Chapter 12: Extreme Dispensationalism Gone Wrong

When Christians try to understand how God works throughout history, many turn to a system called “dispensationalism.” This teaching helps organize the Bible by showing how God has worked with people in different ways during different time periods. Many good, Bible-believing Christians use dispensationalism as a helpful tool. But Finis Dake took this system to dangerous extremes that actually attack the gospel itself. His rigid divisions of Scripture lead to the shocking ideas that God has multiple plans of salvation, that there are different gospels for different times, and most disturbing of all, that animal sacrifices will return in the future. This makes Christ’s death on the cross seem insufficient. This chapter will carefully examine how Dake’s extreme dispensationalism has gone terribly wrong, using his own words to prove these serious errors.

Dake, Finis Jennings. Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963.
—. God’s Plan for Man. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949.
—. The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950.
—. Revelation Expounded. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950.
—. Ages and Dispensations. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977.

The Foundation of Dake’s Extreme System

Dake starts his dispensational teaching with what seems like a reasonable goal – organizing biblical history to make it easier to understand. In his book “Ages and Dispensations,” he writes: “A dispensation as applied to the various ages means a moral or probationary period in history in which God tests free moral agents according to a fixed standard of conduct.”¹ This definition might sound okay at first. But Dake takes this basic idea and builds a complex system that actually breaks Scripture apart and contradicts the Bible’s unified message.

According to Dake, God’s eternal plan unfolds through strictly separated ages, each with completely different requirements, different methods of salvation, and different relationships with God. He writes in “God’s Plan for Man”: “God has always had a plan for man. Before the first man was created, God had already mapped out the course of human history.”² While this statement is biblically accurate, the way Dake applies it leads to a rigid system that makes God’s plan seem changeable and inconsistent rather than unified and dependable.

The problem isn’t that Dake sees different periods in biblical history. The Bible itself shows that God has revealed His truth progressively over time. The problem is that Dake’s extremely literal approach creates hard walls where Scripture shows continuity. He sees contradiction where the Bible demonstrates harmony. He invents new requirements where God has established eternal principles that never change.

In “Ages and Dispensations,” Dake lays out his main outline of what he calls “God’s Plan”:

• The Eternal Past
• The Original Creations
• The Pre-Adamite World
• The Rebellion and Overthrow of the Pre-Adamite World
• First Re-creation of the Earth
• The Seven Dispensations for Man
• Second Re-creation of the Earth
• The Eternal Future

This outline reveals how Dake’s system goes far beyond what Scripture actually teaches. He invents entire worlds and civilizations that the Bible never mentions. He creates complex divisions that Scripture doesn’t support. Most dangerously, he teaches that God’s requirements for salvation change between these different periods.

Multiple Plans of Salvation: The Fatal Error

The most dangerous part of Dake’s dispensationalism is his teaching that different dispensations have different plans of salvation. While good dispensationalists maintain that salvation has always been by grace through faith (even though the content of faith has progressively unfolded), Dake teaches that the actual basis and means of salvation change from dispensation to dispensation.

In his discussion of the Dispensation of Innocence (the time of Adam and Eve in Eden), Dake suggests that Adam and Eve could have earned eternal life through obedience. In “God’s Plan for Man,” he writes about “the test” in Eden as if passing it would have merited salvation apart from grace. This contradicts the biblical principle that even unfallen creatures depend entirely on God’s grace for their existence and blessing.

For the Dispensation of Conscience (from the Fall to the Flood), Dake implies that people were saved by following their conscience correctly. He writes: “The test in this dispensation was obedience to the voice of conscience concerning good and evil.”³ This suggests that salvation came through moral behavior rather than faith in God’s promise of a coming Redeemer.

When discussing the Dispensation of Human Government (from Noah to Abraham), Dake suggests obedience to human authority became part of the salvation requirement. He states: “Man was given the responsibility to govern himself according to the laws of God and human government.”⁴

Under the Dispensation of Law (from Moses to Christ), Dake teaches that keeping the Mosaic Law was the means of salvation for Israel. In his Bible notes on Galatians 3:19, he writes: “The law was added because of transgressions, to make sin known and to provide a way of approach to God through sacrifices until Christ should come.” This makes it sound like the law was a way of salvation rather than what Paul says it was – a tutor to lead us to Christ.

