Chapter 05: God Has a Body? The Heresy of Divine Corporeality

Of all the theological errors propagated by Finis Jennings Dake, perhaps none strikes more directly at the heart of Christian orthodoxy than his insistence that God the Father has a physical body. This teaching doesn’t merely adjust our understanding of divine nature—it fundamentally alters who God is, transforming the infinite, omnipresent Spirit into a localized, limited being. When Dake taught that God has “a personal spirit body” complete with measurable dimensions and physical features, he wasn’t offering a fresh perspective on Scripture but resurrecting an ancient heresy that the church rejected centuries ago. The implications of this error cascade through every aspect of Christian theology, affecting our understanding of creation, salvation, worship, and the very possibility of knowing God.

Dake, Finis Jennings. Dake Annotated Reference Bible. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963. Note on Genesis 1:26, page 1. [All subsequent citations to the Dake Bible refer to this edition unless otherwise noted.]

Dake’s Shocking Claims About God’s Physical Form

To understand the full extent of Dake’s departure from biblical Christianity, we must examine his actual statements about God’s physical nature. These aren’t passing comments or unclear hints but explicit, detailed claims about God having a body with specific parts and dimensions. Dake’s confidence in these assertions is particularly troubling because he presents them as obvious biblical facts rather than controversial interpretations.

In his note on Genesis 1:26 in the Dake Annotated Reference Bible, Dake makes this astounding claim:

This isn’t a metaphorical or symbolic statement. Dake literally believed and taught that God the Father possesses all these physical features. He goes even further in his book God’s Plan for Man, where he elaborates on this teaching with even more specificity:

Notice how Dake isn’t content to merely claim God has a body. He insists that God’s body functions exactly like other bodies, serving as a “house” for the soul and spirit. This reduces God to the level of created beings, differing from humans and angels only in degree rather than in essential nature.

In one of his most comprehensive presentations of this teaching, Dake provides what he calls “63 Facts About God,”¹ where he systematically catalogs every supposed bodily part of God. Dake writes that God “is a person” who “has a spirit body” with specific features including: “Shape… Form… Image and likeness… Back parts… Heart… Hands… Fingers… Right hand… Mouth… Lips… Tongue… Feet… Eyes… Ears… Head… Hair… Arms”² and many other bodily parts. This exhaustive list demonstrates that Dake isn’t speaking figuratively—he literally believes God possesses all these anatomical features.

The Extent of Dake’s Physical Description

Dake’s descriptions of God’s body become increasingly detailed and specific as we examine more of his writings. He doesn’t hesitate to describe God’s physical activities and limitations that necessarily follow from having a body. Consider these additional quotes from his Bible notes:

On God’s Physical Location:

“God is NOT omnipresent in body but in Spirit through the Holy Spirit” (Note on Jeremiah 23:24). Here Dake explicitly denies that God the Father is everywhere present, limiting Him to wherever His supposed body happens to be located.

On God’s Movement:

Commenting on Genesis 11:5, where Scripture says “the LORD came down to see the city,” Dake writes: “The fact that God came down from heaven to earth on different occasions proves He moves from place to place and is not omnipresent in body, but in Spirit through the Holy Spirit.”

On God’s Physical Features:

In his exhaustive attempts to prove God has a body, Dake catalogs every biblical reference to God’s “parts,” treating poetic and anthropomorphic language as anatomical descriptions. He lists: “God’s head (Daniel 7:9), His hair (Daniel 7:9), His face (Exodus 33:20), His eyes (2 Chronicles 16:9), His ears (Psalm 34:15), His nose (Psalm 18:8), His mouth (Numbers 12:8), His lips (Job 11:5), His tongue (Isaiah 30:27), His hands (Psalm 8:3), His fingers (Exodus 31:18), His arms (Isaiah 51:9), His feet (Nahum 1:3), His heart (Genesis 6:6), His bowels (Isaiah 63:15), and His back parts (Exodus 33:23).”

In God’s Plan for Man, Dake provides even more detail, asserting that God “is a Spirit Being with a body” who has “back parts; so must have front parts… a heart… hands and fingers… nostrils… mouth… lips and tongue… feet… eyes, eyelids, sight… voice… breath… ears… countenance… hair, head, face, arms… loins… bodily presence… and many other bodily parts as is required of Him to be a person with a body.”³ The thoroughness of this catalogue reveals Dake’s commitment to the literal physicality of God.

Dake elaborates on God’s physical activities, writing: “God goes from place to place in a body just like anyone else (Gen. 3:8; 11:5; 18:1-22, 33; 19:24; 32:24-32; 35:13; Zech. 14:5; Tit. 2:13). He is omni-present, but not omni-body, that is, His presence can be felt everywhere but His body cannot.”¹⁷ He continues, “He wears clothes (Dan. 7:9-14; 10:5-19); eats (Gen. 18:1-22; Exodus 24:11); rests, not because he gets tired, but because he ceases activity or completes a work (Gen. 2:1-4; Heb. 4:4); dwells in a mansion and in a city located on a material planet called Heaven (John 14:1-3; Heb. 11:10-16; 13:14; Rev. 3:12; 21:1-27); sits on a throne (Isa. 6; Rev. 4:1-5; 22:3-5); walks (Gen. 3:8; 18.1-22, 33); rides upon cherubs, the wind, clouds, and chariots drawn by cherubims (Ps. 18:10; 68:17; 104:2; Ezek. 1:1-28); and does do and can do anything that any other person can do bodily that is right and good.”¹⁸

What Dake fails to understand is that these descriptions are anthropomorphisms—human characteristics attributed to God to help us understand His actions and attributes. They’re not meant to be taken as literal anatomical features any more than saying “the arm of the law” means the legal system has actual limbs.

The “Spirit Body” Confusion

One of Dake’s most peculiar teachings is his concept of a “spirit body.” He tries to have it both ways—maintaining that God has a body while acknowledging that Scripture calls God a spirit. His solution? Invent the category of “spirit body” that supposedly differs from physical bodies while still being a real, tangible body with parts and location.

Dake writes in his note on John 4:24:

Dake elaborates on this concept extensively, insisting that “The 284 passages on spirits in Scripture prove that spirit bodies are just as real and capable of operation in the material worlds as are flesh beings.”⁴ He goes further, declaring that “A spirit being can and does have real, material, and tangible spirit form, shape, and size, with bodily parts, soul passions, and spirit faculties. Their material bodies are of a spiritual substance and are just as real as human bodies.”⁵

In his more explicit statements, Dake argues: “A spirit being can and does have real, material, and tangible spirit form, shape, and size, with bodily parts, soul passions, and spirit faculties. Their material bodies are of a spiritual substance and are just as real as human bodies.”¹⁹ He further claims that “even human bodies after the resurrection will be able to go through material substance as did Jesus after His resurrection. He had a flesh-and-bone body (Luke 24:39) and yet in its changed, spiritualized, glorified state it could appear and disappear, go through material substance, closed doors, be visible and invisible, and change from one form to another according to the will of Jesus.”²⁰

This is theological double-speak. Dake wants to affirm that God has a body (contradicting John 4:24) while seeming to accept that God is spirit. But a “spirit body” with tangible parts that occupies space and has location is simply a physical body—regardless of what material it’s supposedly made from. The very concept of “body” implies spatial limitation, which is precisely what Scripture denies about God.

Why “God is Spirit” (John 4:24) Refutes This Completely

At the heart of the biblical revelation about God’s nature stands Jesus’ profound declaration in John 4:24: “God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” This single verse demolishes Dake’s entire theological construction of a bodied deity. Let’s examine why this passage is so decisive.

The Context of Jesus’ Statement

Jesus spoke these words to the Samaritan woman at the well during a discussion about worship. The woman had raised the question of where proper worship should take place—on Mount Gerizim (as the Samaritans believed) or in Jerusalem (as the Jews maintained). Jesus’ response transcends this geographical debate entirely:

“Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father… But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:21-24).

