Chapter 17: Solid Foundations for Bible Study

“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” – 2 Timothy 2:15

Introduction: Building on the Rock, Not on Sand

Jesus concluded His Sermon on the Mount with a sobering parable about two builders—one who built his house on rock and another who built on sand. When the storms came, only the house built on the solid foundation survived (Matthew 7:24-27). This parable applies directly to how we approach Bible study. The foundation we build upon determines whether our faith will stand when challenged by false teaching, cultural pressures, or personal trials.

Finis Dake built his theological house on the sand of hyperliteralism, isolated proof-texting, and rejection of historic Christian interpretation. The result was a theological disaster that has misled millions. His errors serve as a cautionary tale, demonstrating what happens when sincere Bible study lacks proper foundations. But pointing out errors is only half the task—we must also provide believers with the tools and principles necessary to build their understanding of Scripture on solid rock.

The tragedy of the Dake phenomenon is not just that one man fell into error, but that millions followed him because they lacked the foundations to recognize his mistakes. They were impressed by his apparent biblical knowledge, his comprehensive cross-references, and his confident assertions. They didn’t know enough about proper interpretation, church history, or systematic theology to identify the serious problems in his teaching. This chapter aims to equip readers with these essential foundations.

Part 1: Recommended Study Bibles – Choosing Reliable Guides

Study Bibles can be invaluable tools for understanding Scripture, but as the Dake Bible demonstrates, they can also be vehicles for serious error. Choosing a reliable study Bible is one of the most important decisions a Bible student can make. The notes, cross-references, and interpretive helps in a study Bible shape how readers understand God’s Word, often more than they realize. Therefore, we must choose carefully, looking for study Bibles that maintain theological orthodoxy while providing helpful insights into the text.

What Makes a Good Study Bible?

Before recommending specific study Bibles, let’s establish criteria for evaluation. A good study Bible should:

1. Affirm Historic Christian Orthodoxy: The notes should align with the core doctrines Christians have affirmed throughout history—the Trinity, the deity of Christ, salvation by grace through faith, the authority of Scripture, and the essential attributes of God. Any study Bible that deviates from these fundamentals should be rejected, regardless of what other insights it might offer.

2. Respect the Biblical Text: Good study notes illuminate the text rather than override it. They help readers understand what the biblical authors meant rather than imposing foreign meanings. When Dake made “God is spirit” mean “God has a spirit body,” he was overriding the text, not explaining it. Reliable study Bibles resist this temptation.

3. Acknowledge Interpretive Challenges: No study Bible should pretend that every passage has only one possible interpretation. Good study notes acknowledge when Christians have legitimately disagreed about a passage’s meaning, presenting major views fairly even while advocating for one perspective. This humility is notably absent from Dake’s notes, which present his novel interpretations as if they were the only possible readings.

4. Provide Historical and Cultural Context: Understanding the historical and cultural background of biblical passages is essential for proper interpretation. Good study Bibles provide information about ancient customs, geographical details, political situations, and cultural practices that illuminate the text’s meaning. This context helps prevent the kind of anachronistic readings that characterize Dake’s work.

5. Demonstrate Scholarly Competence: While study Bibles should be accessible to lay readers, they should also reflect sound scholarship. The contributors should have legitimate credentials in biblical studies, theology, or related fields. They should demonstrate familiarity with the original languages and awareness of current scholarly discussions, even if writing for a popular audience.

6. Maintain Appropriate Boundaries: Good study Bibles know their limitations. They don’t speculate beyond what the text warrants, don’t build elaborate theological systems on unclear passages, and don’t claim special revelation or unique insights unknown to previous generations of Christians. Dake’s claims to supernatural knowledge and his elaborate speculations about pre-Adamite races and angelic reproduction violate this principle.

Recommended Study Bibles

With these criteria in mind, here are several study Bibles that provide reliable guidance for understanding Scripture:

The ESV Study Bible (Crossway, 2008)

The NIV Study Bible (Zondervan, various editions)

The MacArthur Study Bible (Thomas Nelson, various editions)

The Reformation Study Bible (Reformation Trust, 2015)

The CSB Study Bible (Holman Bible Publishers, 2017)

The NET Bible (Biblical Studies Press, online and print)

The Literary Study Bible (Crossway, 2007)

Study Bibles for Specific Groups

For Pentecostal/Charismatic Believers:

One reason for the Dake Bible’s popularity among Pentecostals was the lack of study Bibles from their tradition. Thankfully, this has changed:

For New Believers:

For Youth and Young Adults:

Warning Signs: Study Bibles to Avoid

While recommending good resources, we must also warn against problematic ones. Beyond the Dake Bible, several study Bibles contain serious errors or promote unbiblical teachings:

Part 2: Basic Hermeneutical Principles – Learning to Interpret Correctly

Hermeneutics—the science and art of biblical interpretation—provides the foundation for all Bible study. Without sound hermeneutical principles, even sincere students can fall into serious error, as Dake’s example demonstrates. These principles aren’t arbitrary rules imposed on Scripture but observations about how language and communication work, refined through centuries of careful study.