Most troubling is Dake’s teaching about the Dispensation of Grace. He explicitly states: “The test in this dispensation is ‘the obedience of faith among all nations’ through the grace of God. Salvation and the benefits of grace are free for all, yet they are only beneficial to those who believe and accept them through Christ and live life according to the Holy Scriptures.”⁵ But then he adds something shocking: “The purpose of God is not the conversion of the whole world (for He knows that all will not accept His graciousness), but the ‘calling out’ of a people for His name from all nations.”⁶ This sets up his later teaching that different groups will be saved differently in the future.

This teaching about multiple salvation plans reaches its most problematic point when Dake discusses the current Dispensation of Grace and the future Millennium. He actually teaches that during the Tribulation and Millennium, people will be saved differently than they are today.

Different Gospels for Different Times

One of the most serious errors in Dake’s system is his teaching that there are different gospels for different dispensations. This directly contradicts Paul’s fierce declaration in Galatians 1:8: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.”

Dake distinguishes between what he calls “the gospel of the kingdom,” “the gospel of grace,” and future variations that will be preached during the Tribulation and Millennium. He writes in “The Rapture and the Second Coming”: “The purpose of God is not the conversion of the whole world (for He knows that all will not accept His graciousness), but the ‘calling out’ of a people for His name from all nations.”⁷

According to Dake, the gospel Jesus preached (the gospel of the kingdom) was different from the gospel Paul preached (the gospel of grace), and both are different from what will be preached in the future. This creates a fragmented message where God seems to change His requirements arbitrarily based on the dispensation.

In “Revelation Expounded,” Dake writes extensively about evangelism during the Millennium: “The Jewish people will become the missionaries of the gospel and priests of the law during this age and forever. They will, for the first time, really carry out God’s plan when He called out Abraham and promised to make his seed a blessing to all nations. The missionary program will be carried on then by the same means it is being carried on today, with the exception that it will be a governmental enterprise and not merely the enterprise of some small societies.”⁸

Notice how Dake mixes “gospel” and “law” as if they will both be preached together in the Millennium. He explicitly states that Jews will be both “missionaries of the gospel and priests of the law.”⁹ This confusion of law and gospel undermines the clarity of the New Testament message that we are “not under law, but under grace” (Romans 6:14).

The Bible teaches one gospel that has been progressively revealed:

• The “gospel of the kingdom” that Jesus preached included His death and resurrection (Matthew 16:21, Mark 8:31)
• The “gospel of grace” that Paul preached included the kingdom (Acts 28:31)
• These are not different gospels but different aspects of the one “everlasting gospel” (Revelation 14:6)

Paul makes this absolutely clear when he says: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ” (Galatians 1:6-7). There is only one gospel. Any teaching about multiple gospels perverts the true gospel.

The Church vs. Israel Confusion

Dake’s rigid dispensationalism creates an unbiblical wall of separation between Israel and the Church. While recognizing a distinction between Israel and the Church can be helpful in understanding certain passages, Dake takes this to an extreme that contradicts the New Testament’s teaching about the unity of God’s people in Christ.

In “The Rapture and the Second Coming,” Dake writes: “God did deal mainly with Israel from Abraham to Christ, but when Christ came He officially cut off Israel and turned to the Gentiles.”¹⁰ He continues: “After the Church is raptured God will continue to save both Jews and Gentiles who will turn to Him. They will not be in the Church, but will be saved to enjoy earthly blessings.”¹¹

This creates multiple categories of saved people:

• Old Testament saints
• Church Age saints
• Tribulation saints
• Millennial saints
• The 144,000 Jewish evangelists

According to Dake, these different groups have different destinies, different rewards, and different relationships with God. This fragments the unity that Scripture emphasizes among all believers. He states explicitly: “They will not be a part of the Church”¹² when referring to those saved after the rapture. He further teaches that “They will be separate from the Old Testament saints, the Church saints, and the 144,000 Jewish saints.”¹³

The New Testament teaches that all believers are united in Christ:

• “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28)
• “For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us” (Ephesians 2:14)
• “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:29)