Jesus’ point is clear: worship isn’t confined to physical locations because God Himself isn’t confined to physical locations. God is spirit, not a being with a body who exists in one place at a time. This is why true worship can happen anywhere—because God is everywhere, not limited by bodily existence.

The Meaning of “Spirit”

When Jesus says “God is spirit,” He’s making an ontological statement—a declaration about God’s essential nature or being. The Greek word is “pneuma,” which in this context refers to God’s immaterial, non-physical nature. This isn’t saying God is “a spirit” (one among many) but that God’s very essence is spirit as opposed to physical matter.

Consider how Scripture consistently uses this concept:

Luke 24:39: After His resurrection, Jesus tells His disciples, “See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” Jesus explicitly contrasts “spirit” with having a physical body. If a spirit by definition doesn’t have flesh and bones, and God is spirit, then God doesn’t have a body.

1 Timothy 1:17: Paul describes God as “the King of ages, immortal, invisible, the only God.” The word “invisible” (Greek: aoratos) means “unseen” or “that which cannot be seen.” If God has a body with shape and form, He cannot be invisible. Physical bodies, by definition, are visible (even if we currently can’t see them due to distance or obstruction).

1 Timothy 6:16: Paul further states that God “alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see.” This isn’t merely saying God is currently unseen but that He is inherently unseeable by human eyes because He lacks physical form.

Dake’s Distortion of John 4:24

Faced with this clear teaching, how does Dake respond? He performs interpretive gymnastics that would make a circus acrobat envious. Look again at his interpretation:

Notice what Dake does here:

1. He adds to Scripture. Jesus simply said “God is spirit.” Dake adds “being with a spirit body”—concepts found nowhere in the text.
2. He contradicts the plain meaning. When Jesus says God is spirit (not physical), Dake says God has a body (physical by definition).
3. He creates a category that doesn’t exist. The Bible never speaks of “spirit bodies” as Dake describes them—tangible forms with parts that occupy space.
4. He misses the entire point. Jesus is explaining why worship isn’t limited to physical places—because God isn’t limited to physical existence.

Dake goes so far as to claim that “No man, therefore, can say with Scriptural authority, that God consists of a kind of invisible substance which cannot be seen or touched by man. In fact, God will live among men in visible form for ever.”⁶ This directly contradicts 1 Timothy 1:17 and 6:16, which explicitly call God invisible and unseeable.

The Testimony of Scripture

The Bible consistently affirms God’s spiritual, non-corporeal nature. Let’s examine key passages:

Colossians 1:15 calls Christ “the image of the invisible God.” If God the Father has a visible body, in what sense is He invisible? Dake’s theology makes nonsense of this description.

Exodus 33:20 records God telling Moses, “You cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live.” If God has a physical face that could theoretically be seen, why does seeing it cause death? The answer is that God’s “face” is anthropomorphic language for His immediate presence, not a physical feature.

Deuteronomy 4:15-16 explicitly warns: “Therefore watch yourselves very carefully. Since you saw no form on the day that the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a carved image for yourselves, in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female.”

God specifically reminds Israel that they saw “no form” when He revealed Himself. If God has a body with a form, why didn’t they see it? And why would making an image be wrong if God Himself has an image?

Understanding Anthropomorphisms Correctly

The key to understanding biblical descriptions of God’s “body parts” lies in recognizing anthropomorphism—the literary device of describing God in human terms to help us understand His actions and attributes. This isn’t deception or inaccuracy; it’s accommodation to human limitations in understanding the infinite God.

What Are Anthropomorphisms?

Anthropomorphism comes from two Greek words: “anthropos” (human) and “morphe” (form). It means attributing human characteristics to non-human entities. When the Bible speaks of God’s hands, eyes, or face, it’s using human analogies to express divine truths that would otherwise be incomprehensible to us.

Consider how we use similar language in everyday speech:

• We say “the long arm of the law” without thinking the legal system has actual limbs
• We speak of “the face of the clock” without believing timepieces have facial features
• We refer to “the heart of the matter” without imagining issues have cardiac organs
• We talk about “the eye of the storm” without thinking hurricanes have optical equipment

Everyone understands these are figures of speech, not literal descriptions. Similarly, when Scripture speaks of God’s “mighty hand” or His “eyes running to and fro throughout the earth,” these are vivid ways of expressing God’s power and omniscience, not anatomical descriptions.

Dake, however, rejects this interpretation. He argues that “why would God, in hundreds of places, refer to Himself as having bodily parts, soul passions, and spirit faculties if He does not have them? Would it be necessary for Him to tell us He has such in order to reveal that He does not have them? Would He not be more likely to say in plain language that He does not have eyes, hands, mouth, ears, and other bodily members?”⁷ This argument fundamentally misunderstands the nature and purpose of figurative language in Scripture.

Dake expands on this reasoning: “If all the expressions about God having bodily parts are mere figures of speech and human expressions, as is contended by Bible teachers, trying to convey some idea of God, then it may well be asked, what kind of ideas about God do such expressions convey? Do they tell us that God does not have bodily parts or that He does? If they are trying to tell us that He does not have them, then they are a peculiar way for an intelligent being to convey such ideas. Any human being could excel God in expressing himself if this is the way God tells us He does not have a body with parts and passions. It must be remembered there cannot be figures of speech of anything that is not real.”²¹

Biblical Examples of Clear Anthropomorphism

Let’s examine specific passages to see how anthropomorphism works in Scripture:

Psalm 91:4 – “He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge.”

Does God have feathers and wings like a bird? Of course not. This beautiful imagery conveys God’s protection and care, like a mother bird sheltering her young. Even Dake doesn’t claim God has literal feathers, showing he can recognize figurative language when it’s obvious. The question is: why doesn’t he apply the same interpretive principle to other bodily descriptions?

Psalm 18:8 – “Smoke went up from his nostrils, and devouring fire from his mouth; glowing coals flamed forth from him.”

Is God literally breathing smoke and fire like a dragon? This poetic description expresses God’s righteous anger against evil. The psalmist uses vivid, even frightening imagery to convey the intensity of divine judgment. Taking this literally would make God into a fire-breathing monster rather than the holy Creator.

Isaiah 59:1 – “Behold, the LORD’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save, or his ear dull, that it cannot hear.”

The prophet isn’t providing information about the length of God’s arm or the sensitivity of His hearing organs. He’s assuring Israel that God remains able to save (His “hand”) and willing to listen (His “ear”). The anthropomorphic language makes abstract concepts concrete—God’s power becomes a strong hand, His attention becomes a listening ear.

Why Anthropomorphisms Are Necessary

God uses anthropomorphic language because we simply cannot comprehend His infinite being directly. Consider how you would explain color to someone born blind, or music to someone born deaf. You would have to use analogies from their experience. Similarly, God reveals Himself using concepts we can grasp.

To Express God’s Personal Nature: While God doesn’t have a body, He is personal. He thinks, feels (in a divine way), acts, and relates. Anthropomorphisms help us understand that God isn’t an impersonal force but a personal Being who loves, cares, and interacts with His creation.

To Communicate Divine Actions: When the Bible says God’s “eyes” see or His “hand” acts, it’s expressing real divine activities in terms we understand. God does see everything (omniscience) and does act in history (providence), but not through physical organs.

To Reveal God’s Character: Anthropomorphisms often reveal God’s attributes. His “strong arm” reveals His power. His “listening ear” reveals His attentiveness. His “face shining upon us” reveals His favor. These aren’t physical descriptions but character revelations.