Principle 1: Context Is King

The most fundamental principle of biblical interpretation is that context determines meaning. Every verse exists within multiple layers of context—immediate, literary, historical, and canonical—and understanding these contexts is essential for proper interpretation.

Immediate Context: What comes immediately before and after a passage? Dake routinely violated this principle by pulling verses out of context to support his predetermined conclusions. For example, when he used Genesis 1:26 (“Let us make man in our image”) to argue that God has a physical body, he ignored the immediate context of Genesis 1:27, which defines the image of God in terms of maleness and femaleness—relational and functional qualities, not physical form.

Literary Context: What type of literature contains this passage? Is it historical narrative, poetry, prophecy, parable, or epistle? Each genre has its own interpretive principles. When Dake interpreted poetic descriptions of God’s “eyes” and “hands” as literal anatomical features, he ignored the poetic genre of these passages. Similarly, when he forced literal interpretations on apocalyptic visions in Revelation, he missed the symbolic nature of apocalyptic literature.

Historical Context: What was happening when this was written? Who was the author? Who was the original audience? What situations were they facing? Understanding the historical context prevents us from imposing modern meanings on ancient texts. Dake’s racial interpretations, for instance, read 20th-century American segregation back into biblical texts that had nothing to do with race as he understood it.

Canonical Context: How does this passage fit within the whole of Scripture? The Bible is a unified revelation, and later passages often clarify earlier ones. When Dake interpreted Old Testament anthropomorphisms literally, he failed to consider New Testament clarifications about God’s spiritual nature (John 4:24) and invisibility (Colossians 1:15).

Principle 2: Scripture Interprets Scripture

The Reformation principle of Scriptura Scripturae interpres (Scripture interprets Scripture) recognizes that the Bible is its own best interpreter. Clear passages help us understand unclear ones. Didactic (teaching) passages clarify narrative passages. New Testament revelation completes Old Testament revelation.

Dake consistently violated this principle by allowing unclear or isolated passages to override clear biblical teaching. When he built his doctrine of God having a physical body on anthropomorphic passages, he ignored clear statements like:

• “God is spirit” (John 4:24)
• “The invisible God” (Colossians 1:15)
• “Whom no man has seen or can see” (1 Timothy 6:16)
• “Heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain you” (1 Kings 8:27)

These clear didactic statements about God’s nature should interpret the metaphorical anthropomorphic language, not vice versa.

The Analogy of Faith: A corollary to this principle is the “analogy of faith”—the teaching that Scripture doesn’t contradict itself. Any interpretation that creates a contradiction with clear biblical teaching should be reconsidered. Dake’s interpretation of the Trinity as three separate Gods contradicts numerous clear affirmations of monotheism throughout Scripture. Rather than reconsider his interpretation, Dake redefined monotheism itself—a clear violation of the analogy of faith.

Principle 3: Original Meaning Priority

The goal of interpretation is to understand what the original author intended to communicate to the original audience. This doesn’t mean the text has no contemporary application, but application must flow from accurate interpretation of original meaning.

Dake routinely imposed modern meanings on ancient texts. His racial interpretations are the clearest example—he read American segregation into texts written millennia before modern racial categories existed. But this problem appears throughout his work. When he interpreted biblical prophecies as referring to modern technology or political entities, he was imposing meanings the original authors couldn’t have intended.

Avoiding Anachronism: Anachronism—reading later ideas back into earlier texts—is a constant danger in interpretation. We must resist the temptation to find modern concepts in ancient texts. The biblical authors wrote in their historical context to address their contemporary situations. While Scripture has timeless truth and contemporary application, we must first understand what it meant then before we can properly apply it now.

Principle 4: Progressive Revelation

God revealed truth progressively throughout biblical history. Later revelation doesn’t contradict earlier revelation but does clarify, expand, and complete it. The full revelation in Christ and the New Testament helps us properly understand the Old Testament.

