A Theological Analysis of Finis Dake’s Hyper-Literal Interpretation

Part I: Dake’s Fundamental Approach to Scripture

The Hyper-Literal Principle

Dake’s entire theological system rests on what he calls his “fundamental principle of Bible interpretation.” In the preface to Revelation Expounded, Dake states:

“The author relies on the fundamental principle of Bible interpretation—that of taking the Bible literally wherein it is at all possible. When the language of a passage cannot possibly be literal, then it is clear from the passage itself, as well as from other Scriptures, that it is figurative. It must be remembered, however, that all figurative language conveys literal truth.” (Revelation Expounded, Preface)

While taking Scripture literally when appropriate is a sound hermeneutical principle, Dake pushes this to an extreme that ignores clear biblical genres, literary devices, and theological context. He proudly declares:

“He made a covenant with God that he would never teach anything which could not be proven by at least two or three plain Scriptures.” (Revelation Expounded, Preface)

However, as we will demonstrate, Dake’s application of this principle leads him to teachings that contradict orthodox Christian doctrine established for two millennia.

Part II: The Most Serious Error – Tritheism Instead of Trinity

Redefining the Godhead

Perhaps the most egregious example of Dake’s hyper-literal interpretation is his complete redefinition of the Trinity. Orthodox Christianity has always taught that God is one Being in three Persons. However, Dake explicitly denies this, teaching instead that the Godhead consists of three completely separate Beings. From his God’s Plan for Man, page 51, Dake writes:

Notice how Dake redefines “one” to mean “made up of others” – essentially arguing that when Scripture says God is “one,” it doesn’t mean one in number but rather a unity of separate beings. This is a fundamental departure from biblical monotheism and represents polytheism disguised as Christianity.

God as Three Separate Physical Beings

Dake’s hyper-literalism leads him to teach that each member of the Trinity has a separate physical body. He writes:

“INCARNATION means a person assuming a body which he takes as his very own, dwelling inside that body and not existing in any other place outside the body while he has taken to dwell in. (God’s Plan for Man, p. 51)

FATHER AND SON. A father is one who has begotten or brought into existence a child. A son is the one who is begotten by a father. It requires two separate people to be a father and a son. They could in no sense be one person, but could be one in unity, as any two persons can be.

TRINITY. This means the union of three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in one (unified) Godhead or divinity, so that all three persons are one in unity and eternal substance, but three separate and distinct persons as to individuality.” (God’s Plan for Man, p. 51)

By insisting that the Father and Son must be “two separate people” because that’s what these terms mean in human relationships, Dake completely misses the analogical nature of theological language. This leads him to teach that:

Part III: The Gap Theory and Pre-Adamite Race

Lucifer’s Pre-Adamite Kingdom

Dake’s hyper-literal approach to Genesis 1:1-2 leads him to develop an elaborate Gap Theory involving a pre-Adamite race ruled by Lucifer. From his book Ages and Dispensations, Dake teaches:

“From several passages in the Old and New Testaments, we learn that, before Adam was created, there was a social order on Earth which was destroyed before the events of Genesis 1:3 (Isa. 14:12-14; 45:18; Jer. 4:23-26; Ezek. 28:11-17; 2 Pet. 3:6).

We read in Genesis 1:1 that God created the heavens and the Earth. However, by Genesis 1:2, the Earth is ‘without form’ and ‘desolate.’ The Earth was made desolate and empty due to Lucifer’s rebellion.” (Ages and Dispensations, Chapter III)

Dake goes on to describe in detail:

“That Lucifer had control of this pre-Adamite kingdom and ruled this social order is clear from such verses as Isaiah 14:12-14… In these verses we see that Lucifer had a throne (which implies dominion and rulership), and that his rulership extended over territory which existed, not in heaven (since his desire was to ‘ascend into heaven’) but on the Earth.” (Ages and Dispensations, Chapter III)

