Read All About It! Drew Reviews...
"Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible" by Stephen Dempster
Stephen G. Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible New Testament Studies in Biblical Theology 15 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003). $28.
Is the Old Testament a series of texts or a Text? To put it another way, should we understand the OT canon to be an assorted collection of random stories or an organized collection of books which are tied together by a unifying storyline?
In Dominion and Dynasty, Stephen Dempster argues for the latter. And to make his case, he asserts that we should read it according to the Hebrew canon.1
The Structure of the Hebrew Canon & Biblical Theology
If you compared the table of contents in your English Bible to the one in the Hebrew Bible, you’d notice that the books are arranged according to a different schema and appear in quite a different order. A few books have even been combined. The table below shows the comparison.2
So what’s the difference in how we understand the storyline if we were to read according to the Hebrew canon? Dempster begins his answer by pointing to its beginning (Genesis) and ending (Chronicles). He writes,
“The ending of a document provides a sense of closure, drawing together the main lines of thought, and refocusing on what the writer thinks important. In many ways, the ending, with its sense of closure, ensures organization unification of the whole.”3
So how does Chronicles bookend with Genesis?
First, Dempster calls our attention to the differences: Genesis begins with a universal account of origins and the beginnings of Israel, whereas Chronicles is focused exclusively on Israel, David, and the Temple.4 But the comparisons come to the fore when the reader traces both book’s lengthy genealogies.5 Genesis goes from Adam to a descendant of Judah who would rule over the nations (Gen 49:8-12).6 Chronicles goes from Adam to David (a descendant of Judah) and leaves hope for the prophetic fulfillment of a future Davidic Seed ruling again in the land promised to the Patriarchs. That Davidic Seed, we know, is Christ Jesus (Matt 1:1).
But why this focus on dynasty and land (or, better, dominion)? The answer lies in God’s original commission for humanity in Genesis 1. Specifically in 1:27-28 we read,
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”
The terms for having dominion and subduing (rah’dah & kah’bash), Dempster argues, carry a sense of royal authority.7 The first term is used of Solomon’s rule (1 Kgs 4:24) and is later applied to a future messianic king (Ps. 110:2; cf. Num. 24:17-18; Ps. 72:8; Zech 9:10).8 The second term is used of the Canaanite conquest (Num 32:22, 29; Josh 18:1), David’s conquests (2 Sam 8:11), and Israel’s eschatological subduing of enemies (Zech 9:15).9
Thus, Dempster describes the first human pair as the king and queen of creation whose task was to rule over all things by (1) being God’s representatives and (2) bringing more representatives into being through procreation. Or, we could say, Genesis 1 is about humanity as a royal dynasty called to extend God’s dominion by filling the world with more royal family members. He writes, “Another way of describing this emphasis on human dominion and dynasty would be by the simple expression, ‘kingdom of God.’ The earth is created for human dominion and rule, which reflects the divine rule.”10
Sadly, Genesis 3 records Adam and Eve’s decision to reject their commission and grasp for divinity themselves. But if you’ve read this Substack for long, then you know what verse I’m about to reference… That’s right… Genesis 3:15:
“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”
In other words, the hope of humanity will come through a future Seed of the woman who will crush the Serpent. Dempster’s commentary helps us to see the full contextual significance of this promise:
“In light of the immediate context, the triumph of the woman’s seed would suggest a return to the Edenic state, before the serpent had wrought its damage, and a wresting of the dominion of the world from the serpent. Just as the woman was built from the man to complete the old creation, so a seed will be built from the woman with the task of restoring the lost dominion of the old creation to its rightful heirs.”11
The line of this Seed can be traced all the way to Abram. And in 12:1-3, the LORD promises to make him into a great nation who will live on a land promised to them. And through them, God would restore his “blessing” over all the families of the earth (cf. Gen. 1:28a). The promise of nationhood through Abram brings together dominion and dynasty.12 All of this leads Dempster to conclude, “Israel’s calling is fundamentally missiological; its purpose for existence is the restoration of the world to its pre-Edenic state.” 13
Ultimately, then, what drives the plot of the Old Testament forward is the restoration of humanity’s relationship to their Creator and their original commission: “The dominion of Adam begins over all creation, and then the land of Canaan becomes the focus, and next the city of Jerusalem and the temple. And from this particular place, the rule of God extends outwards to Israel and the nations, even to the ends of the earth.” 14 This restoration takes place through genealogy and geography.15 Or, as the title of this book suggests, dynasty and dominion.
The remainder of the book is a deep dive into how this story unfolds through the Old Testament’s major sections: the Law (77-121), the Prophets (122-189), and the Writings (191-227).
My Thoughts
It wouldn’t be a book review with a quibble or two, right? So here goes. I wish he would’ve spent more time showing the presence of the dynasty and dominion themes in the Minor Prophets (or Book of the Twelve) and in the wisdom books of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs (both contain only two pages of comment each [182-183 & 206-207, respectively]). While the things he has to say here are valuable, I would’ve loved to hear more. That quibble aside, however, I think Dempster has done a commendable job. And I heartily commend his work to you. Heck, he even convinced me to read the Old Testament for myself according to the Hebrew ordering. That might be something you want to try to.
That’s all the time I have for now. Thank you so much for yours.
Warmly,
Drew
Stephen G. Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible New Testament Studies in Biblical Theology 15 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003), 169.
You’ll notice that 1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, and Ezra and Nehemiah are all considered one book. Merit for reading the Old Testament according to its order is summed up nicely by Peter Gentry. He notes that the Protestant canon is based on later Greek translations (See Peter J. Gentry & Stephen J. Wellum, Kingdom through Covenant: A Biblical-Theological Understanding of the Covenants [Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2018], 169). Thus, the Hebrew canon was the original order. I don’t think that means reading the Old Testament according to the Protestant canon is wrong, or sinful, or anything like that. Rather, it just means that reading the OT according to the Hebrew order may help bring greater clarity to its storyline. Or, at the very least, to offer us a different vantage point from which to view it.
S. Dempster, Dominion and Dynasty, 45.
Ibid., 47.
Ibid.
Ibid., 48.
Ibid., 59.
Ibid.
Ibid., 60.
Ibid., 62.
Ibid., 68.
Ibid., 76.
Ibid.
Ibid., 231.
Ibid., 49.