Dake’s failure to properly apply progressive revelation led to numerous errors:

• He applied Old Testament ceremonial laws to New Testament believers, ignoring their fulfillment in Christ
• He interpreted Old Testament prophecies without considering their New Testament fulfillment
• He built doctrines on Old Testament passages without considering New Testament clarification
• He treated all parts of Scripture as equally clear, ignoring the greater light of New Testament revelation

For example, when dealing with Old Testament dietary laws or ceremonial regulations, Dake often failed to recognize how Christ’s work fulfilled and superseded these requirements (Mark 7:19; Acts 10:15; Hebrews 10:1-18). This led to confused and sometimes legalistic applications that ignored the freedom we have in Christ.

Principle 5: Grammatical-Historical Method

The grammatical-historical method interprets Scripture by carefully analyzing the grammar of the text and the historical situation in which it was written. This method takes seriously both the human and divine authorship of Scripture, recognizing that God communicated through human authors using normal language in specific historical contexts.

Grammatical Analysis: This involves studying the actual words, their meanings, and their grammatical relationships. It requires attention to:

• Word meanings in their original languages
• Grammatical constructions and their significance
• Figures of speech and literary devices
• The flow of thought in passages

Dake’s “concordance theology”—looking up every occurrence of a word and assuming it means the same thing everywhere—violated grammatical analysis. Words have different meanings in different contexts. The word “day” in Genesis 1, for instance, has at least three different meanings within that single chapter.

Historical Analysis: This involves understanding the historical and cultural background of passages. It requires knowledge of:

• Ancient Near Eastern customs and culture
• Greco-Roman society and thought
• Jewish religious and social practices
• Geographical and political contexts

Without this historical understanding, we’re likely to misinterpret passages by imposing our cultural assumptions on them. Dake’s interpretation of biblical passages about slavery, for instance, confused ancient Near Eastern debt servitude with American chattel slavery, leading to serious misapplications.

Principle 6: Literary Awareness

The Bible contains various literary genres, each with its own conventions and interpretive principles. Recognizing and respecting these genres is essential for proper interpretation. Dake’s hyperliteralism largely ignored genre distinctions, leading to massive misinterpretation.

Major Biblical Genres:

Part 3: Understanding Literary Devices in Scripture

One of Dake’s most fundamental errors was his failure to recognize and properly interpret the literary devices used throughout Scripture. The Bible, while being God’s Word, is also a literary masterpiece that employs the full range of human language—including metaphor, simile, hyperbole, symbolism, and many other devices. Understanding these devices is essential for proper interpretation.

Metaphor and Simile

Metaphors and similes compare one thing to another to communicate truth more vividly. A metaphor states that one thing is another (“God is our fortress”), while a simile says one thing is like another (“The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed”). The Bible is full of such comparisons, and taking them literally leads to absurdity.

Consider some biblical metaphors that Dake’s hyperliteral method would struggle with:

• “I am the door” (John 10:9) – Jesus is not literally made of wood with hinges
• “You are the salt of the earth” (Matthew 5:13) – Believers are not literally sodium chloride
• “The Lord is my shepherd” (Psalm 23:1) – God doesn’t literally tend sheep
• “Our God is a consuming fire” (Hebrews 12:29) – God is not literally combustion

Dake inconsistently recognized some metaphors while literalizing others. He didn’t claim God was literally a fire, but he did insist God literally has hands, eyes, and other body parts based on metaphorical language. This inconsistency reveals the arbitrary nature of his hyperliteralism.

Anthropomorphism and Anthropopathism

Anthropomorphism attributes human characteristics to God to help us understand divine actions. Anthropopathism attributes human emotions to God to help us understand divine responses. These devices accommodate infinite truth to finite understanding.

Common Anthropomorphisms:

• God’s “eyes” see (representing omniscience)
• God’s “hands” work (representing omnipotence)
• God’s “arms” save (representing divine strength)
• God’s “face” shines (representing divine favor)

The church has always understood these as metaphorical descriptions. Even in the early centuries, church fathers like Origen and Augustine warned against taking such language literally. They recognized that an infinite, spiritual God cannot have physical body parts. Dake’s insistence on literalizing these descriptions represents a departure from two thousand years of Christian interpretation.

