Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible
Book Review • Dempster, Stephen G. Dominion and Dynasty: A Theology of the Hebrew Bible. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2003. 267 pp. $18.95.
Read time: 11 min
Stephen Dempster, Old Testament scholar and professor of Religious Studies at Atlantic Baptist University in New Brunswick, Canada, has written a highly readable theology of the Hebrew Bible. This work comes as part of a larger series edited by D. A. Carson, New Studies in Biblical Theology, which “aims simultaneously to instruct and edify, to interact with the current literature, and to point the way ahead,” to “help thinking Christians to understand their Bibles better” (9). In the preface, Dempster references his own experience of coming to terms with a ‘literary approach’ to the Hebrew Bible (11). He had not always seen the Old Testament as a narrative-driven, literary unity. Thus, this book is an invitation to join him in seeing the Scriptures with a new set of eyes. As a contributor to the New Dictionary of Biblical Theology and also Biblical Theology: Retrospect and Prospect, Dempster is well-positioned not only to analyze the developments within Old Testament Biblical Studies but also to plot the course for a faithful reading of these first thirty-nine books of the Christian Scriptures.
Summary
The chief contention of Dempster’s work is that the Hebrew Bible, the Tanakh, is more than a collection of individual texts—more than books in the Bible. The Tanakh is, by divine superintendence, a literary Text that should be read as such (22). While each text of the Old Testament canon is diverse and autonomous in its own testimony and authorial intent, the collection of these thirty-nine texts is “hardly a ragbag of literary relics,” says Dempster. “Rather it is a remarkable Story that assimilates all its texts into its comprehensive framework” (43). The Tanakh, to Dempster, is a cohesive, literary whole: a Textual forest of individual trees (26).
Dempster sets out to demonstrate the appropriateness of a literary perspective by weaving short, critical synopses of several modern, scholarly approaches to the Tanakh. In most cases, he finds them ultimately inadequate in their treatment of the Tanakh. He then presents internal textual evidence in the argument for a literary approach. Thus, having established a case for a literary reading of the Tanakh, he then claims that the two dominant themes of this cohesive Text are that of dominion and dynasty as realized in the Davidic house and ultimately in Christ, the Son of David (49).
The remaining three parts of Dominion and Dynasty are Dempster’s own reading of the Text, in which he demonstrates concretely that the textual parts contribute to the Textual unity—rather than disunity—of the Tanakh’s central themes. He walks the reader through the book of Genesis as the beginning of the Story, setting up the plot, introducing the ancient stage, the cast, and the drama's characters that were to unfold throughout the remainder of the Bible. Following this, he demonstrates how the narrative Storyline continued through the rest of the Pentateuch (Exodus to Deuteronomy) and the Former prophets (Joshua to Kings). And what of the less or non-historical Old Testament books—such as the Latter Prophets (Jeremiah to the Twelve) and the wisdom literature (Ruth to Lamentations)? Dempster accounts for these in terms of a “suspension” of the developing historical narrative, they being “poetic commentary” upon those events so far related (159). The Story then resumes (in Daniel to Chronicles) in the form of Daniel’s futuristic visions, the historical account of Esther, and the events of the restoration of the city of Jerusalem and its temple under Ezra and Nehemiah (213). In his conclusion, Dempster reflects on several key New Testament connections to the themes of dominion and dynasty in the Hebrew Bible (231).
Critical Analysis
The author’s assignment in writing his book as part of the New Studies in Biblical Theology series is stated by Don Carson in the series preface: “to organize the [Old Testament] material in a way that is fair to each part, faithful to the historical setting and genre of each part, and yet a component of the Christian canon” (9). Dempster’s Biblical Theology of the Hebrew Bible is achieved with his proposed literary approach. It is evident that Dempster does not at all assume that his readers initially agree with him or even understand what he means by a ‘literary approach.’ So his larger purpose seems at least dual: to (1) define his terms, describe what a literary approach is, and argue for its theoretical appropriateness; and to (2) demonstrate his own literary reading of the Tanakh, book by book. He clarifies, “It is the thesis of this book that, when the Hebrew Bible is read and reread (that is, viewed with a wide-angle lens), the faces of the biblical Rushmore — the ‘purposeful pattern’ — will be seen clearly, rather than the ‘textual patchwork’ in the face of the mountain” (30). This he wrote having shared an analogy: that getting close to a text (a sort of micro-exegesis) without having seen its vital connection to the whole is like analyzing the rock’s texture of a face on Mount Rushmore, so as to miss the point entirely.
Dempster does a fine job engaging the reader in this exercise of taking a few steps backward to view the Hebrew Bible through a ‘wide-angle’ lens. His facility with the current literature and familiarity with the perspectives of Evangelical and liberal theologians results in a straightforward means of distinguishing his view against the backdrop of several others. For example, he draws from thinkers such as Alter, Auerbach, and C. S. Lewis in establishing the necessity of seeing the literary forest in order to appreciate the trees (25-26). If the Tanakh is not a Text but “rather…an interesting, eclectic collection of ancient texts,” then “such an ‘anthology’ would contain no storyline, coherence or unity — and, in the judgment of many, any unity that might exist would be strictly artificial.” If this were the case, he argues, the Old Testament canon would be “a literary and historical accident resulting from a ‘political’ decision” (26-27). The point is well made.