The Danger of Hyperliteral Interpretation

Dake’s error wasn’t in taking the Bible seriously but in failing to recognize obvious figures of speech. His hyperliteral approach leads to absurd conclusions. Consider what happens when we apply Dake’s method consistently:

If God literally has all the body parts mentioned in Scripture, then He must have:

• Wings (Psalm 91:4)
• Smoke-breathing nostrils (Psalm 18:8)
• Multiple faces, since He’s also described as having the face of a lion, ox, and eagle in certain visions
• A sword coming out of His mouth (Revelation 19:15)
• Seven eyes (Zechariah 4:10)
• Wheels within wheels (Ezekiel 1)

The absurdity becomes obvious. Dake picks and chooses which descriptions to take literally based on no consistent principle. He accepts “hands” and “feet” as literal but presumably not “wings” and “wheels.” This arbitrary approach to interpretation undermines any claim to letting Scripture speak for itself.

Despite these obvious problems, Dake insists on his literal interpretation. He writes: “It is logical not to question the plain, simple statements of Scripture about God and His body; it is logical to understand them in the same literal way that we understand like statements about angels, men, and other beings. We have no Bible authority to do otherwise.”⁸ This statement reveals Dake’s fundamental misunderstanding of how language—especially religious language—works.

In his hermeneutical approach, Dake declares: “TAKE EVERY STATEMENT IN THE BIBLE AS LITERAL WHEN IT IS AT ALL POSSIBLE AND WHERE IT IS CLEAR THAT IT IS LITERAL, OTHERWISE, IT IS FIGURATIVE… REMEMBER, NO FIGURE OF SPEECH EVER DOES AWAY WITH THE LITERAL TRUTH, BUT MERELY EXPRESSES IT IN ANOTHER WAY.”²² While this hermeneutical principle has some merit, Dake fails to apply it consistently, refusing to recognize obvious anthropomorphisms as figurative language.

How a Physical God Cannot Be Infinite

The philosophical implications of Dake’s teaching about God having a body are devastating to classical Christian theism. A God with a body cannot possess the attributes that make God truly God. Let’s examine why physical embodiment is incompatible with divine infinity.

The Nature of Bodies

By definition, a body is a bounded, limited entity that exists in space and time. Every body, whether physical or this supposed “spirit body” Dake imagines, must have:

Spatial Location: A body exists somewhere specific. It occupies space, which means it’s here and not there. It has a specific location at any given moment.

Finite Dimensions: Every body has size. It may be large or small, but it has measurable dimensions. It has boundaries where it ends and other things begin.

Limited Presence: A body can only be in one place at a time. It cannot be omnipresent. Even if it could move at infinite speed (a logical impossibility), it would still be limited to one location at each moment.

Compositional Parts: Bodies have parts that exist in relation to each other. A head is above shoulders, hands are at the end of arms, etc. This means the body is composed of parts rather than being absolutely simple.

Temporal Existence: Bodies exist in time, experiencing succession of moments. They have duration, experiencing “before” and “after.”

Interestingly, Dake himself acknowledges some of these limitations. In his discussion of 2 Chronicles 2:6, where Solomon declares that “the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain” God, Dake writes: “Surely the size of His body, soul, and spirit are not referred to, for He is of ordinary size as proved by the many personal appearances He has made to men.”⁹ This remarkable admission—that God is “of ordinary size”—demonstrates how Dake’s theology reduces God to merely a very powerful creature rather than the infinite Creator.

Why Infinity and Embodiment Are Incompatible

God’s infinity means He is unlimited in every perfection. He is not confined by space, time, or any other limitation. But if God has a body, He immediately becomes finite:

Mathematical Impossibility: Consider the mathematical implications. If God has a body with specific dimensions, we could theoretically measure Him. He might be a trillion light-years tall, but that’s still a finite number. Infinity is not a very large number; it’s the absence of limitation. No matter how large Dake imagines God’s body to be, if it has any dimensions at all, it’s infinitely smaller than true infinity.

The Container Problem: If God has a body, what contains Him? Bodies exist in space, but God is supposed to be the Creator of space. Did God create the space He exists in? If so, where was He before? If not, then space is eternal alongside God, and we have two infinite realities—God and the space He occupies. This leads to dualism, not monotheism.

The Parts Problem: Classical theism affirms divine simplicity—God has no parts but is absolutely one. But a body necessarily has parts. If God has hands, feet, a head, etc., then He is composed of parts. This means:

• God’s hand is not His foot (they’re different parts)
• God’s parts must be arranged somehow (head above shoulders, etc.)
• God would be dependent on His parts being properly connected
• God could theoretically lose a part or have parts separated

This makes God a complex being dependent on His parts rather than the simple, independent ground of all existence.

The Logical Contradictions

Dake’s position generates numerous logical contradictions. Let’s examine several:

Contradiction 1: Located Everywhere and Somewhere

Dake claims God is omnipresent “in Spirit through the Holy Spirit” but located in heaven in His body. This is incoherent. Either God the Father is everywhere (omnipresent) or He’s somewhere specific (located). He cannot be both. If the Father needs the Spirit to be omnipresent for Him, then the Father Himself is not omnipresent, which means He’s not fully God.

Dake attempts to explain this distinction, writing: “Omnipresence then, is different from omnibody, and is governed by relationship and knowledge of God. Like the presence of someone being felt by another who is thousands of miles away, so it is with the presence of God among men.”¹⁰ But this “solution” creates more problems than it solves—it makes God’s presence merely psychological rather than actual.

He elaborates further: “Spirit beings, including God, Himself, cannot be omnipresent in body, for their bodies are of ordinary size and must be at one place at a time, in the same way that bodies of men are always localized, being in one place at a time.”²³ Dake continues, “God personally dwells in Heaven, not everywhere. Jesus addressed His Father and referred to Him as being in Heaven. Eighteen times He said, ‘Father which is in heaven’ (Matt. 5:16, 45,48; 6:1,9; 7:11,21, etc.). Shall we conclude that Jesus did not know what He was talking about? Not one time does one Scripture refer to God as being bodily everywhere. God is omni-present but not omni-body, that is, His presence can be felt by moral agents who are everywhere, but His body cannot be seen by them every place at the same time. God has a body and goes from place to place like anybody else.”²⁴

Contradiction 2: Seeing the Unseeable

Scripture says God is invisible (1 Timothy 1:17) and that no one has seen or can see Him (1 Timothy 6:16). But if God has a body with a form, He’s not inherently invisible—He’s just currently unseen. This contradicts the biblical teaching about God’s essential invisibility.

Contradiction 3: Creating His Own Space

Genesis 1:1 says God created “the heavens and the earth”—all of physical reality. But if God has a physical body, He needs space to exist in. Did He create the space He occupies? If yes, where was He before? If no, then something exists eternally alongside God, contradicting monotheism.

Contradiction 4: The Incarnation Becomes Meaningless

If God already has a body, why did the Son need to become incarnate? What’s special about Jesus taking on human flesh if the Father already has a body? The incarnation loses its uniqueness and significance if God is already embodied.

The Philosophical Impossibility of a Bodied Deity

Beyond the biblical problems, Dake’s teaching faces insurmountable philosophical challenges. Philosophers throughout history have recognized that the concept of God necessarily excludes physical embodiment. Let’s examine why.

The Contingency Problem

Everything with a body is contingent—it depends on other things for its existence. A body needs:

• Space to exist in
• The proper arrangement of its parts
• The continued connection of its parts
• The maintenance of its structure

But God is supposed to be necessary, not contingent. He exists by His own nature, depending on nothing else. A God with a body would depend on space, on His parts remaining connected, on His structure being maintained. This makes Him contingent, not necessary—a creature rather than the Creator.

The Change Problem

Bodies can change. They can move from one location to another, their parts can shift in relation to each other, they can potentially be damaged or altered. But classical theism affirms that God is immutable—unchanging in His being, perfections, purposes, and promises.