Common Anthropopathisms:

• God “repents” or “relents” (describing change in divine action from human perspective)
• God becomes “angry” (describing divine response to sin)
• God is “grieved” (describing divine response to human rebellion)
• God is “jealous” (describing divine desire for exclusive worship)

These descriptions help us understand God’s responses in terms we can grasp, but they don’t mean God experiences emotions exactly as humans do. God doesn’t have mood swings or emotional reactions He didn’t anticipate. Dake’s interpretation that God literally changes His mind and learns new information misses the accommodative nature of this language.

Hyperbole

Hyperbole uses deliberate exaggeration to make a point. Jesus frequently used hyperbole in His teaching, and recognizing it is essential for proper interpretation. Consider these examples:

• “If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out” (Matthew 5:29) – Not literal self-mutilation but radical dealing with sin
• “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle” (Matthew 19:24) – Emphasizing impossibility apart from God
• “Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?” (Matthew 7:3) – Not literal lumber in eyes but degrees of fault
• “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother” (Luke 14:26) – Not literal hatred but comparative devotion

The prophets also used hyperbole extensively:

• “The mountains melt like wax before the Lord” (Psalm 97:5) – Describing God’s awesome power
• “All the trees of the field will clap their hands” (Isaiah 55:12) – Expressing creation’s joy
• “The stars will fall from heaven” (Matthew 24:29) – Describing cosmic upheaval using apocalyptic language

Dake’s failure to recognize hyperbole led him to expect literal fulfillment of clearly hyperbolic statements, creating elaborate prophetic schemes based on misread figures of speech.

Symbolism

The Bible uses symbols—objects, numbers, colors, or actions that represent something beyond themselves. Understanding biblical symbolism prevents the kind of wooden literalism that characterized Dake’s interpretation.

Numeric Symbolism:

• Seven represents completeness or perfection (seven days of creation, seven churches in Revelation)
• Twelve represents God’s people (twelve tribes, twelve apostles)
• Forty represents testing or judgment (forty days of rain, forty years in wilderness, forty days of temptation)
• Thousand often represents a large, complete number rather than exactly 1,000

When Revelation speaks of 144,000 sealed servants (12 x 12 x 1,000), it’s using symbolic numbers to represent the complete people of God, not giving a literal census figure. Dake’s attempts to identify exactly 144,000 literal Jewish evangelists miss the symbolic nature of the number.

Color Symbolism:

• White represents purity or victory
• Red represents blood, sacrifice, or judgment
• Purple represents royalty
• Black represents judgment or mourning

When Revelation describes horses of different colors, it’s using symbolic imagery to convey spiritual truths, not providing a literal description of multicolored horses that will appear in the end times.

Phenomenological Language

The Bible often describes things as they appear from human perspective rather than giving scientific descriptions. This “phenomenological language” speaks of the sun “rising” and “setting,” the “four corners of the earth,” and the “windows of heaven.” This isn’t scientific error but normal observational language—the same language we still use today.

Dake’s hyperliteralism sometimes led him to insist on literal interpretations of phenomenological language, creating unnecessary conflicts between the Bible and observable reality. The Bible’s purpose is to reveal spiritual truth, not to provide scientific textbooks. When it uses observational language, it’s communicating in terms the original audience would understand.

Typology

Types are Old Testament persons, events, or institutions that prefigure New Testament realities. The New Testament identifies many types:

• Adam is a type of Christ (Romans 5:14)
• The Passover lamb is a type of Christ (1 Corinthians 5:7)
• The wilderness journey is a type of Christian experience (1 Corinthians 10:1-11)
• The tabernacle/temple is a type of Christ and the church (John 2:19-21; 1 Corinthians 3:16)

Understanding typology helps us see the unity of Scripture and God’s redemptive plan. However, we must be careful not to find types everywhere or to press typological details beyond what Scripture warrants. Dake often engaged in fanciful typological speculation, finding “types” that Scripture never identifies and building doctrine on typological details rather than clear teaching.

Part 4: The Role of Church History and Creeds

One of Dake’s most serious errors was his rejection of historical Christian interpretation in favor of his supposed “plain reading” of Scripture. He boasted about not consulting commentaries or theological works, relying instead on his own interpretation. This prideful independence led him into heresies that the church identified and rejected centuries ago.

Why Church History Matters

Some Christians, particularly in certain Protestant traditions, are suspicious of church history and tradition. They fear that consulting historical sources somehow undermines the authority of Scripture or contradicts the principle of sola Scriptura. This is a serious misunderstanding. Consulting church history doesn’t mean tradition equals Scripture in authority; it means we recognize that the Holy Spirit has been active in the church for two thousand years, and we can learn from believers who have gone before us.