Strengths
There are several strengths of Dempster’s work. First, because his thesis is to establish the legitimacy of a ‘wide-angle’ lens, he is particularly advantaged in making inter-textual connections within the Tanakh, which someone without this literary lens might miss. For example, in noting the significance of Jacob’s clan being seventy in number when they migrated to Egypt, Dempster points out that this is “the same number as the nations enumerated in the Table of Nations (Gen. 10), which were eventually dispersed across the earth. Here is Abraham’s new humanity, a new ‘Table of Nations’, called into being to restore the nations to the fulfillment of the divine purpose” (89). That’s a striking connection. Another intertextual connection is regarding Solomon's appointment to David’s throne. “To say that [Solomon] is an unlikely candidate is an understatement, but the previous history was full of such ‘no-things’ (147). By this, Dempster reminds the reader of similar disruptions in the ‘normal’ processes of events in the Biblical narrative, specifically in the oft superiority of younger brothers over the elder: Abel over Cain, Shem over Ham, Isaac over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau, Judah over Ruben, Perez over Zerah and most famously David over Abinadab. Dempster is a master at making such connections.
I found Dempster’s designation of each of the individual books in the Tanakh into one of two categories very helpful: he states that a book either contributes to the narrative itself or is itself a commentary on the narrative. This distills the main framework of the Tanakh to that of narrative—whether the very thing or commentary upon it. This is more distilled than the traditional ‘historical, wisdom, and prophetic literature’ paradigm. For example, he assigns Solomon’s Ecclesiastes the role of commentary on the larger biblical narrative. “Proverbs is life-affirming; Ecclesiastes is life-denying. The one sees the possibilities that life affords; the other its limitations” (206). But Dempster is not content to merely analyze the books disconnected from the storyline of the Tanakh. He elaborates:
“Ecclesiastes seems not to deal with the issue of blessing but with the problem of curse… The world can be an evil place. Many times the wicked seem blessed and the righteous cursed. Death renders everything pointless — hebel (a word that echoes Abel’s name forcefully). But ultimately the way out of this riddled existence is not agnosticism, skepticism or trying to acquire a forbidden wisdom (cf. Gen. 3); it is through fear of the Lord.” (207)
Thus, Dempster bids the reader to see the baneful aspects of human existence in Ecclesiastes in connection to and explained by the Genesis narrative of the fall and the curse.
Weaknesses
Finally, I would point out two potential weaknesses of the book. Dempster did not conclude his book after ‘part one’ (in which he introduced and explained a literary approach to the Hebrew Bible). He went on to render his own literary interpretations of the Tanakh—book by book. While this is a good thing, it does open up his exegesis in any given instance to scrutiny and disagreement. At times, Dempster’s connections seem a little forced. Simply because he sees various textual “trees” that look similar to each other does not necessitate that they belong to the same forest. Here’s an example:
“Esther’s opposition to Haman continues the major theme [emphasis mine] running through the narrative, that of woman against the beast; Eve versus the serpent; Sarah and Rebekah versus barrenness; Tamar versus Judah; Jochebed and Miriam versus the Pharaoh; Deborah and Jael versus Sisera; Ruth and Naomi versus death… In all these examples of struggle these women of faith are engaged in a battle to save the people of God.” (223)
While it is relatively easy to “see” a line connecting miscellaneous dots, it is quite another matter to have a biblical warrant (the Bible interpreting itself) for making such claims. Any number of connections could be made between those same dots: one might “see” a Feminist narrative formed and emphasized by those same stories. Thus, the plausibility of a given “major theme running through the narrative” is not evidence of its legitimacy. One may “see” designs in the stars or in their oatmeal, though seeing simply what one wants to see, justifiably or not. Likewise, Dempster’s literary connections might be a bit overwrought in some cases.
A second negative I see is Dempster’s disruption of the traditional canonical ordering of the books of the Old Testament. He points out that since the Tanakh is essentially narrative in form, it begins with Genesis and ends with Chronicles, the other books finding their respective places somewhere in the middle. Since I have read other authors pleading for the providence of God in the specific ordering of the biblical books of the Christian scriptures, I find this somewhat off-setting. Perhaps for this reason (a different ordering of the books), Dempster seems to avoid the use of “Old Testament,” opting instead to call it either the Tanakh or the Hebrew Bible. Dempster accounts for this difference in the arrangement of the books in terms of chronological versus eschatological ordering (42). He argues persuasively, but the change in order may be a larger matter than the reader’s perspective.
Conclusion
I benefitted greatly from Dempster’s explanation of the Tanakh. I found his ‘wide-lens’ narrative-driven approach and his synopses of each of the thirty-nine books within this literary framework paradigm-shifting. Having read this book, I will affirm that the reader’s act of connecting each passage to the larger Story—while not necessarily infallible in each case—likely does lead the reader to the most plausible interpretation of the passage, within reason. I would happily recommend this work to others, especially those preparing messages and attempting to preach from the Old Testament. Though advertised for lay people, it is probably too much for most to take up and read. But certainly, the concepts are worthy of sharing with any Christians wanting to understand their Bible better. I have grown in my appreciation for the Hebrew Bible as a unified narrative of God’s self-disclosure to Israel—and through them to the whole world—which was God’s promise to Abraham in the beginning. And I feel as though Dempster has, indeed, set me on a journey of reading and re-reading the Old Testament with a new set of eyes. ❖