If God has a body that can move, then He changes location. If His hand can move relative to His foot, His parts change position. This introduces change into God’s being, contradicting divine immutability. Malachi 3:6 declares, “For I the LORD do not change,” but a bodied God necessarily changes whenever He moves or acts physically.

Dake explicitly affirms that God moves physically, declaring that God “has bodily presence… and goes from place to place in a body like all other persons.”¹¹ This admission makes divine immutability impossible.

The Perfection Problem

God is defined as the most perfect being—that than which nothing greater can be conceived (to use Anselm’s famous formulation). But is a being with a body more perfect than one without?

Consider: A being with a body is limited to one location, while a spiritual being can be omnipresent. Which is greater—being everywhere or being stuck in one place? A being with a body depends on space and the proper arrangement of parts, while a spiritual being is independent. Which is more perfect—independence or dependence? A being with a body is complex (having parts), while a spiritual being can be simple. Which is greater—simplicity or complexity?

In every case, lacking a body represents greater perfection than having one. Therefore, the most perfect being—God—cannot have a body.

The Causation Problem

God is the First Cause—the uncaused cause of everything else. But if God has a body, what caused His body? Bodies don’t just exist; they require explanation. What gave God’s supposed body its form? What maintains its structure? What prevents it from dissolving?

If God’s body is uncaused, then we’re saying complex structured entities can exist without cause or explanation—which undermines the entire cosmological argument for God’s existence. If God’s body has a cause, then God is not the First Cause. Either way, Dake’s position destroys natural theology.

What We Lose If God Has a Body

The practical and spiritual implications of Dake’s teaching are devastating. If God has a body, we lose not just abstract theological truths but concrete spiritual realities that affect every aspect of Christian life. Let’s examine what’s at stake.

We Lose the Comfort of God’s Omnipresence

One of the greatest comforts in Scripture is that God is always with us. David expressed this beautifully in Psalm 139:7-10:

This beautiful assurance becomes impossible if God has a body located in heaven. A bodied God can’t be with you in your darkest hour if His body is somewhere else. When you cry out to God from your hospital bed, your prison cell, or your moment of despair, is He really there, or is His body far away in heaven while only the Holy Spirit is present? Dake’s theology destroys the immediacy of God’s presence that has comforted believers for millennia.

Think about what this means practically:

• When Jesus promised “I am with you always” (Matthew 28:20), was He lying if He has a body in heaven?
• When we gather for worship and claim God’s promise that “where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them” (Matthew 18:20), is God really present or just watching from a distance?
• When a dying saint takes comfort that God is with them in the valley of the shadow of death, are they deluded if God’s body is elsewhere?

We Lose the Possibility of Simultaneous Prayer

Millions of Christians pray simultaneously around the world at any given moment. How can a God with a body hear and respond to all these prayers at once? A body can only be in one place, attending to one thing at a time. Even if God could move at infinite speed (itself a logical impossibility), He would have to process prayers sequentially, not simultaneously.

This creates a queue system for prayer—your prayer might have to wait while God deals with others. The biblical promise that God hears every prayer immediately becomes impossible. The God who “knows what you need before you ask him” (Matthew 6:8) becomes a deity scrambling to keep up with prayer requests.

We Lose the Transcendence of God

If God has a body existing in space and time like we do (even if it’s bigger and more powerful), then He’s not truly transcendent—He’s just another being within reality rather than the ground of reality itself. This reduction of God to a super-powered creature rather than the Creator has massive implications:

Worship Becomes Idolatry: If God has a physical form, then making an image of Him would be appropriate, not forbidden. Why did God forbid images if He Himself has an image? The second commandment becomes arbitrary and inexplicable.

God Becomes One Being Among Many: Instead of being Being Itself, the source and ground of all existence, God becomes just the most powerful being among other beings. He’s quantitatively greater (bigger, stronger) but not qualitatively different. This is the god of paganism, not the God of biblical revelation.

Dake’s own words reveal this reduction: “God can be like man in bodily form and still be as magnificent as we have always thought Him to be. He can have a spirit-substance body and still be like man in size and shape… man in reality is simply a miniature of God in attributes and powers.”¹² Notice how Dake explicitly says God is “like man in size and shape” and that humans are “a miniature of God.” This obliterates the Creator-creature distinction and reduces God to merely a bigger version of us.

In another place, Dake declares: “Man was made a miniature of God in soul and spirit faculties and with bodily parts like those of God. The only difference between the faculties of God and those of man is that those of God are infinite and those of man are finite; one is unlimited, and the other is limited.”²⁵ This statement makes God merely quantitatively different from humans, not qualitatively different in essence.

Mystery Disappears: If God has a body we could theoretically see and measure, the mystery and transcendence that produces awe and worship evaporates. God becomes comprehensible, graspable, reducible to categories we fully understand.

We Lose the Incarnation’s Significance

The incarnation—God becoming man in Jesus Christ—is the central miracle of Christianity. John 1:14 declares with wonder, “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” This is presented as an astounding event—the infinite God taking on finite human nature.

But if God already has a body, what’s remarkable about the incarnation? It becomes merely one bodied being taking on a different kind of body. The scandal and miracle of the incarnation disappear. The early church’s amazement that God would humble Himself to take on flesh makes no sense if He already has a body.

Consider these New Testament passages that become meaningless if God already has a body:

Philippians 2:6-7: “Though he was in the form of God… he emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.” If the Father has a body, why is taking human form an act of humility?

1 Timothy 3:16: “Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh.” What’s mysterious about this if God already has a body?

Colossians 2:9: “For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily.” If deity normally has a body, what’s special about deity dwelling bodily in Christ?

We Lose Coherent Theology

Theology is the study of God and His relationship to creation. If God has a body, systematic theology collapses into incoherence:

Examining Dake’s “Proofs” for Divine Corporeality

Despite the overwhelming biblical and philosophical problems with his position, Dake believed he had irrefutable proof that God has a body. Let’s examine his main arguments and see why they fail.

Dake’s Argument from Genesis 1:26

Dake’s primary proof text is Genesis 1:26: “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.'” Dake argues that since humans have bodies and we’re made in God’s image, God must have a body too.

Dake frames this as a simple logical deduction: “What on earth was created in the image and likeness of God? Man (Gen. 1:26-28). Do God’s image and likeness consist only of moral and spiritual powers? If so, it can be concluded that man is only a moral and spiritual being. Is God bodiless? If so, we can conclude that man is also bodiless.”¹³

In his detailed exposition of this passage, Dake writes: “Moses declared that man was made in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1:26-27; 9:6). The Hebrew word for image is tselem, meaning shape, shadow, resemblance, figure, bodily form, as proved in all passages where it is used (Gen. 5:3; 9:6; Exodus 20:4; Lev. 26:1; Ps. 73:20; 106:19; Isa. 40:19-20; 44:9-17; 45:20; 48:5; Jer. 10:14; 51:17). The Hebrew word for likeness is demooth, meaning model, shape, fashion, similitude, and bodily resemblance, as proved in Gen. 5:1, 3; Isa. 40:18; Ezek. 1:5, 10, 13, 16, 22, 26, 28; 10:1, 10, 21-22.”²⁶

He continues: “There is no question about man being made in the moral and spiritual likeness of God, but none of the above passages refer to this idea. They refer to bodily form and shape. If man was made in the image and likeness of God bodily, then God must have a body, and an outward form and shape. One might as well argue that image and likeness, when used of idols, mean moral and spiritual image and likeness and not outward bodily shape, as to argue this about God; for the same Hebrew and Greek words are used in both cases.”²⁷

This argument fails for multiple reasons:

1. The Image Is Not Physical: Scripture itself defines what the image of God means, and it’s not about physical appearance:

• Ephesians 4:24 defines it as “righteousness and holiness”
• Colossians 3:10 describes it as “knowledge”
• Genesis 1:26-28 connects it to dominion over creation

The image of God refers to our rational, moral, and spiritual capacities—our ability to think, choose, love, and rule. It’s not about having hands and feet.