Dake writes extensively about this in “Revelation Expounded”: “Every offering mentioned in the law was to be observed by Israel forever as proven by the following statements in the law, which are found from two to eight times in a single chapter: ‘It is a statute for ever.’ ‘By a statute forever throughout their generations.’ ‘This shall be an everlasting statute unto you.’ ‘By a perpetual statute.’ ‘By an ordinance forever.'”¹⁴

He continues: “There is no question but what God intends to have a temple, an earthly priesthood, sacrifices, and feasts in the future, for that is what He revealed to Ezekiel (chapters 40-48) and promised Israel when He gave them ordinances to be observed throughout all their generations forever.”¹⁵

Dake lists specific offerings he believes will be restored:

• “Burnt offerings, Ezek. 43:24-27; 45:17-25; 46:1-24”¹⁶
• “Sin offering, Ezek. 43:19-23; 45:17-25; 46:1-24”¹⁷
• “Meat offering, Ezek. 45:17-25; 46:1-24”¹⁸
• “Trespass offering, Ezek. 46:20”¹⁹
• “Peace offering, Ezek. 45:22; 46:2”²⁰

To try to reconcile this with the New Testament’s clear teaching that Christ’s sacrifice ended animal sacrifices, Dake argues that these future sacrifices won’t be for salvation but as “a memorial or object lesson to demonstrate that the people believe in what has been done for them through Christ.” He writes: “These outward observances will not supercede the present individual salvation, or the means of approach to God, but will be added for earthly peoples to satisfy the natural instinct in man for something outward in religion.”²¹

This explanation fails on multiple levels. First, Hebrews explicitly states that it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins (Hebrews 10:4), and that Christ “offered one sacrifice for sins for ever” (Hebrews 10:12). The entire argument of Hebrews is that the old covenant with its sacrifices has been replaced by the new covenant in Christ’s blood.

Hebrews 10:18 states definitively: “Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.” The Greek could not be clearer – where sins have been forgiven through Christ, there is no longer any offering for sin, whether salvific or memorial.

Dake even goes so far as to specify who will serve as priests in these future sacrifices: “The Levites who went astray with the northern kingdom of the ten tribes will not be permitted to do the most holy work, but shall serve in other parts of the temple; i.e., their descendants will serve in the future temple worship. The sons of Zadok who stayed true to the house of David will do the most holy work.”²²

Furthermore, Dake’s argument that these sacrifices will be memorial contradicts his own hyperliteral hermeneutic. If “forever” means forever when God commanded sacrifices in the Old Testament, and if we must take Ezekiel’s temple vision literally, then these sacrifices must be real sacrifices, not mere memorials. Dake can’t have it both ways – either his literalism applies consistently, in which case these are real sin offerings (contradicting Hebrews), or it doesn’t, in which case his entire system collapses.

The idea that people will need animal sacrifices to “satisfy the natural instinct in man for something outward in religion”²³ is particularly troubling. This suggests that Christ’s sacrifice and the Lord’s Supper He instituted as its memorial are somehow insufficient for future generations. It implies that what Jesus established isn’t good enough and needs supplementation with animal blood.

Dake even lists the specific feasts he believes will be restored: “Passover (Ezek. 45:21), Unleavened Bread (Ezek. 45:21), First-fruits (Ezek. 44:30), Pentecost, or Weeks (Ezek. 46:9), Trumpets (Ezek. 44:5; 45:17), Day of Atonement (Ezek. 45-46), Tabernacles (Ezek. 45:25; Zech. 14:16-21).”²⁴ He adds: “In addition to these offerings and feasts, the new moons, the sabbaths, and ‘all the ordinances of the house of the Lord, and all the laws thereof,’ and ‘All solemnities of the house of Israel’ will be observed during the Millennium and even in the New Earth forever.”²⁵

How This Undermines the Finished Work of Christ

The cumulative effect of Dake’s extreme dispensationalism is to undermine the finished work of Christ in multiple ways:

1. It Makes Christ’s Sacrifice Incomplete

By teaching that animal sacrifices will resume, even as memorials, Dake implies that Christ’s sacrifice needs supplementation. The Lord’s Supper, instituted by Christ Himself as the memorial of His death, is apparently insufficient for future generations who will need animal blood to remind them of redemption. Dake explicitly states that these sacrifices will serve “as memorials in a deeper significance than they ever served as types of old.”²⁶ How can animal blood provide a “deeper significance” than the memorial Christ Himself established?