Benefits of Historical Awareness:

1. Protection from Old Heresies: Ecclesiastes reminds us there’s nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9). Most “new revelations” are actually old heresies repackaged. Dake’s teaching that God has a body was addressed and rejected by the early church as the heresy of anthropomorphism. His functional tritheism echoes ancient polytheistic corruptions of Christian doctrine. If Dake had studied church history, he would have recognized his errors as recycled heresies.

2. Interpretive Wisdom: Throughout history, godly and learned Christians have studied Scripture carefully. Their insights can illuminate difficult passages and help us avoid interpretive pitfalls. While we must test everything by Scripture, ignoring two millennia of Christian interpretation is both arrogant and foolish. As G.K. Chesterton said, “Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors.”

3. Theological Development: Understanding how doctrine developed helps us appreciate the careful work of defining biblical truth. The doctrine of the Trinity, for instance, wasn’t invented by the church but carefully articulated through centuries of biblical study and debate. The resulting creeds and definitions help us express biblical truth accurately and avoid subtle errors.

4. Unity with the Universal Church: When we ignore church history, we cut ourselves off from the universal church—the body of believers throughout time and space. We become provincial and narrow, vulnerable to the peculiar blindnesses of our own time and culture. Church history connects us with believers from different centuries and cultures, broadening our perspective and deepening our understanding.

The Value of Creeds and Confessions

Creeds and confessions are carefully formulated summaries of biblical teaching, developed by the church to define essential truths and guard against error. While they’re not inspired like Scripture, they provide invaluable guides for understanding biblical doctrine.

The Ecumenical Creeds:

These creeds represent the consensual understanding of Scripture by the universal church. When someone’s interpretation contradicts these fundamental affirmations, it’s a strong indication they’re misreading Scripture. Dake’s rejection of these historic formulations led him into precisely the errors they were designed to prevent.

Confessional Standards

Beyond the ecumenical creeds, various Christian traditions have developed confessions that elaborate biblical doctrine more fully:

• The Augsburg Confession (Lutheran, 1530) – Defines justification by faith and other Reformation distinctives
• The Westminster Confession of Faith (Presbyterian/Reformed, 1646) – Comprehensive statement of Reformed theology
• The London Baptist Confession (Baptist, 1689) – Baptist adaptation of Westminster
• The Thirty-Nine Articles (Anglican, 1563) – Anglican doctrinal standards
• The Methodist Articles of Religion (Methodist, 1784) – Adapted from Anglican articles

Even Pentecostal and Charismatic traditions, sometimes suspicious of formal creeds, have doctrinal statements:

• The Assemblies of God Fundamental Truths – Sixteen fundamental doctrines
• The International Church of the Foursquare Gospel Declaration of Faith – Core Pentecostal beliefs
• The Church of God (Cleveland) Declaration of Faith – Pentecostal doctrinal standards

These confessions help believers understand what their traditions believe Scripture teaches. While not infallible, they represent careful theological work by godly scholars and should be taken seriously. When someone like Dake contradicts not just one but virtually all Christian confessions, it’s a clear sign of serious error.

How to Use Historical Resources Wisely

While affirming the value of church history and creeds, we must use them properly:

1. Scripture Remains Supreme: Historical sources help us understand Scripture but never override it. If a creed or confession clearly contradicts Scripture, Scripture wins. However, we should be very careful before concluding that centuries of Christian interpretation are wrong and we alone are right.

2. Distinguish Essential from Secondary: The ecumenical creeds focus on essential doctrines—Trinity, Incarnation, Resurrection. Denominational confessions include secondary issues where Christians legitimately disagree. We should be firmest on essentials, charitable on secondaries.

3. Learn from Multiple Traditions: Don’t just read your own tradition’s history. Learn from Catholics, Orthodox, and various Protestant traditions. Each has insights to offer, and studying broadly prevents narrow provincialism.

4. Recognize Historical Development: Doctrine develops over time as the church faces new challenges and articulates truth more precisely. The word “Trinity” isn’t in the Bible, but it accurately describes biblical teaching. Don’t reject something simply because it uses non-biblical terminology if it expresses biblical truth.

5. Apply Historical Insights Carefully: Historical sources address their own contexts. We must understand what issues they were addressing before applying their insights to our situations. Simple proof-texting from church fathers is as dangerous as proof-texting from Scripture.