2. God Explicitly Has No Form: Deuteronomy 4:15-16 specifically states that when God revealed Himself to Israel, they saw “no form.” If humans physically resemble God, why didn’t Israel see that form? God warns against making any physical representation precisely because He has no physical form to represent.

3. The Image Can Be Renewed Without Physical Change: Colossians 3:10 speaks of believers “being renewed in knowledge after the image of him who created him.” This renewal doesn’t change our physical bodies but our spiritual condition. If the image were physical, spiritual renewal couldn’t affect it.

Dake’s Argument from Theophanies

Dake points to Old Testament theophanies (appearances of God) as proof God has a body. He notes instances where people saw God in human form, such as Abraham’s visitors in Genesis 18 or Jacob wrestling with God in Genesis 32.

Dake declares triumphantly: “God has been seen bodily by human eyes many times… If we will take the Bible literally as to what it says about Him, as we do with other things the subject will be very clear.”¹⁴

He provides extensive examples: “Bible writers not only stated that God has a body, but they also testified that they have seen it with the natural eyes. Abraham made a dinner for God and two angels and they actually ate food (Gen. 18). Jacob had a physical wrestling match with God all night (Gen. 32:24-30). Moses and seventy-four elders of Israel ate and drank in the actual bodily presence of God when they saw Him with their eyes (Exodus 24:9-13). Moses got to see God’s glory as expressed in His ‘back parts’ (vs. 18-23), but could not see God’s glory as expressed in His countenance.”²⁸

This argument misunderstands the nature of theophanies:

1. Temporary Accommodations: Theophanies are temporary appearances God takes for specific purposes. They’re not revelations of God’s essential nature but accommodations to human limitations. God appears in forms we can perceive and understand, but these forms are not His true nature.

2. Various Forms: God appears in multiple forms in Scripture—a burning bush (Exodus 3), a pillar of cloud and fire (Exodus 13), a still small voice (1 Kings 19). If these reveal God’s true form, which one is accurate? Does God have multiple bodies? The variety of forms shows these are accommodations, not God’s essential nature.

3. Christophanies: Many theologians believe Old Testament appearances of “the angel of the LORD” were pre-incarnate appearances of Christ, not the Father. This would mean the Son temporarily took visible form before His permanent incarnation, not that the Father has a body.

Dake’s Argument from Heavenly Visions

Dake cites visions of God’s throne room (Isaiah 6, Ezekiel 1, Revelation 4) where prophets saw God seated on a throne. Surely, he argues, a being on a throne must have a body.

This argument fails to recognize the nature of visionary literature:

1. Symbolic Visions: Prophetic visions are highly symbolic, not photographic representations. In Ezekiel’s vision, God appears with four faces and is accompanied by wheels within wheels covered with eyes. In Revelation, Christ appears with a sword coming from His mouth and eyes like flames of fire. These are symbolic representations, not literal photographs.

2. Accommodation to Human Understanding: God reveals Himself in visions using imagery humans can grasp. A throne represents authority, not God’s furniture. Just as parables use earthly stories to convey spiritual truths without being literal history, visions use earthly imagery to convey divine realities without being literal descriptions.

3. Contradictory Descriptions: If visions reveal God’s literal appearance, they contradict each other. Does God look like Ezekiel’s vision, Daniel’s vision, or John’s vision? They all differ significantly. This shows they’re symbolic representations tailored to specific messages, not anatomical descriptions.

Dake’s Argument from Christ’s Resurrection Body

Dake argues that since Christ retained His body after resurrection and ascension, and since He’s God, this proves God has a body. This argument contains multiple errors:

1. Confuses the Persons: Christ is God the Son incarnate, not God the Father. The Son took on human nature in the incarnation, but this doesn’t mean the Father has a body. Each person of the Trinity has distinct properties while sharing the one divine essence.

2. The Incarnation Is Unique: The Son’s incarnation is presented as unique in Scripture—something that had never happened before and amazed the angels. If having a body were normal for deity, the incarnation wouldn’t be special.

3. The Hypostatic Union: Christ has two natures—divine and human—united in one person. His divine nature remains spiritual and infinite while His human nature has a body. The Father has only divine nature, hence no body.

The Historical Orthodox Position

Throughout church history, orthodox Christianity has unanimously rejected the idea that God has a body. This isn’t a minor disagreement but a fundamental marker distinguishing biblical faith from paganism and heresy. Let’s examine what the church has consistently taught.

The Early Church Fathers

The early church fathers were unanimous in affirming God’s incorporeality (lack of a body):

Irenaeus (130-202 AD): “God is not as men are… He is invisible, not comprehensible by the bodily senses, without bodily form” (Against Heresies, Book II, Chapter 13).

Origen (185-254 AD): “God is incomprehensible and immeasurable… God is not a body, nor is He in a body” (De Principiis, Book I, Chapter 1).

Augustine (354-430 AD): “God is not contained in any place… He is everywhere present in His entirety” (Letter 187). Augustine specifically refuted anthropomorphite monks who believed God had a body, calling this view heretical.

John of Damascus (675-749 AD): “The Deity is simple and uncompound. But that which is composed of many and diverse elements is compound. If, then, we speak of the qualities of being uncreated and without beginning and incorporeal… as essential differences in the case of God, that which is composed of so many qualities will not be simple but compound. But this is impious in the extreme” (Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book I, Chapter 9).

The Ecumenical Creeds

While the early creeds focused primarily on Trinitarian and Christological controversies, they assume God’s incorporeality as foundational:

The Nicene Creed (325/381 AD) speaks of Christ as “Light from Light, true God from true God,” using metaphysical rather than physical language. The creed assumes God’s spirituality as the backdrop for understanding the incarnation’s miracle.

The Athanasian Creed (5th century) states: “The Father is immense, the Son is immense, the Holy Spirit is immense… yet there are not three immense beings, but one immense being.” Immensity here means unlimited by spatial constraints—impossible if God has a body.

The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) explicitly declared: “God is absolutely simple essence… In Him there can be no composition either of quantitative parts as in a body.”

The Protestant Reformers

The Reformers unanimously affirmed God’s incorporeality:

Martin Luther: While Luther occasionally used vivid anthropomorphic language in his preaching, he clearly affirmed God’s spiritual nature: “God is not a corporeal substance, but a Spirit” (Table Talk).

John Calvin: “When [Scripture] attributes hands, feet, mouth, eyes, and heart to God, we must not imagine that He is corporeal… These expressions are accommodations to our capacity” (Institutes I.13.1).

The Westminster Confession (1646): “There is but one only, living, and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions” (Chapter 2.1). Note the explicit denial of God having “body” or “parts.”

Why This Consensus Matters

The unanimous testimony of orthodox Christianity across all traditions—Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant—affirms God’s incorporeality. This isn’t because they all misunderstood Scripture but because Scripture clearly teaches God is spirit.

When Dake claims God has a body, he’s not offering a fresh biblical insight but resurrecting a heresy the church definitively rejected. He stands not with the great teachers of the faith but with:

• The Anthropomorphites (4th century heretics who believed God had human form)
• The Mormons (who teach God the Father has a body of flesh and bones)
• Various pagan religions that conceive of gods as superhuman beings with bodies

The Connection to Other Errors

Dake’s teaching that God has a body doesn’t exist in isolation. It connects to and reinforces his other theological errors, creating a web of false doctrine. Understanding these connections helps us see why this isn’t merely an abstract theological dispute but a fundamental corruption of Christian faith.

Connection to Tritheism

Once Dake asserts that God has a body, his slide into tritheism (belief in three Gods) becomes almost inevitable. If the Father has a body, and the Son has a body (after the incarnation), and the Holy Spirit has a body (as Dake also teaches), then we have three separate bodied beings. Bodies, by definition, separate one being from another. You can’t have three bodies and one being—you necessarily have three beings.