2. It Makes Christ’s Victory Partial

If the law must be reinstituted in the Millennium, then Christ has not fully delivered us from its bondage. His declaration “It is finished” becomes “It is temporarily suspended.” The freedom we have in Christ becomes a dispensational parenthesis rather than an eternal reality. Dake teaches that in the Millennium, “Many will be executed during the Millennium because of committing sins worthy of death.”²⁷ This suggests a return to law enforcement that Christ freed us from.

3. It Makes Christ’s Body Divided

By maintaining rigid separation between Israel and the Church, between different groups of saints, Dake denies the unity Christ died to create. The “one new man” of Ephesians 2:15 becomes multiple men with different destinies, different requirements, and different relationships with God. Dake explicitly states that tribulation saints “will not be in the Church,”²⁸ creating permanent divisions in the body of Christ.

4. It Makes Christ’s Redemption Reversible

If people can return to law-keeping and animal sacrifices in the future, then the redemption Christ accomplished is not permanent. The “eternal redemption” of Hebrews 9:12 becomes temporary redemption subject to dispensational changes.

5. It Makes Christ’s Gospel Changeable

By teaching different gospels for different times, Dake makes the message of salvation unstable and unreliable. The “everlasting gospel” becomes an evolving gospel that changes based on the dispensation. This undermines confidence in the message we preach today.

The Problem of Hyperliteral Interpretation

The root of Dake’s dispensational errors lies in his hyperliteral approach to biblical interpretation. When God told Israel that certain ordinances were “forever,” Dake insists this must mean they will resume in the future, regardless of the New Testament’s clear teaching that these ordinances have been fulfilled and superseded in Christ.

This hyperliteralism fails to recognize that “forever” (Hebrew: olam) in the Old Testament often means “for the entire duration of the age” or “as long as the conditions exist.” For example:

• The Aaronic priesthood was to be “everlasting” (Exodus 40:15), yet Hebrews declares it has been changed (Hebrews 7:12)
• The Sabbath was an “everlasting covenant” (Exodus 31:16), yet Paul says we shouldn’t let anyone judge us about Sabbaths (Colossians 2:16-17)
• Circumcision was an “everlasting covenant” (Genesis 17:13), yet Paul says it profits nothing (Galatians 5:2)

These weren’t false promises – they were fulfilled and transcended in Christ. The “forever” was until their purpose was complete.

Dake’s hyperliteralism also fails to recognize different literary genres in Scripture. When prophets describe the future using imagery from their own time, this doesn’t mean every detail will be literally fulfilled. Isaiah speaks of the wolf dwelling with the lamb (Isaiah 11:6). Ezekiel describes a temple with specific measurements (Ezekiel 40-48). Zechariah mentions the Feast of Tabernacles (Zechariah 14:16). These may be using familiar images to describe unfamiliar realities.

Responding to Dake’s Proof Texts

Dake relies heavily on certain passages to support his extreme dispensationalism. It’s important to examine these texts carefully to see how his interpretation falls short:

Ezekiel’s Temple Vision (Ezekiel 40-48)

Dake points to Ezekiel’s detailed temple vision as proof that animal sacrifices will resume. He argues: “God intends to have a temple, an earthly priesthood, sacrifices and feasts in the future, for that is what He revealed to Ezekiel (40:1-48:35) and promised Israel when He gave them ordinances to be observed throughout all their generations forever.”²⁹ However, several interpretive options exist that don’t require a return to animal sacrifices:

1. Symbolic Interpretation: The vision uses temple imagery familiar to Ezekiel to convey spiritual truths about God’s presence with His people in the messianic age. The specific details symbolize spiritual realities rather than predicting literal architecture and rituals.

2. Conditional Prophecy: The vision was given to Israel in exile as a call to repentance and a promise of restoration if they returned to God. Their failure to fully respond meant the prophecy was not literally fulfilled.

3. Already Fulfilled: Some see the prophecy as fulfilled in the return from exile and the rebuilding of the temple, even if not to the exact specifications Ezekiel described.

4. Memorial View: Even if taken literally, the sacrifices could be purely memorial, like the Lord’s Supper, with no expiatory value whatsoever.