The Pre-Adamite Human Race

Most remarkably, Dake teaches that there was an entire race of human beings before Adam:

“The creation of the pre-Adamite world included the first inhabitants of the Earth, called ‘nations’ over whom Lucifer ruled (Isa. 14:12-14), ‘man’ who built cities (Jer. 4:23-26), and ‘the world (Greek, kosmos, social system) that then was’ (2 Pet. 3:5-8). The pre-Adamites were Earthly creatures as proved by the fact that they were drowned in the pre-Adamite flood (Gen. 1:2; Jer. 4:23-26; 2 Pet. 3:5-8; Ps. 104:5-9).” (Ages and Dispensations, Chapter II)

This interpretation completely misreads the biblical texts cited. For example, Jeremiah 4:23-26 is clearly describing the effects of God’s judgment on Judah using creation-reversal imagery, not describing a pre-Adamite world. Peter in 2 Peter 3:5-8 is referring to Noah’s flood, not some supposed pre-Adamite catastrophe.

Part IV: Mishandling Figurative Language

The Problem of Genre and Literary Context

Dake’s insistence on literal interpretation leads him to mishandle obvious figurative language throughout Scripture. He approaches prophetic and apocalyptic literature, poetry, and parables with the same wooden literalism he applies to historical narrative. From Revelation Expounded, he criticizes those who see symbolism where he sees literalism:

“This method of interpretation of Revelation really should be called ‘How Not to Interpret Prophecy’ for it does away with the literal meaning of God’s own revelation and substitutes man’s theories instead. If these ideas are really what God wanted revealed, could not God have made this clear when He gave the Revelation instead of giving us what He did reveal?” (Revelation Expounded, Chapter 1)

Yet ironically, Dake himself is forced to acknowledge that some language in Revelation is symbolic – he simply applies his literalism inconsistently, deciding arbitrarily what should be taken literally and what should not.

Examples of Hyper-Literal Misinterpretation

Part V: Theological Consequences of Hyper-Literalism

1. Destruction of God’s Transcendence

By insisting that God has a physical body confined to space, Dake destroys the biblical teaching of God’s transcendence and omnipresence. The Bible clearly teaches that God is spirit (John 4:24) and that He fills heaven and earth (Jeremiah 23:24). Solomon recognized that “the heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain you” (1 Kings 8:27). Yet Dake’s literalism forces him to deny these clear biblical truths.

2. Undermining the Incarnation

If God the Father and the Holy Spirit already have physical bodies, as Dake teaches, then the incarnation of Christ loses its unique significance. The wonder of “the Word became flesh” (John 1:14) is diminished if all three Persons of the Trinity already possessed flesh. Dake writes in The Truth about Baptism in the Holy Spirit:

“Christ laid aside His God-form, including the natural and all-powerful attributes of God and all the glory He had with the Father before the world was created, and limited Himself by taking human-form and all its limitations during the days of His flesh.”

This suggests Christ had a “God-form” (physical body) before the incarnation, which He exchanged for a “human-form.” This completely misunderstands the nature of the incarnation.

3. Introduction of Mythology into Biblical Interpretation

Dake’s pre-Adamite race theory introduces mythological elements into biblical interpretation. His elaborate descriptions of Lucifer’s earthly kingdom, complete with cities and nations of pre-Adamite humans, reads more like fantasy literature than biblical exegesis. He writes:

“Before the time of Adam, men lived in cities and fruitful places on earth, so they must have eaten food and been mortal as we are today.” (Heavenly Hosts)

This is pure speculation presented as biblical fact, based on misreading poetic and prophetic texts as literal historical descriptions.

4. Redefinition of Core Christian Terms

One of the most deceptive aspects of Dake’s teaching is his redefinition of traditional Christian theological terms while continuing to use them. He uses words like “Trinity,” “Godhead,” and “one God,” but has completely changed their meanings:

This redefinition allows Dake and his followers to claim they believe in the “Trinity” and “one God” while actually teaching polytheism.