Dake explicitly embraces this conclusion. In his note on Deuteronomy 6:4, he writes:

Dake elaborates extensively on this teaching: “What we mean by Divine Trinity is that there are three separate and distinct persons in the Godhead, each one having His own personal spirit body, personal soul, and personal spirit in the same sense each human being, angel, or any other being has his own body, soul, and spirit. We mean by body, whether a spirit body or a flesh body, the house for the indwelling of the personal soul and spirit.”¹⁵

He states further: “If the fact is revealed that there are three separate distinct beings in the Deity or Godhead, this would be sufficient to warrant the conclusion that each of them have separate bodies, souls, and spirits, like all other separate and distinct beings.”²⁹ Dake continues, “The members of the Godhead are exactly the same in every sense and have been from all eternity, so if one of them had a body by nature then all of them had spirit bodies exactly the same until one of them took a human body to redeem.”³⁰

Notice the progression: God has a body → Each person of the Trinity has a body → Three bodies mean three separate beings → Tritheism. The error compounds itself, moving from bad theology to outright heresy.

Connection to Limited Omniscience

If God has a body located in heaven, questions arise about His knowledge of events on earth. Can He see what’s happening everywhere if His eyes are in one location? Dake’s solution is to limit God’s direct knowledge while maintaining He knows everything through the Holy Spirit.

But this creates a divided knowledge in the Godhead. The Father doesn’t directly know everything—He depends on the Spirit for information about distant events. This makes God’s omniscience derivative and dependent rather than essential and immediate. The God who “knows the end from the beginning” becomes a God receiving reports from His Spirit.

Connection to Racial Theology

Dake’s belief in God’s physical form contributed to his racist theology. If God has a specific physical appearance, questions arise: What color is God’s skin? What are His racial features? Dake’s answer, shaped by his cultural prejudices, was that God must look like a white man.

This thinking influenced his infamous “30 reasons for segregation of races,” where he argued that God created racial distinctions as permanent, divinely ordained categories. If God Himself has specific racial characteristics (in Dake’s prejudiced imagination, white ones), then racial hierarchy might seem divinely sanctioned. The error of divine corporeality thus feeds the sin of racism.

Connection to the “Little Gods” Doctrine

If God has a body like we do, differing only in power and perfection, then humans are essentially the same type of being as God—just smaller and weaker versions. Dake explicitly teaches this, saying humans are “in the God class” of beings.

This opens the door to the “little gods” heresy popularized by the Word of Faith movement. If we’re the same essential type of being as God, then perhaps we can evolve or develop into gods ourselves. The distinction between Creator and creature, fundamental to biblical faith, collapses. We become gods in embryo rather than creatures made in God’s image.

Dake explicitly states: “man in reality is simply a miniature of God in attributes and powers.”¹⁶ This statement perfectly encapsulates how the error of divine corporeality leads to the erasure of the Creator-creature distinction.

Responding to Common Defenses

Defenders of Dake often offer various arguments to justify or minimize his teaching about God having a body. Let’s address the most common defenses:

Defense 1: “Dake Just Meant God Is Personal”

Some argue that Dake was simply affirming God’s personal nature against abstract philosophical concepts of deity. They claim his language about God’s body was meant to emphasize that God is personal, not impersonal.

Response: This defense doesn’t hold up when we read Dake’s actual statements. He doesn’t say God is “personal”—he says God has “a personal spirit body” with specific parts. He lists these parts in detail: hands, feet, eyes, mouth, etc. He explicitly denies that God is omnipresent “in body.” This isn’t metaphorical language about personality but literal claims about physical form.

Furthermore, orthodox Christianity has always affirmed God’s personal nature without attributing a body to Him. Being personal doesn’t require being physical. God can think, will, love, and relate without having a body—just as human souls are personal without being physical.

Defense 2: “The Bible Describes God’s Body Parts”

Defenders point out that Scripture frequently mentions God’s hands, eyes, face, etc. They argue Dake was simply taking the Bible literally rather than explaining it away.

Response: This defense confuses literal interpretation with literalistic interpretation. Taking the Bible literally means accepting what it actually teaches, including its use of figures of speech. The Bible also says God has wings (Psalm 91:4) and that Christ has a sword coming from His mouth (Revelation 19:15). Should we take these literally too?

Scripture itself tells us God has “no form” (Deuteronomy 4:15) and is “spirit” (John 4:24). When we encounter descriptions of God’s body parts, we must interpret them in light of these clear statements about God’s incorporeal nature. The body-part language is anthropomorphic, not anatomical.

Defense 3: “Spirit Bodies Are Different from Physical Bodies”

Some argue that Dake’s concept of a “spirit body” doesn’t mean a physical body like ours. They claim spirit bodies are made of different substance and don’t have the limitations of physical bodies.

Response: This defense engages in special pleading. A body, by definition, has location, dimensions, and parts, regardless of what it’s made of. If God’s “spirit body” takes up space, has boundaries, and exists in one location rather than everywhere, then it functions exactly like a physical body in all the ways that matter theologically.

Moreover, Dake himself says spirit bodies are “just as real and tangible with bodily parts as ours.” He’s not proposing some ethereal, non-physical existence but a real body that happens to be made of spirit rather than flesh. This is still a body with all the limitations embodiment entails.

Defense 4: “This Is a Secondary Issue”

Some argue that disagreement about God’s form is a secondary matter that shouldn’t divide Christians. They claim we can disagree about whether God has a body while maintaining fellowship.

Response: This is not a secondary issue but strikes at the heart of who God is. If God has a body:

• He cannot be omnipresent
• He cannot be infinite
• He cannot be simple (without parts)
• He cannot be truly transcendent
• The incarnation loses its meaning
• We slide into tritheism (three Gods)

These aren’t minor adjustments but fundamental changes to the nature of God. The early church recognized this, which is why they condemned anthropomorphism as heresy. We’re not dealing with a difference of opinion but with a corruption of essential Christian doctrine.

The Pastoral Impact

Beyond theological concerns, Dake’s teaching about God having a body has serious pastoral implications. False doctrine doesn’t remain abstract but affects real people in real ways. Let’s examine the pastoral damage this teaching causes.

Creates Anxiety About God’s Presence

When believers going through trials are told God has a body located in heaven, it creates anxiety about whether He’s truly present with them. The mother watching her child suffer wonders if God is really there or far away in heaven. The prisoner in solitary confinement questions whether God can be with him in his cell if God’s body is elsewhere.

I’ve counseled believers influenced by Dake’s teaching who expressed exactly these anxieties. One elderly woman, facing surgery, tearfully asked, “If God has a body in heaven, how can He be with me in the operating room?” This teaching robs believers of the comfort of God’s immediate presence in their darkest hours.

Undermines Confidence in Prayer

If God has a body that can only be in one place, how can He hear simultaneous prayers from millions of believers? This teaching creates a “customer service” model of prayer where believers worry about whether God is available or busy with others.

I’ve encountered believers who, influenced by this teaching, actually tried to time their prayers for when they thought God might be less busy. One young man told me he prayed late at night because he figured fewer people would be praying then, so God would be more likely to hear him. This is the practical fruit of teaching that God has a body—anxiety and uncertainty about prayer.

Distorts Worship

Worship is fundamentally about recognizing and responding to who God truly is. When God is reduced to a super-powered being with a body, worship becomes distorted. Instead of worshiping the transcendent, infinite, omnipresent Spirit, people worship what amounts to a cosmic superhero.

This affects both corporate and private worship:

• In corporate worship, the sense of God’s immediate presence diminishes. He’s watching from heaven rather than dwelling among His people.
• In private worship, people might try to visualize God’s body, creating mental idols that violate the second commandment.
• The awe and mystery appropriate to worshiping the infinite God gets replaced with a casual familiarity toward a bodied deity.