What’s crucial is that any interpretation must align with the clear New Testament teaching that Christ’s sacrifice is final and complete. Hebrews leaves no room for animal sacrifices that have any real spiritual value.

“Forever” Commands in the Old Testament

Dake argues that because God said certain ordinances were “forever,” they must resume in the future. He states: “The priesthood of the law of Moses was an eternal one (Ex. 29:9; 40:15; Num. 25:11-13; 1 Chron. 23:13).”³⁰ But as we’ve seen, the Hebrew word “olam” translated “forever” doesn’t always mean endless duration. It can mean:

• For the entire age or dispensation
• As long as the conditions exist
• Until the purpose is fulfilled
• For an indefinite but not necessarily endless time

The New Testament explicitly teaches that many “forever” ordinances have been fulfilled in Christ and are no longer binding. This doesn’t make God a liar – it shows that He always intended these things to point to Christ and to be fulfilled in Him.

The Distinction Between Israel and the Church

Dake uses passages that speak of Israel’s future to argue for eternal separation between Israel and the Church. He claims that when the Church is raptured, “there will not be one saved Jew or Gentile left on the earth.”³¹ He then teaches that “Multitudes of Gentiles will become saved immediately after the rapture of the Church and Old Testament saints, but they will not be a part of the Church.”³² However, the New Testament teaches that Israel’s promises are fulfilled through expansion to include Gentiles, not through separation:

Romans 11 uses the image of an olive tree – Gentiles are grafted into Israel’s tree, not planted in a separate garden. Ephesians 2 speaks of one new man created from both Jew and Gentile, not two separate entities. Galatians 3:29 says if we are Christ’s, we are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.

Yes, God has a future for ethnic Israel (Romans 11:25-26), but this future involves them being grafted back into the same tree, not maintaining a separate program for eternity.

A Balanced Approach to Understanding Scripture’s Progression

While Dake’s extreme dispensationalism must be rejected, this doesn’t mean we should ignore the progressive nature of biblical revelation. A balanced approach recognizes:

Progressive Revelation Without Changing Salvation

God has revealed His truth progressively throughout history. Abraham knew less than Moses, Moses knew less than David, David knew less than Isaiah, and even the prophets didn’t fully understand what they were prophesying (1 Peter 1:10-12). But this progressive revelation never changed the fundamental way of salvation – it has always been by grace through faith.

Administrative Changes Without Contradicting Principles

God has worked through different administrative arrangements – from patriarchal government to theocracy to monarchy to the church. But these changes in administration don’t represent changes in God’s character or His moral requirements. Murder was wrong in Eden, at Sinai, and remains wrong today. Faith was required of Abel, Abraham, and is required of us.

Continuity with Distinction

We can recognize that the church is not Israel without creating an unbridgeable gulf between them. The church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Ephesians 2:20). We are grafted into Israel’s olive tree (Romans 11:17). We inherit the promises made to Abraham (Galatians 3:29). There is distinction without disconnection.

Fulfillment Without Replacement

Christ came not to destroy the law but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17). This doesn’t mean the law continues as before, nor that it’s simply discarded. It means that everything the law pointed to finds its completion in Christ. The sacrifices aren’t replaced by something else – they’re fulfilled in the one sacrifice they always pictured.

Unity in Diversity

The Bible presents unity in God’s plan with diversity in its outworking. There is one God, one mediator, one gospel, one way of salvation – but this one plan unfolds through diverse times, places, and peoples. The diversity serves the unity rather than fragmenting it.

Historical Orthodox Position vs. Dake’s Innovations

It’s important to understand that Dake’s extreme dispensationalism represents a departure not only from historic Christian orthodoxy but even from mainstream dispensationalism. Throughout church history, Christians have recognized different periods in God’s dealings with humanity while maintaining the unity of His redemptive plan.

The Early Church Fathers

The early church fathers recognized a distinction between the Old and New Covenants but emphasized their unity in Christ. Justin Martyr, writing in the second century, argued that the ceremonial laws were given to Israel temporarily but that the moral law and the way of salvation by faith were constant. Irenaeus spoke of different “economies” (dispensations) but saw them as progressive stages in one unified plan of redemption.

