more obvious of the two themes to many readers of the Old Testament due to the many included genealogies and numerous references to paternity. The theme less likely to be considered is the theme of dominion or the importance of geography, which Dempster sees as intrinsically woven into the theme of dynasty. Dominion is the connectedness God has between his redemptive work and the physical promised land for the people of Israel. Even as Dempster writes using two words to define the main theological thrust of the Old Testament, he really believes these ideas are linked so tightly they cannot stand separately, as he writes, “For human beings to function as the image of God they need a territory, a domain to rule over. And to have the land without human beings is also pointless, for the kingdom needs a king, the dominion a dynasty” (62).
Dempster writes for those actively seeking the theological intentions of the Old Testament through a literary framework and those who believe taking a literary approach to the text would be invalid or unhelpful with this method. To those opposed or unsure of this importance, he spends the entire first chapter addressing these concerns and arguing for the importance of reading the Old Testament as he does. Dempster believes, for example, the Old Testament has a clear beginning, middle, and ending, so Old Testament readers ought to read it simply as a narrative and avoid using ideas of modernism or post-modernism to read and interpret the texts. Dempster describes, “This book, whose plot-line stretches from the beginning to the ‘latter days’, from Adam to the son of man, is hardly a ragbag of literary relics. Rather, it is a remarkable Story that assimilates all its texts into its comprehensive framework” (43). To those who are already convinced by the first chapter of the importance of reading the text through a literary perspective, Dempster spends the rest of the book unpacking his specific evaluation and argues for Old Testament readers to read through the lens of dominion and dynasty.
Through the rest of the book, Dempster works book-by-book through the canon, examining when and where the themes show up. Because he is using the lens of dominion and dynasty, he spends significantly more time in the Pentateuch, where God promises dominion and dynasty, and less time considering other books. Dempster does not inject new details into the texts or pretend to know previously unknown insights but, rather, he deals with exactly what is presented literarily in the Scriptures and draws connections between passages and identifies where his thesis themes resurface passage-by-passage. For example, when drawing examining the Davidic covenant, Dempster is seeing the terms and the promised results of the covenant through the lenses of dominion:
[T]he Davidic covenant is linked with creation. Just as God destroyed the forces of chaos at the beginning to build the world, thus manifesting his faithfulness, so he is in the process of destroying chaotic forces within history by means of covenant. The power of creation, which repulsed the forces of chaos, has been channeled into the Davidic covenant and the building of the Davidic house. David is a new Adam appointed as God's vicegerent over the world to subdue it and have dominion over it. (198)
Dempster argues an Old Testament reader or even a dedicated scholar might not be as quick to make such a connection without reading the Old Testament as a unified whole and without developing the reading lens of dominion. He believes readers would be more likely to see such a connection if they were carefully reading Genesis and then reading 1 and 2 Samuel thinking of them as a cohesive unit and developing interpretive reading lenses.
Dempster fights for the importance of discovering a faithful lens through which to read the Old Testament. “[T]he function of a particular text should inform interpreters, so much so that they begin to use the lens the text itself provides,” he argues (18). If even someone were to disagree with Dempster on the value of approaching the Old Testament from a literary approach, there are numerous and undeniable motifs and references to the ideas of dominion and dynasty riddled throughout the Old Testament as Dempster’s demonstrates. Dempster primarily addresses two types of readers, those who are completely opposed to a literary approach and those in favor of his method. He does not address a middle view where it would be considered right to read the Bible from a literary approach, but it would be wrong to conclude someone could summarize or approach the entire Old Testament exclusively through the singular lens of dominion and dynasty. Dominion and dynasty are central and important themes, but at times Dempster becomes reductionistic and his thinking will limit Bible readers into seeing all the Old Testament exclusively through these themes and ideas when there could be many more which would be helpful to the faithful Christian. An example of an alternative lens is seeing the Old Testament as stories of mankind’s sin and God exacting justice on sin but with the ever present and stark contrast of God bringing these sinners into faithfulness and lavishing grace on them. It is possible to categorize almost every single verse of the Old Testament into one of these categories. When Dempster examines the story of Abraham and near sacrifice of Isaac in Genesis 22, he simply acknowledges Abraham’s faith in one sentence but spends most of his analysis on the importance of God’s promise being fulfilled through the line of Isaac, but Paul’s clear priority in Romans 4 is not on the importance of genealogy but on the importance of Abraham’s faith.
It is worth noting that if someone was coming from a background other than a reformed one, they would likely struggle to get past the first chapter and into the consideration of dominion and dynasty. Dempster does address his opponents in the first chapter but his purpose in writing is not primarily to change the minds of his opponents on hermeneutical issues. He begins the book very abruptly, immediately challenging his opposition in the first pages, and then quickly moves on to his purpose in writing in chapter two. Perhaps someone might have their mind changed but it seems Dempster writes to reassure those already on his side on the matter.
It is helpful Dempster makes clear, unapologetic statements as there is little value in taking a stance that accommodates so many views there is nothing truly decisive to consider. However, Dempster states he intentionally does not extend his analysis into the New Testament, and this leaves the book lacking in its usefulness. His main argument for this exclusion is there is value in considering the Old Testament first and comprehensively and avoiding inappropriately letting the New Testament interpret the Old Testament. The consideration of the New Testament Dempster does perform in the very final pages of the book, which is included in the book’s conclusion, leaves his readers with more questions and much more theological work to be done. It may be of some value to limit studies to this for a time, but Christians today are living under the context of the New Testament and are ultimately looking for answers for their lives from the Bible exclusively in this context. If Christians stop at only considering the implications of the Old Testament from an Old Testament reader’s perspective, then it therefore would be to academic ends only. It would be better for Dempster to build upon the work he already performed and help the New Testament Christians he writes to understand how his approach should be rightly handled in the context of the entire Bible and how Old Testament ideas are used in the New Testament. Certainly, Dempster does not need to perform the same extensive analysis of the New Testament that he did on the Old Testament but he should have equipped his readers with the next steps they should take move this work from academia to knowledge that can be used to advance the gospel through evangelism, counseling, and preaching.
Because Dempster avoids the New Testament, and specifically the book of Revelation, it allows him to mostly avoid the natural question of how dominion and dynasty develop eschatologically for the people of God. Namely, Dempster goes so in depth on how the Old Testament demonstrates God’s emphasis on the physical land his people were to possess that it leaves the reader wondering why God would suddenly seemingly be uninterested in physical land in the New Testament. There is no denying the covenants of the Old Testament and New Testament testaments function differently, but Dempster only addresses these questions in the context of the Old Testament prophets and leaves much to be desired with the added clarity of books like Thessalonians or Revelation. At the very least, he leaves the dispensationalist unsatisfied with understanding God’s desires and intentions for dominion after the cross.
Dempster’s Dominion and Dynasty succeeded at contending for the lens of dominion and dynasty being a useful and faithful tool for Old Testament readers to read and interpret the text. After reading Dempster’s work, it would be impossible to not see these ideas showing up regularly in daily Bible reading or in study. Not only would these themes become more apparent, but they would also be useful tools to better understand how and why God works to bring about the restoration of his relationship with his people. Even as Dempster could have developed his thinking into a New Testament context for a modern reader, he helpfully advances the conversation and leaves solid biblical theology from which others can continue to work.
Stephen Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible, Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2003.
Comments