Weakens Evangelism

When Christians influenced by Dake try to share their faith, they often find themselves defending the indefensible. Try explaining to a thoughtful unbeliever that God has a body with hands and feet but is still omnipresent and infinite. The logical contradictions become immediately apparent.

I’ve seen evangelistic conversations derailed when believers, influenced by Dake, tried to explain that God has a body. Instead of presenting the awesome, transcendent Creator, they described what sounded like a Greek god or comic book character. Unbelievers rightly reject such an inadequate deity.

Produces Theological Confusion

Once believers accept that God has a body, they must perform mental gymnastics to reconcile this with clear biblical teaching about God’s nature. This produces a fragmented, inconsistent theology that can’t answer basic questions:

• How can God be infinite if He has a body with boundaries?
• How can God be omnipresent if He’s located in heaven?
• How can God be invisible if He has a visible form?
• Why did Jesus need to become incarnate if God already has a body?

Unable to answer these questions coherently, believers either live with cognitive dissonance or begin doubting the reliability of Scripture itself. Either outcome damages faith.

The Connection to Mormonism

One of the most troubling aspects of Dake’s teaching about God having a body is how closely it parallels Mormon doctrine. This similarity isn’t coincidental—both arise from the same hyperliteral reading of Scripture and the same failure to understand anthropomorphic language.

Mormon Teaching on God’s Body

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) explicitly teaches that God the Father has a physical body. Their Doctrine and Covenants 130:22 states:

Joseph Smith, Mormonism’s founder, taught: “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret… He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did.”

The Parallels with Dake

Compare Mormon teaching with Dake’s statements:

Mormon Teaching	Dake’s Teaching
God has a tangible body	“Spirit bodies are just as real and tangible with bodily parts as ours”
The Father has a body distinct from the Son’s body	“God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, each has His own personal spirit body”
God is an exalted man	Humans are “in the God class” of beings
Multiple gods exist	“Three separate and distinct persons” each with their own body

The parallels are striking and disturbing. Both Dake and Mormonism:

• Interpret anthropomorphic language literally
• Deny God’s essential spirituality
• Limit God to spatial location
• Blur the Creator-creature distinction
• Move toward polytheism (multiple gods)

Why This Matters

Evangelical Christians have long recognized Mormonism as a separate religion, not a Christian denomination, precisely because of teachings like God having a body. The physical deity of Mormonism is not the God of biblical Christianity. When Dake teaches essentially the same doctrine, he’s leading people toward the same theological destination—outside orthodox Christianity.

This isn’t guilt by association but recognition that the same errors lead to the same conclusions. If God has a body, as both Mormons and Dake teach, then:

• Biblical monotheism collapses into polytheism
• The Creator-creature distinction disappears
• Humans can potentially evolve into gods
• The incarnation loses its unique significance
• Scripture’s teaching about God’s nature must be radically reinterpreted

Reclaiming Biblical Truth About God’s Nature

Having examined the errors and dangers of Dake’s teaching, we must return to positive biblical truth about God’s nature. What does Scripture actually teach about God’s being? How should we understand the God we worship?

God Is Pure Spirit

The foundational biblical truth is that God is spirit, not physical. This doesn’t mean God is less real than physical things—it means He’s more real, the source of all reality. Consider how Scripture consistently presents this truth:

God Is the Creator of All Physical Reality: Genesis 1:1 declares God created “the heavens and the earth”—all physical reality. He cannot be part of what He created. He transcends the physical universe as its Creator, not existing within it as a physical being.

God Cannot Be Contained: Solomon recognized this at the temple’s dedication: “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold, heaven and the highest heaven cannot contain you; how much less this house that I have built!” (1 Kings 8:27). If God had a body, He could be contained. Solomon knows God transcends all spatial limitations.

God Is Not Accessible to Physical Senses: “No one has ever seen God” (John 1:18). “You heard the sound of words, but saw no form” (Deuteronomy 4:12). God cannot be perceived by physical senses because He’s not physical. We know Him through revelation, not observation.

God Is Infinite and Omnipresent

Because God is spirit, He can be truly infinite and omnipresent. He’s not very large—He’s beyond spatial categories entirely. He’s not everywhere in the sense of being spread out through space—He’s wholly present at every point while transcending space itself.

God Fills Heaven and Earth: “Do I not fill heaven and earth? declares the LORD” (Jeremiah 23:24). This isn’t partial presence in many places but complete presence everywhere. Every location in the universe enjoys God’s full presence.

God Is Near to All: “He is actually not far from each one of us, for ‘In him we live and move and have our being'” (Acts 17:27-28). We exist within God’s presence. We’re never outside Him or distant from Him because He encompasses all reality.

Nothing Can Separate Us from God: Paul triumphantly declares that nothing “in all creation will be able to separate us from the love of God” (Romans 8:39). If God had a body in heaven, distance could separate us. Because He’s omnipresent spirit, nothing can.

God Is Simple (Without Parts)

Divine simplicity means God has no parts—He’s not composed of various elements but is purely and simply God. This truth, though philosophically deep, has practical importance:

God Cannot Be Divided: A being with parts could theoretically lose parts or have them separated. But God, being simple, cannot be diminished, divided, or destroyed. He’s absolutely stable and secure.

God’s Attributes Are His Essence: God doesn’t have love—He is love. He doesn’t have holiness—He is holy. His attributes aren’t qualities added to His being but expressions of His simple, undivided essence.

God Needs Nothing: A complex being depends on its parts being properly arranged. But God, being simple, depends on nothing. He’s completely self-sufficient, needing nothing outside Himself.

God Is Transcendent Yet Immanent

God transcends creation—He’s wholly other, above and beyond all created reality. Yet He’s also immanent—intimately present and involved with His creation. This paradox is possible only because God is spirit:

Transcendence: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways” (Isaiah 55:8-9). God infinitely surpasses all created reality.

Immanence: “In him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). “He upholds the universe by the word of his power” (Hebrews 1:3). God is intimately present, sustaining every atom in existence.

A God with a body could be either transcendent (far away in heaven) or immanent (present on earth), but not both simultaneously. Only a spiritual God can be both wholly beyond us and fully present.

Practical Applications for Faith and Life

Understanding that God is spirit rather than having a body isn’t merely academic theology—it profoundly affects every aspect of Christian life. Let’s explore the practical implications of this truth.

For Prayer

Knowing God is omnipresent spirit transforms prayer:

Immediate Access: You don’t need to send prayers across space to a God with a body in heaven. He’s immediately present, closer than your breath. Prayer is speaking to Someone right there with you, not placing a long-distance call.

Simultaneous Attention: God can fully attend to millions of prayers simultaneously because He’s not limited by bodily existence. Your prayer never waits in a queue. You have God’s complete attention whenever you pray.

No Sacred Spaces Required: While we may find certain places helpful for prayer, no location is inherently closer to God. You can pray with equal effectiveness in a cathedral, a closet, or a car because God is equally present everywhere.

For Worship

Understanding God’s spiritual nature revolutionizes worship:

Worship in Spirit and Truth: Jesus said true worshipers worship “in spirit and truth” because “God is spirit” (John 4:24). Worship isn’t about physical location or bodily postures primarily, but about spiritual engagement with the spiritual God.

No Images Needed: The prohibition against images makes sense—God has no form to represent. Any image limits and distorts the unlimited God. We worship without visual aids, engaging God directly through faith.

Corporate Presence: When believers gather, God is fully present with the assembly, not watching from a distance. “Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them” (Matthew 18:20)—not “there I am watching” but “there am I among them.”

