Terry Eagleton, writing for
The Guardian, described the book as "an absorbing survey of Christianity's subversive origins and enduring influence" and an "illuminating study", concluding "Holland is surely right to argue that when we condemn the moral obscenities committed in the name of Christ, it is hard to do so without implicitly invoking his own teaching." Philosopher
John Gray, writing for the
New Statesman, called
Dominion "a masterpiece of scholarship and storytelling". Gray wrote that “Dominion surpasses Holland’s earlier books in its sweeping ambition and gripping presentation…Holland comes into his own when he shows how Christianity created the values of the modern Western world…What makes the book riveting… is the devastating demolition job it does on the sacred history of secular humanism”. Other reviews were more mixed. A review in
The Economist described Holland as a "superb writer", though also writing that "his theory has flaws", and that "
correlation is not causation". The scholars James Orr,
G.R. Evans, and
Samuel Moyn all regarded the book’s earlier sections on Ancient history as stronger than its later sections on more modern history. Evans writes that "The third section on “Modernitas” is perhaps the least successful, because of the degree of compression which it attempts". Peter Thonemann, writing for the
Wall Street Journal, called
Dominion "an immensely powerful and thought-provoking book", stating "it is hard to think of another that so effectively and readably summarizes the major strands of Christian ethical and political thought across two millennia". At the same time, he criticized its argument as selective, writing "Mr. Holland postulates a golden thread of Nice Christianity ... this argument — that everything Nice in our contemporary world derives from Christian values, and everything Nasty in the actual history of Christendom was just a regrettable diversion from the true Christian path — seems to me to run dangerously close to
apologetic". The
Los Angeles Review of Books stated that "
Dominion's most important contribution is in emphasizing how terms we take for granted, even concepts seemingly as fundamental as 'religion' and 'secular,' come 'freighted with the legacy of Christendom'", stating that his argument about the Christian origin of "human rights, socialism, revolution, feminism, science, and even the division between religion and the secular" is carried out in a "mostly convincing way".
Jonathan Sumption, writing for
The Spectator, opined the book was "sustained with all the breadth, originality and erudition that we have come to associate with Holland’s writing." However he had some criticisms of the argument of the book: "The problem is that Dominion is a work of history, not moral theology. It is not always easy to trace essential Christian values through the alternating highs and lows of Christian history…The 'western mind' is too large a concept for any one thing to have 'made' it. But on any view, a rejection of revealed authority and a belief in empirical enquiry are a fundamental part of the 'western mind' as it has developed since the 17th century. It is difficult to accept that Christianity has contributed anything to that." Many reviewers noted the distinctive approach used by Holland, centred on the lives and personalities of figures in history, as opposed to an in-depth history of ideas or theological analysis. Moyn described how "Holland brings the past to life through his characters, which are always vividly drawn". Eagleton wrote how "Holland has all the talents of an accomplished novelist...Rather than unpack complex theological debates, the book gives us a series of vivid portraits of some key figures in Christian history". Daniel Strand similarly wrote that "As opposed to intellectual history, which too often floats above historical events, Holland focuses on historical actors and their motivations". Mendo Castro Henriques wrote, "Dominion is not a history of ideas, but of the body and soul of humanity." the
New Yorker, and
Kirkus Reviews who called it "an insightful argument that Christian ethics, even when ignored, are the norm worldwide." In a mixed review, Gerard DeGroot, writing for
The Sunday Times, wrote that he "[had] to commend the originality of this book" but disagreed with its thesis, writing "the values described as Christian seem more like simple human nature... The idea that charity and tolerance are evidence of Christian influence seems too ethnocentric". Philosopher
A. C. Grayling has rejected Holland's interpretation of Christianity's influence on modern morality, meeting Tom Holland for a debate on the subject. ==Influence==