Part VI: How Hyper-Literalism Distorts Biblical Understanding

1. Ignoring Literary Context

The Bible contains multiple literary genres: historical narrative, poetry, wisdom literature, prophecy, apocalyptic literature, gospels, and epistles. Each genre has its own interpretive principles. Dake’s error is applying the same wooden literalism to all genres. For example, when the Psalms speak of God having “wings” (Psalm 91:4), this is clearly metaphorical language expressing God’s protection. Yet Dake’s method would require taking this literally.

2. Missing the Progressive Nature of Revelation

Scripture reveals God’s truth progressively, with later revelation clarifying and expanding upon earlier revelation. The New Testament helps us understand the Old Testament more fully. Yet Dake often interprets Old Testament passages in isolation, leading to conclusions that contradict New Testament teaching. His interpretation of Genesis 1:26 (“Let us make man in our image”) as proof that God has a physical body ignores the New Testament’s clear teaching that God is spirit.

3. Failure to Recognize Accommodation

God accommodates His revelation to human understanding, using human language and concepts to communicate divine truth. When Scripture speaks of God’s “arm” or “hand,” it’s using human anatomy as an accommodation to help us understand God’s power and activity. Dake fails to recognize this accommodation, instead insisting that God literally has arms and hands.

4. Creating False Dichotomies

Dake often presents false either/or scenarios. For example, he argues that either the Father and Son are two separate beings, or they are the same person. This ignores the orthodox position that they are two distinct Persons within one Being. His inability to grasp this distinction leads him into tritheism.

Part VII: The Proper Approach to Biblical Interpretation

1. The Grammatical-Historical Method

Proper biblical interpretation requires understanding the text in its original grammatical and historical context. This means:

• Understanding the original languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek have their own idioms and figures of speech that don’t always translate literally into English.
• Recognizing the historical setting: Understanding the culture, customs, and historical situation of the original audience.
• Identifying the literary genre: Different types of literature require different interpretive approaches.
• Considering the broader biblical context: Scripture interprets Scripture; no passage should be interpreted in isolation.

2. The Role of Church History and Theology

While Scripture is our ultimate authority, we should be cautious about interpretations that contradict 2,000 years of orthodox Christian teaching. The core doctrines of Christianity – including the Trinity, the nature of God, and the person of Christ – have been carefully studied and articulated by generations of faithful scholars. When someone like Dake comes along with novel interpretations that overturn these established truths, extreme caution is warranted.

3. The Importance of Systematic Theology

Biblical doctrines must be understood systematically, taking into account all that Scripture teaches on a subject. Dake’s error often stems from building entire theological systems on isolated proof texts while ignoring passages that contradict his interpretation. For example, his teaching that God has a body ignores numerous passages that teach God’s spirituality and omnipresence.

4. Recognizing Figures of Speech

The Bible is full of figures of speech: metaphors, similes, hyperbole, anthropomorphisms, and more. These are not errors or primitive thinking, but sophisticated literary devices that communicate truth powerfully. When Jesus says “I am the door” (John 10:9), He’s not claiming to be made of wood with hinges. Recognizing and properly interpreting these figures of speech is essential to understanding Scripture correctly.

Part VIII: Specific Examples of Dake’s Errors

Example 1: The Nature of God

Example 2: The Trinity

Example 3: The Pre-Adamite World

Example 4: Interpreting Revelation

Part IX: The Impact on Understanding God

How Dake’s Method Diminishes God

Dake’s hyper-literal interpretation ultimately presents a diminished view of God:

This stands in stark contrast to the biblical God who is:

The Loss of Mystery and Transcendence

By reducing God to a being with a physical body who operates within the constraints of space and time, Dake removes the mystery and transcendence that are essential to true worship. The God of the Bible is awesome, incomprehensible, and worthy of worship precisely because He is not like us. He is wholly other, infinite, eternal, and beyond our full comprehension.