For Daily Life

God’s omnipresent spiritual nature affects everyday living:

Constant Companionship: You’re never alone. Whether in a crowd or isolation, at work or home, in joy or sorrow, God is fully present. Loneliness becomes impossible when you realize the infinite God is your constant companion.

No Hidden Sins: “Nothing is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account” (Hebrews 4:13). God doesn’t have physical eyes that might miss something—His spiritual sight penetrates everything. This promotes integrity and authenticity.

Available Help: “God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble” (Psalm 46:1). Not a distant help who might arrive too late, but a present help already there when trouble strikes. His help is immediate because His presence is immediate.

For Suffering

In suffering, God’s spiritual omnipresence provides unique comfort:

Present in Pain: When you hurt, God isn’t watching sympathetically from heaven—He’s right there in your pain. “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me” (Psalm 23:4).

No Abandoned Moments: In your darkest moments—in the hospital room, the funeral home, the unemployment line—God is fully present. A bodied God might be elsewhere, but the omnipresent Spirit is always with you.

Intimate Understanding: Because God is present in your suffering, He knows it intimately—not from observation but from presence. He doesn’t just see your tears; He’s present in them.

For Mission

God’s spiritual nature empowers Christian mission:

Universal Presence: Missionaries don’t take God to unreached places—He’s already there. “The earth is the LORD’s and the fullness thereof” (Psalm 24:1). We discover God at work in places we thought were godless.

Simultaneous Work: God can work simultaneously in countless locations because He’s not limited to one body in one place. Revival in Africa doesn’t mean less of God available for work in Asia. His presence is unlimited.

Confidence in Going: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations… And behold, I am with you always” (Matthew 28:19-20). This promise is possible only because Christ, being God, is omnipresent spirit. He’s with every missionary everywhere always.

Conclusion: The Glory of the Incorporeal God

As we conclude our examination of Dake’s heretical teaching about divine corporeality, we must not lose sight of the positive truth: the glory of the God who is spirit. Far from being a limitation, God’s incorporeal nature is part of His infinite perfection. Let’s conclude by celebrating the God Scripture actually reveals.

Greater Than We Can Imagine

A God with a body would be comprehensible—we could theoretically measure Him, diagram Him, fully understand Him. But the incorporeal God transcends our categories. Paul exclaims, “Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!” (Romans 11:33).

This incomprehensibility isn’t a defect but glory. A God small enough for us to fully understand wouldn’t be big enough to worship. The infinite, spiritual God always exceeds our grasp, inviting us into endless exploration of His inexhaustible being.

Nearer Than We Dare Hope

While God infinitely transcends us, He’s also intimately near. The psalmist marveled, “You hem me in, behind and before, and lay your hand upon me. Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high; I cannot attain it” (Psalm 139:5-6).

A bodied God could be either great (far away in heaven) or near (present on earth), but not both. The spiritual God is both infinitely beyond us and intimately with us. This is the wonder of biblical theism—the highest is also the nearest.

The Foundation for the Gospel

The gospel depends on God being spirit. Only because the Father is incorporeal could the Son’s incarnation be the unique miracle it is. “The Word became flesh” (John 1:14) is astounding precisely because God is not flesh. The incarnation isn’t one bodied being taking another body, but the infinite Spirit taking finite flesh.

Moreover, salvation involves the omnipresent Spirit indwelling believers. “Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?” (1 Corinthians 3:16). If the Spirit had a body, He couldn’t simultaneously indwell millions of believers. The gospel promise of God dwelling in us requires God to be incorporeal spirit.

The Hope of Eternal Life

Our eternal hope rests on the God who is spirit. Jesus promised, “In my Father’s house are many rooms… I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also” (John 14:2-3). This isn’t about physical proximity to a bodied God but spiritual communion with the infinite Spirit.

Heaven’s glory isn’t seeing God’s body but experiencing His immediate spiritual presence without the veil of sin. “Now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face” (1 Corinthians 13:12). This “face to face” isn’t physical sight but perfect spiritual communion with the God who is spirit.

A Call to True Worship

Understanding that God is spirit calls us to proper worship. We don’t worship a localized deity with a body, hoping He notices us from heaven. We worship the omnipresent Spirit who is fully present with us now. This should fill our worship with:

Awe: We approach not a superhuman with a body but the infinite, incomprehensible Spirit who spoke galaxies into existence.

Intimacy: We speak not to a distant God but to One closer than our thoughts, who knows us better than we know ourselves.

Confidence: We rely not on a limited God who might be too busy elsewhere but on the omnipresent Spirit who is always fully available.

Joy: We celebrate not a God confined to heaven but One who fills all things, making every place sacred by His presence.

Standing Against Error

Dake’s teaching that God has a body isn’t a minor error we can overlook. It strikes at the heart of who God is and affects every aspect of Christian faith and life. When we encounter this teaching—whether in the Dake Bible or elsewhere—we must lovingly but firmly correct it.

This isn’t about winning arguments but about preserving the truth about God that makes genuine faith, worship, and salvation possible. The God with a body that Dake proclaims is not the God of Scripture, and faith in that false god cannot save.

The Unchanging Truth

For two thousand years, the church has confessed that God is spirit. This isn’t because earlier Christians lacked Dake’s insight but because they correctly understood Scripture. When Jesus said “God is spirit,” He meant exactly that—God is spirit, not a being with a body.

This truth has comforted countless believers through the ages:

• The martyrs facing death knew God was immediately present in their suffering
• The missionaries in distant lands knew God was already there
• The sick and dying knew God was with them in their weakness
• The lonely and abandoned knew they were never truly alone

All this comfort depends on God being incorporeal spirit, omnipresent and infinite.

Final Words

Finis Dake’s teaching that God has a body represents a fundamental departure from biblical Christianity. It’s not a fresh insight or deeper understanding but a resurrection of ancient heresy that the church rightly rejected. By reducing God to a being with a body—however special that body might be—Dake diminishes the infinite Creator to the level of a creature.

The God of Scripture is infinitely greater than Dake’s bodied deity. He is pure spirit—unlimited by space or time, unrestricted by physical form, unconfined by bodily existence. He is wholly transcendent yet fully immanent, infinitely beyond us yet intimately with us. He needs no body because He is the source of all existence, the ground of all being, the Creator of all reality.

This is the God we worship—not a localized being with hands and feet, but the omnipresent Spirit in whom “we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). Not a God watching from heaven’s distance, but One who is “near to all who call on him” (Psalm 145:18). Not a deity limited by bodily existence, but the infinite God who “fills all in all” (Ephesians 1:23).

When we understand and embrace this biblical truth about God’s nature, our faith is anchored not in human imagination about divine bodies but in the revelation of the God who is spirit. This God—incorporeal, infinite, omnipresent—is worthy of our worship, trust, and devotion. He is not the god of Dake’s imagination but the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; the eternal Spirit who was and is and is to come.

To Him be glory forever and ever. Amen.

Footnotes

¹ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on Job 13:8, referring to “63 Facts About God.”

² Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on Job 13:8, “63 Facts About God,” facts 1-19.

³ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 56-57.

⁴ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on the Trinity.

⁵ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 56.

⁶ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on John 4:24.

⁷ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on anthropomorphism.

⁸ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on God’s body.

⁹ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on 2 Chronicles 2:6.

¹⁰ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on omnipresence.

¹¹ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 56-57.

¹² Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on God’s form.

¹³ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on the Trinity.

¹⁴ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on God being seen.

¹⁵ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), “89 Proofs of A Divine Trinity.”

¹⁶ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on God’s form and man’s nature.

¹⁷ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 57.

¹⁸ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 57.

¹⁹ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 56.

²⁰ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 56.

²¹ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 59.

²² Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 47.

²³ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 61.

²⁴ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 61.

²⁵ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 60.

²⁶ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 53.

²⁷ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 53.

²⁸ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 53, 58.

²⁹ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 448.

³⁰ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 449.

© 2025, DakeBible.org. All rights reserved.