Part 5: Balancing Academic Study with Devotional Reading

One criticism sometimes leveled against theological education is that it kills spiritual vitality—that academic study of Scripture destroys devotional warmth. This is a false dichotomy. Proper Bible study enhances rather than diminishes spiritual devotion. The problem isn’t academic study but academic study divorced from spiritual application. Similarly, devotional reading without sound interpretation can lead to the kind of errors Dake exemplified.

The Need for Both Head and Heart

Scripture commands us to love God with all our heart, soul, mind, and strength (Mark 12:30). Notice that mind is included—intellectual engagement with truth is part of loving God. Paul prays that believers’ love would abound “more and more in knowledge and depth of insight” (Philippians 1:9). Knowledge without love is worthless (1 Corinthians 13:2), but love without knowledge is dangerous.

Dake claimed his knowledge came supernaturally, bypassing the need for study. This claim to spiritual knowledge without intellectual effort appeals to those who want shortcuts to biblical understanding. But God normally works through means—including the hard work of study. Paul told Timothy to “study to show yourself approved” (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV) and to “give attention to reading” (1 Timothy 4:13).

Benefits of Academic Study:

• Provides tools for accurate interpretation
• Reveals historical and cultural background
• Exposes us to different perspectives
• Develops critical thinking skills
• Deepens understanding of biblical languages
• Connects us with centuries of Christian scholarship

Benefits of Devotional Reading:

• Focuses on personal application
• Nurtures spiritual intimacy with God
• Provides comfort and encouragement
• Develops meditation and contemplation
• Builds faith and trust
• Transforms character

We need both approaches. Academic study without devotion produces dead orthodoxy. Devotional reading without sound interpretation produces unstable emotionalism or doctrinal error.

Practical Strategies for Balance

1. Begin with Prayer: Whether doing academic study or devotional reading, begin by asking the Holy Spirit for illumination. Acknowledge your dependence on God for understanding. This keeps academic study spiritual and devotional reading grounded.

2. Study with Application in Mind: When doing serious Bible study, always ask “So what?” How does this truth affect my life? What should I do differently? Academic insights should lead to life transformation.

3. Read Devotionally with Discernment: During devotional reading, don’t turn off your mind. If something seems questionable, note it for further study. Devotion doesn’t mean gullibility.

4. Use Different Approaches for Different Purposes: Sometimes you need to do detailed word studies; other times you need to read large portions for overall flow. Sometimes you need to analyze grammar; other times you need to meditate on a single verse. Each approach has its place.

5. Integrate Study and Worship: Let your study lead to worship. When you discover something wonderful about God through study, stop and praise Him. When you understand a passage more deeply, thank God for His Word. Academic study should increase, not decrease, your awe of God.

Avoiding Common Pitfalls

The Pitfall of Intellectualism: Some become so enamored with academic study that they lose sight of Scripture’s transformative purpose. They can parse Greek verbs but their hearts remain cold. They debate theology but don’t practice love. This was the Pharisees’ error—extensive biblical knowledge without spiritual transformation.

Guard against intellectualism by:

• Maintaining regular devotional practices
• Staying involved in practical ministry
• Cultivating humility about your knowledge
• Prioritizing relationship with God over information about God
• Remembering that knowledge puffs up but love builds up (1 Corinthians 8:1)

The Pitfall of Anti-Intellectualism: Others react against intellectualism by rejecting serious study altogether. They pride themselves on “simple faith” and view theological education with suspicion. This leaves them vulnerable to every wind of doctrine and unable to defend their faith. This was the error that allowed Dake’s teachings to spread—people lacked the theological foundation to recognize his errors.

Guard against anti-intellectualism by:

• Recognizing that God gave you a mind to use
• Understanding that faith and reason work together
• Appreciating the hard work of scholars and theologians
• Developing critical thinking skills
• Growing in your ability to teach and defend truth

Part 6: Questions to Ask of Any Teacher

Given Dake’s influence and the damage his teachings have caused, it’s crucial that believers develop discernment about the teachers and resources they follow. The Bible commands us to “test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21) and to “test the spirits to see whether they are from God” (1 John 4:1). Here are essential questions to ask of any teacher or teaching resource:

1. Questions About Their Doctrine of God

Since the doctrine of God is foundational to everything else, start here:

• Do they affirm the Trinity as one God in three persons? Any deviation from this—whether toward tritheism (three Gods) or modalism (one person in three modes)—is heretical.
• Do they teach that God is spirit? Anyone claiming God has a physical body contradicts Jesus’s clear statement in John 4:24.
• Do they affirm God’s infinity and omnipresence? A God who is localized or limited cannot be the God of Scripture.
• Do they maintain God’s immutability? The claim that God changes His mind, learns, or grows contradicts numerous Scriptures affirming God’s unchanging nature.
• Do they uphold God’s omniscience? A God who doesn’t know the future cannot make and keep promises.