None of the early fathers taught that animal sacrifices would resume or that there would be different peoples of God with different eternal destinies. They saw the Church as the fulfillment of Israel, not its replacement or its parallel.

The Reformation Position

The Reformers strongly emphasized the unity of the covenant of grace throughout all ages. While recognizing different administrations of this covenant, they maintained that salvation was always by grace through faith and that the Old Testament saints were saved the same way as New Testament believers.

Calvin wrote extensively about the unity of the Old and New Testaments, arguing that “the covenant made with all the patriarchs is so much like ours in substance and reality that the two are actually one and the same.” The Westminster Confession states that there are not “two covenants of grace, differing in substance, but one and the same, under various dispensations.”

Even Traditional Dispensationalists Disagree

Even within dispensationalism, Dake’s views are extreme. Traditional dispensationalists like C.I. Scofield, Lewis Sperry Chafer, and Charles Ryrie, while maintaining a distinction between Israel and the Church, never taught that animal sacrifices would resume for salvific or truly expiatory purposes.

Most dispensationalists who believe in millennial sacrifices see them as purely memorial, similar to the Lord’s Supper, and emphasize that they could never add to or supplement Christ’s finished work. They certainly don’t envision the wholesale return to Mosaic Law that Dake describes.

The Practical Damage to Christian Living

Dake’s extreme dispensationalism doesn’t just affect theology – it has serious practical implications for Christian living today. When believers accept his system, it affects how they read the Bible, how they understand their relationship with God, and how they live out their faith.

Creating Confusion About Biblical Application

If different dispensations have different requirements, how do believers know which biblical commands apply to them? Dake’s system creates uncertainty about which parts of Scripture are for today and which are for other dispensations. This can lead to either legalistic application of commands not meant for the Church or antinomian rejection of biblical principles that transcend dispensations.

For example, when Jesus gives commands in the Sermon on the Mount, are these for the Church Age or the Millennial Kingdom? Dake’s system suggests they’re primarily for the future kingdom, potentially leading believers to dismiss Christ’s ethical teaching as not applicable to them. He teaches that many of Jesus’ teachings about the kingdom were “primarily Jewish and it refers to the good news that the kingdom of David and of Israel will soon be established in Jerusalem”³³ rather than applying to the church today.

Undermining Assurance of Salvation

If God changes the requirements for salvation between dispensations, how can believers be sure their salvation is secure? What if God decides to change the rules again? Dake’s teaching about people in the Millennium needing to keep the law and those who rebel being executed creates uncertainty about the permanence of salvation.

He writes in “Revelation Expounded”: “Many will be executed during the Millennium because of committing sins worthy of death, Isa. 11:3-5; 16:5; 65:20.”³⁴ This suggests that even in the kingdom, salvation can be lost through disobedience, contradicting the New Testament’s teaching about eternal security for those in Christ.

Fostering an Escapist Mentality

By rigidly separating the Church from Israel and this age from the next, Dake’s system can foster an escapist mentality where believers focus on leaving this world rather than being salt and light in it. If God has completely different plans for Israel and the nations in the future, why work for justice, peace, or societal transformation now?

This contradicts Jesus’ teaching that His followers are to be salt and light (Matthew 5:13-16), that the kingdom of God is already among us (Luke 17:21), and that we should pray for God’s will to be done on earth as in heaven (Matthew 6:10).

Creating Division in the Body of Christ

Dake’s teaching about different groups of saints with different destinies can create division among believers today. If Jewish believers have a fundamentally different relationship with God and a different eternal destiny than Gentile believers, how can there be true unity in the Church? He states that “The 144,000 Jews will get saved after the rapture and will be translated as the manchild”³⁵ as a separate group from church saints.

This has practical ramifications for Jewish-Gentile relationships in the Church, for how we understand the role of Messianic Jews, and for how we relate to the nation of Israel. Instead of the unity Paul fought to preserve, Dake’s system institutionalizes division.

The Theological Implications

Beyond the practical damage, Dake’s extreme dispensationalism has serious theological implications that affect core Christian doctrines:

It Compromises the Immutability of God

If God changes His requirements for salvation, His methods of dealing with humanity, and His ultimate plans based on dispensations, then He is not truly immutable. The Bible declares, “For I am the LORD, I change not” (Malachi 3:6). This includes not just His being but His character, His standards, and His purposes.