Dake’s God, by contrast, is simply a bigger, more powerful version of ourselves. This anthropomorphic deity lacks the majesty and transcendence of the biblical God. When we lose sight of God’s transcendence, we lose the foundation for true worship and reverence.

Part X: The Danger to the Church

Why This Matters

Some might argue that these are merely academic theological debates with little practical importance. However, Dake’s errors strike at the very heart of Christian faith:

The Influence of the Dake Bible

The Dake Annotated Reference Bible continues to be popular in certain circles, particularly among some Pentecostal and Charismatic Christians. Many users of this Bible may not realize the heretical nature of some of its notes. They trust that a “study Bible” will help them understand Scripture better, not lead them into error.

This makes it crucial for pastors, teachers, and informed Christians to:

• Be aware of Dake’s teachings and their errors
• Gently correct those who have been influenced by these teachings
• Recommend sound study resources that properly interpret Scripture
• Teach proper hermeneutical principles to their congregations

The Deceptive Nature of Dake’s System

What makes Dake’s teaching particularly dangerous is its appearance of being thoroughly biblical. He quotes Scripture extensively, claims to base everything on “two or three plain Scriptures,” and uses traditional Christian terminology. This can deceive sincere believers who don’t recognize that:

• Quoting Scripture is not the same as correctly interpreting Scripture
• Traditional terms have been redefined with unorthodox meanings
• Proof-texting (using isolated verses) can “prove” almost anything
• Literal interpretation must be balanced with proper hermeneutical principles

Part XI: Learning from Dake’s Errors

Principles for Sound Biblical Interpretation

Dake’s errors provide valuable lessons for proper biblical interpretation:

The Importance of Theological Education

Dake’s errors highlight the importance of sound theological education. While academic credentials don’t guarantee correct interpretation, training in:

• Biblical languages (Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic)
• Hermeneutics (principles of interpretation)
• Systematic theology
• Church history
• Biblical theology

…provides essential tools for understanding Scripture correctly. Dake’s lack of formal theological training shows in his inability to recognize basic interpretive principles and his unfamiliarity with orthodox theological categories.

The Role of the Church Community

Individual Bible study is important, but it should never be divorced from the broader church community. The Ethiopian eunuch asked Philip, “How can I understand unless someone guides me?” (Acts 8:31). We need the wisdom of mature believers, the insights of trained teachers, and the accountability of the Christian community to help us interpret Scripture correctly.

Dake’s errors might have been corrected if he had submitted his interpretations to qualified theological review before publishing them. His covenant to “never teach anything which could not be proven by at least two or three plain Scriptures” sounds noble, but without proper hermeneutical principles and theological accountability, it led him into serious error.

Conclusion: The Call to Biblical Faithfulness

Finis Jennings Dake’s hyper-literal interpretation method serves as a cautionary tale for all who seek to understand God’s Word. While his desire to take Scripture seriously is commendable, his failure to recognize the nature of biblical language, the importance of context, and the value of theological tradition led him into grave errors that fundamentally misrepresent the nature of God and the teaching of Scripture.

As we study God’s Word, let us commit to:

• Reading Scripture in context
• Recognizing different literary genres
• Submitting to the whole counsel of Scripture
• Learning from church history and tradition
• Approaching the text with humility
• Seeking the illumination of the Holy Spirit
• Testing our interpretations within the Christian community

The Bible is God’s Word, profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16). But it must be “correctly handled” (2 Timothy 2:15). Dake’s errors remind us that zeal without knowledge, and literalism without wisdom, can lead to distortions that dishonor God and confuse His people.

May we be like the Bereans, who “received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true” (Acts 17:11). Let us test all teaching against Scripture, properly interpreted in its context, guided by the Holy Spirit, and informed by the wisdom of the church throughout the ages.

© 2025, DakeBible.org. All rights reserved.