2. Questions About Their View of Scripture

How teachers handle Scripture reveals much about their reliability:

• Do they affirm Scripture’s authority and sufficiency? Beware of those who claim special revelation beyond Scripture or equal to Scripture.
• Do they interpret Scripture in context? Watch for proof-texting—stringing together verses without regard for context.
• Do they recognize different literary genres? Teachers who interpret everything literally, ignoring poetry, metaphor, and apocalyptic symbolism, will inevitably misinterpret Scripture.
• Do they let Scripture interpret Scripture? Be wary of those who build major doctrines on unclear or isolated passages while ignoring clear biblical teaching.
• Do they acknowledge when Christians have historically disagreed? Teachers who present their novel interpretations as the only possible reading show dangerous pride.

3. Questions About Their Character and Accountability

Biblical qualifications for teachers emphasize character as much as knowledge:

• What is their moral reputation? While everyone sins and can be restored, patterns of moral failure (like Dake’s criminal conviction) raise serious questions about fitness to teach.
• Are they accountable to others? Beware of “lone ranger” teachers who answer to no one and reject all correction.
• Do they demonstrate humility? Teachers who claim unique insights unknown to all previous Christians should be viewed with extreme skepticism.
• How do they handle criticism? Do they respond graciously to correction, or do they attack critics and refuse to acknowledge errors?
• What fruit does their teaching produce? Jesus said we would know false teachers by their fruits (Matthew 7:16). Does their teaching produce godliness or division, love or hatred, unity or segregation?

4. Questions About Their Relationship to Historic Christianity

Christianity is a historical faith with two thousand years of development:

• Do they respect church history and tradition? While tradition isn’t equal to Scripture, those who completely reject historical Christianity often fall into old heresies.
• Do they affirm the ecumenical creeds? Rejection of the Apostles’, Nicene, or Athanasian Creeds is a major red flag.
• Are they connected to a broader Christian community? Beware of teachers who operate independently without ecclesiastical connection or oversight.
• Do they acknowledge learning from others? Teachers who claim to have learned everything directly from God or the Bible alone, without human teachers, contradict the New Testament pattern of discipleship and teaching.

5. Questions About Their Interpretive Method

Understanding how teachers interpret Scripture helps evaluate their reliability:

• Is their interpretation consistent? Do they apply the same interpretive principles throughout, or do they change methods to support predetermined conclusions?
• Do they engage with biblical scholarship? While not all teachers need to be scholars, complete dismissal of scholarship often indicates prideful independence.
• Can they read the original languages? While not essential for all teachers, those making claims about what the “Greek really says” should demonstrate actual knowledge of Greek.
• Do they acknowledge their limitations? Good teachers admit when they don’t know something rather than speculating beyond their knowledge.
• Do they encourage personal Bible study? Reliable teachers want you to verify their teaching from Scripture, not just accept their word.

6. Specific Warning Signs

Based on Dake’s errors and similar false teachers, watch for these specific warning signs:

7. Positive Qualities to Seek

While identifying what to avoid is important, we should also know what to look for in reliable teachers:

Practical Application: Building Your Bible Study Foundation

Having examined principles and warnings, let’s conclude with practical steps for building a solid foundation for Bible study that will protect you from errors like Dake’s while helping you grow in biblical understanding.

Step 1: Establish Your Core Resources

Start by assembling a basic library of reliable resources:

Essential Resources:

• A reliable translation of the Bible (ESV, NIV, NASB, CSB, or NKJV)
• A good study Bible (from those recommended earlier)
• A one-volume Bible commentary (like the New Bible Commentary or the ESV Study Bible notes)
• A Bible dictionary (Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary or New Bible Dictionary)
• A basic systematic theology (Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology or Millard Erickson’s Christian Theology)

Additional Helpful Resources:

• A Bible atlas for geographical context
• A book on hermeneutics (How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by Fee and Stuart)
• Commentaries on books you’re studying
• A church history text (Bruce Shelley’s Church History in Plain Language)
• Biographies of faithful Christians

Step 2: Develop a Study Method

Establish a consistent method for Bible study. Here’s a simple but effective approach:

Step 3: Connect with a Sound Church

Bible study shouldn’t be done in isolation. Find a church that:

• Preaches the Bible faithfully
• Affirms essential Christian doctrine
• Practices church discipline
• Encourages questions and discussion
• Provides opportunities for biblical education
• Demonstrates love for God and others
• Engages in evangelism and missions

Within that church, get involved in:

• Regular worship services
• Small group Bible studies
• Sunday school or adult education classes
• Service and ministry opportunities
• Accountability relationships

Step 4: Pursue Ongoing Education

Never stop learning. Continue growing through:

Formal Education Options:

• Church-based Bible institutes
• Online courses from reputable seminaries
• Certificate programs in biblical studies
• Degree programs if called to vocational ministry

Informal Learning Opportunities:

• Bible conferences and seminars
• Podcast lectures from trusted teachers
• Systematic reading plans
• Mentoring relationships
• Teaching others (which deepens your own understanding)

Step 5: Maintain Spiritual Vitality

Remember that Bible study is ultimately about knowing God, not just knowing about God:

• Begin every study session with prayer
• Read Scripture devotionally as well as academically
• Meditate on what you learn
• Apply truth to your life immediately
• Share what you’re learning with others
• Use your knowledge to serve the church
• Let study lead to worship

Conclusion: The Path Forward

The devastation wrought by Finis Dake’s theological errors serves as a sobering reminder of what happens when Bible study lacks proper foundations. His hyperliteral hermeneutic, rejection of church history, speculation beyond Scripture, and prideful independence led him into heresies that have damaged countless lives and continues to mislead many today. But pointing out these errors is only valuable if it leads us to better practices.

This chapter has provided practical tools and principles for establishing solid foundations in Bible study. We’ve examined reliable study Bibles that can replace the Dake Bible. We’ve outlined basic hermeneutical principles that prevent the kind of interpretive disasters that characterized Dake’s work. We’ve explored the literary nature of Scripture and the importance of recognizing different genres and literary devices. We’ve seen how church history and creeds provide guardrails against ancient heresies repackaged as new revelations. We’ve discussed balancing academic study with devotional reading. And we’ve provided specific questions to evaluate any teacher or resource.

But having knowledge of these principles isn’t enough—they must be applied. Too many Christians know about proper Bible study methods but don’t practice them. They own good study resources but don’t use them. They belong to sound churches but don’t engage deeply. The result is continued vulnerability to false teaching.

The apostle Paul’s words to Timothy provide our closing exhortation: “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15 ESV). The phrase “rightly handling” literally means “cutting straight”—like a craftsman making a precise cut or a farmer plowing a straight furrow. It requires skill developed through practice, knowledge gained through study, and wisdom given by the Spirit.

Dake failed to rightly handle God’s Word, cutting crooked lines through Scripture that led many astray. But his failure need not be ours. With proper foundations, sound methods, reliable resources, and the Holy Spirit’s guidance, we can study Scripture in ways that honor God, build up the church, and transform our lives. We can avoid the quicksand of hyperliteralism and speculation while building on the solid rock of sound interpretation.

The church desperately needs believers who combine passionate faith with sound doctrine, spiritual fervor with intellectual rigor, devotional warmth with theological precision. The errors of teachers like Dake shouldn’t drive us away from Bible study but toward better Bible study. They shouldn’t make us suspicious of all teachers but help us recognize and support faithful ones.

As we move forward from examining Dake’s errors to establishing better foundations, let’s commit ourselves to being students of the Word who need not be ashamed. Let’s approach Scripture with humility, recognizing our need for the Spirit’s illumination and the church’s wisdom. Let’s study with diligence, using the tools and methods that lead to accurate interpretation. Let’s apply with courage, allowing God’s Word to transform every area of our lives.

The solid foundations for Bible study outlined in this chapter aren’t just academic exercises—they’re spiritual disciplines that protect us from error while leading us into truth. They’re not burdensome requirements but liberating principles that free us from confusion and speculation. They’re not barriers to knowing God but pathways to deeper intimacy with Him through His Word.

May God raise up a generation of Bible students who learn from Dake’s mistakes rather than repeating them. May the church be strengthened through sound teaching rather than weakened by speculation. And may the Word of God, rightly understood and faithfully applied, continue to transform lives until Christ returns.

The foundation has been laid. The tools have been provided. The path has been marked. Now the responsibility is ours to build wisely, study diligently, and walk faithfully in the truth of God’s Word.

© 2025, DakeBible.org. All rights reserved.