Dake tries to avoid this by saying God’s character doesn’t change, only His methods. But if salvation by grace through faith can become salvation by law-keeping, if the finished work of Christ can be supplemented with animal sacrifices, then something fundamental about God’s character has changed.

It Undermines the Authority of Scripture

When parts of Scripture are relegated to other dispensations and declared not applicable to believers today, the functional authority of Scripture is undermined. Large portions of the Bible become merely historical or future-oriented, with no direct relevance to Christian living.

Paul declares that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). This “all” includes the Old Testament, the Gospels, and the prophetic writings – not just the epistles Dake assigns to the Church Age.

It Distorts the Nature of Biblical Prophecy

By insisting on hyperliteral fulfillment of all Old Testament prophecies, including the restoration of animal sacrifices, Dake misses the typological and Christological nature of biblical prophecy. The prophets often used the language and imagery of their time to describe future realities that transcend those categories.

When Isaiah speaks of the wolf dwelling with the lamb (Isaiah 11:6), when Ezekiel describes a temple with specific measurements (Ezekiel 40-48), when Zechariah mentions the Feast of Tabernacles (Zechariah 14:16), they may be using familiar images to describe unfamiliar realities. To insist on wooden literal fulfillment can miss the greater spiritual realities these prophecies convey.

It Confuses the Relationship Between Law and Grace

Dake’s system creates confusion about the relationship between law and grace. In his scheme, we move from law (Old Testament) to grace (Church Age) back to law (Millennium). This cyclical view contradicts the biblical presentation of redemptive history as linear progress from promise to fulfillment, from shadow to reality, from law to grace.

The New Testament presents the law as good but insufficient, as holy but unable to save, as a tutor that leads to Christ but is no longer needed once Christ has come. To return to law after grace is not progress but regress, not fulfillment but denial of what Christ accomplished.

The Gospel Truth: One Message for All Time

Against Dake’s multiple gospels and changing requirements, Scripture proclaims one unchanging message of salvation. This gospel was promised in the Old Testament, accomplished by Christ, proclaimed by the apostles, and will remain the only message of salvation until Christ returns.

The gospel is that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, was buried, and rose again the third day according to the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). This message doesn’t change based on dispensations. It doesn’t need supplementation with animal sacrifices. It doesn’t require a return to law-keeping. It is sufficient for all people in all times.

When Paul encountered those who wanted to add requirements to the gospel – whether circumcision, law-keeping, or anything else – he responded with fierce opposition. The book of Galatians exists precisely to combat the error of adding anything to the gospel of grace. Dake’s system, which envisions future additions and modifications to God’s plan of salvation, falls under the same apostolic condemnation.

The writer of Hebrews emphasizes repeatedly that Christ’s work is “once for all” (Hebrews 7:27, 9:12, 9:26, 10:10). This Greek phrase (ephapax) means “once for all time with no repetition needed or possible.” It’s a decisive declaration that Christ’s work needs no supplementation, no repetition, no memorial sacrifices, no return to law – nothing but faith in His finished work.

Conclusion: The Danger of Extreme Dispensationalism

Dake’s extreme dispensationalism represents a serious departure from biblical Christianity. By fragmenting God’s unified plan of redemption into disconnected dispensations with different requirements, different gospels, and different destinies, he undermines the very foundations of the faith.

Most seriously, his teaching about the resumption of animal sacrifices and the return to law-keeping in the Millennium effectively denies the sufficiency of Christ’s finished work. Even if these sacrifices are called “memorial,” their very existence suggests that Christ’s ordained memorial (the Lord’s Supper) and His completed sacrifice are somehow insufficient for future generations.

The practical effect of accepting Dake’s system is to create uncertainty about salvation, confusion about biblical interpretation, and division within the body of Christ. Instead of the clear, unified message of Scripture centered on Christ, followers of Dake are left with a fragmented Bible where different parts apply to different groups at different times with different requirements.

The theological effect is even more serious. Dake’s system compromises the immutability of God, the finality of Christ’s work, the unity of God’s people, and the unchanging nature of the gospel. It represents not just a different interpretation of Scripture but a different religion altogether – one that might use Christian terminology but denies Christian essentials.

As we’ve seen throughout this examination, the root problem is Dake’s hyperliteral hermeneutic that fails to recognize literary genres, redemptive-historical progress, and the Christocentric nature of all Scripture. By woodenly literalizing every statement without considering context, genre, or the analogy of faith, Dake creates contradictions where none exist and divisions where God intends unity.

The alternative is not to abandon dispensational insights altogether. Recognizing that God has worked through different administrative arrangements throughout history can be helpful in understanding Scripture. The key is to maintain this recognition within the framework of God’s one, unified plan of redemption centered on Christ.

This means recognizing that:

• Salvation has always been by grace through faith
• Christ’s sacrifice is complete and final
• The gospel is unchanging and sufficient
• God’s people are ultimately one in Christ
• The law was fulfilled, not abolished, in Christ
• Progressive revelation unveils one plan, not multiple plans
• All Scripture points to and finds its fulfillment in Christ

When we maintain these biblical truths, we can appreciate the genuine insights of dispensationalism while avoiding the errors of Dake’s extreme system. We can recognize God’s distinct working with Israel and the Church while maintaining their ultimate unity in Christ. We can see progressive revelation while affirming the unchanging nature of God and His gospel.

Most importantly, we can rest confidently in the finished work of Christ, knowing that nothing needs to be added, nothing needs to be repeated, and nothing needs to be supplemented. His sacrifice is sufficient. His gospel is complete. His victory is final. This is the true biblical faith that Dake’s extreme dispensationalism obscures and ultimately denies.

The church must be vigilant against any teaching that fragments the unity of Scripture, divides the people of God, or adds to the finished work of Christ. Dake’s extreme dispensationalism does all three, making it not merely an alternative interpretation but a dangerous deviation from biblical Christianity.

As Paul warned the Galatians about those who would pervert the gospel by adding requirements, so we must warn about Dake’s system that envisions future additions to God’s completed work. The gospel of grace is not a temporary dispensational arrangement but the eternal good news of what God has done in Christ. Any system that compromises this truth, no matter how elaborate its biblical arguments, must be rejected.

May we hold fast to the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Corinthians 11:3), the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3), and the gospel that shall never change (Galatians 1:8). This is our calling, our confidence, and our unshakeable foundation – not the shifting sands of extreme dispensationalism but the solid rock of Christ and His finished work.

---

Footnotes

¹ Finis Jennings Dake, Ages and Dispensations (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), Introductory Remarks.
² Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), page referenced in Ages and Dispensations, Introductory Remarks.
³ Finis Jennings Dake, Ages and Dispensations (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), Dispensation of Conscience section.
⁴ Finis Jennings Dake, Ages and Dispensations (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), Dispensation of Human Government section.
⁵ Finis Jennings Dake, Ages and Dispensations (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), Dispensation of Grace section (4).
⁶ Finis Jennings Dake, Ages and Dispensations (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), Dispensation of Grace section (5).
⁷ Finis Jennings Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), referenced from Ages and Dispensations.
⁸ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 282-283.
⁹ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 282.
¹⁰ Finis Jennings Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Chapter on Israel and the Church.
¹¹ Finis Jennings Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Chapter on Post-Rapture Salvation.
¹² Finis Jennings Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Chapter on Tribulation Saints.
¹³ Finis Jennings Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Fallacy 9, Chapter 9.
¹⁴ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 282.
¹⁵ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 967.
¹⁶ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 282.
¹⁷ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 282.
¹⁸ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 282.
¹⁹ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 282.
²⁰ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 967.
²¹ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 282.
²² Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 967.
²³ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 967.
²⁴ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 283.
²⁵ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 283.
²⁶ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), 282.
²⁷ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Chapter on Millennial Kingdom.
²⁸ Finis Jennings Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Chapter on Tribulation Saints.
²⁹ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 967.
³⁰ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 967.
³¹ Finis Jennings Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Chapter on the Rapture.
³² Finis Jennings Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Chapter on Post-Rapture Saints.
³³ Finis Jennings Dake, The Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Chapter on the Gospel of the Kingdom.
³⁴ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Chapter on Millennial Conditions.
³⁵ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), Chapter on the 144,000.

© 2025, DakeBible.org. All rights reserved.