An Analysis of Dake’s Unorthodox Teachings on God’s Omniscience and Omnipresence

Introduction: Understanding the Importance of God’s Attributes

When we talk about who God is, we’re dealing with the most important subject any person can think about. The way we understand God affects everything else in our Christian life – how we pray, how we trust Him, how we worship Him, and how we live for Him. For centuries, Christians have believed certain fundamental truths about God based on what the Bible teaches. These truths include that God knows everything (omniscience) and that God is everywhere present (omnipresence).

Finis Jennings Dake (1902-1987) was a Pentecostal minister and Bible teacher who created the popular Dake Annotated Reference Bible. While his study Bible contains much helpful information, Dake held some views about God that differ dramatically from what Christians have believed throughout history. In his book “God’s Plan for Man,” Dake uses the traditional terms “omniscient” and “omnipresent,” but he redefines them in ways that completely change their meaning.

This review will carefully examine what Dake actually taught about these two attributes of God, compare his teachings with historic Christian belief, and explain why these differences matter. We’ll look at direct quotes from his book, examine the biblical evidence, and help readers understand why orthodox Christian teaching on these subjects is so important to maintain.

Part I: Dake’s Errors Concerning God’s Omniscience

What Dake Taught About God’s Knowledge

The word “omniscient” comes from two Latin words meaning “all-knowing.” Christians have always believed this means God knows everything – past, present, and future – perfectly and completely. However, Dake dramatically redefined this term while still using it, which has confused many readers.

From GPFM, Chapter: “God is Omniscient,” pages 62-63:

“The question of the omniscience of God is also much misunderstood. The Bible makes many simple statements that limit God’s knowledge. There would be no sense in such passages if we do not believe them literally. There is no meaning to them if we take them figuratively. There was no object in God saying such things about Himself if they were untrue.”

“God gets to know things concerning the free moral actions of men as others do (Gen. 6:5-7; 11:5-7; 18:21; 22:12; 2 Chron. 16:9; Zech. 4:10; Job 12:22; 24:23; Ps. 7:9; 44:21; Ps. 139:1-6; Prov. 24:12; Jer. 17:10; Ezek. 11:5; Rom. 8:27; 1 Thes. 2:4).”

“God sends messengers throughout the Earth who report to Him of all that they find in the Earth that goes on (Dan. 10:13-21; 11:1; 12:1; Zech. 1:7-11; 6:1-8; Matt. 18:10-11; Heb. 1:14; 2:2-4).”

“God does not take care of every detail of His vast business in all the kingdoms of the universe. His agents help Him and they are found in every part of the universe on missions for God. Certain angels are responsible to God for carrying out His will in almost infinite detail concerning the billions of suns, moons, planets and all free moral agents on them.”

“God does not personally do everything that is done in all acts and events, nor has He known, elected, chosen, or predestinated all the acts and events from all eternity past. Several times God, Himself said of certain events that they did not come into His mind (Jer. 19:5; 32:35; 44:21).”

“God did not know beforehand that men would become so wicked (Gen. 6:5-7); that they would plan Babel (Gen. 11:5-7); that Sodom would be so wicked (Gen. 18:21, 26, 28-32); that Abraham would actually proceed to offer up Isaac (Gen. 22:12). God did not know whether it would take one or two or three signs to make Israel believe in Him (Ex. 4:1-12); or whether testing Israel would cause them to obey Him, or not (Dt. 8:2, 16). He did not know that Israel would backslide as far as she did (Dt. 32:19-29; Isa. 59:15-19).”

“Furthermore, He searches to find men whom He can bless (2 Chr. 16:9). He discovers deep things (Job 12:22); tries the hearts and reins of men so that He may know them (Ps. 7:9; 44:21; 139:1-6, 23-24; Jer. 17:10; 1 Chr. 28:9; Rom. 8:27; 1 Cor. 2:10; Rev. 2:23), proving all men for the same reason (Ps. 17:3; 66:10; 81:7).”

From GPFM, Chapter: “The Test for Man in Conscience,” page 63:

“God’s eternal plan for man is known from the beginning to the end and what He plans to bring to pass on Earth He has power to do, but concerning the free actions of free moral agents He does not know from all eternity what they will do before they are in existence and are here to have a part in His plan. He does not know which ones will be saved and which ones will be lost. He has made a plan for all to be saved alike and all who conform to His plan are blessed with the predestined blessings. Those who wilfully rebel will be cursed with the predestined punishments according to the plan. It is the plan that is known from the beginning to the end, not the individual conformity to it by free moral agents.”

Analysis of Dake’s Teaching on Omniscience

When we examine these quotes carefully, we see that Dake is teaching several shocking things about God’s knowledge:

What Conservative Christians Have Always Believed About God’s Omniscience

Throughout church history, Christians have consistently taught that God possesses perfect, complete, and eternal knowledge of all things – past, present, and future. This belief is not based on human philosophy but on clear biblical teaching. Let’s examine what Scripture actually teaches and what Christians have historically believed.

Biblical Foundation for True Omniscience

The Bible clearly teaches that God knows everything, including the future free actions of human beings. Consider these passages:

Isaiah 46:9-10 declares: “Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure.”

This passage explicitly states that God declares “from the beginning” things that are “not yet done.” This includes all future events, including human choices. God doesn’t just know His own plans; He knows exactly how everything will unfold.

Psalm 139:1-4 says: “O Lord, thou hast searched me, and known me. Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off. Thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways. For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O Lord, thou knowest it altogether.”

Notice that God knows our thoughts “afar off” – before we think them. He knows every word before we speak it. This is not God learning as we go, but God knowing ahead of time.

1 John 3:20 states simply: “God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.” The phrase “all things” means exactly that – everything, without exception, including all future events and choices.

Acts 15:18 declares: “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.” This tells us God has always known everything He would do and everything that would happen.

Hebrews 4:13 teaches: “Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.” Nothing is hidden from God – not even future events or decisions.

Understanding the Passages Dake Misinterprets

Dake builds his case by misunderstanding certain biblical passages where God appears to be learning or discovering information. However, conservative Bible scholars have long recognized that these passages use what’s called “anthropomorphic language” – describing God in human terms to help us understand Him better. Let’s examine some of these passages:

Historic Christian Teaching on God’s Omniscience

Throughout church history, Christian theologians have consistently affirmed God’s complete knowledge of all things, including future events. This isn’t a modern invention but has been the church’s teaching from the beginning.

Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD) wrote extensively about God’s knowledge, stating: “God’s knowledge is not like ours, which has past, present, and future. God sees all things in an eternal present. To Him, nothing is past or future, but all things are present.”

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) explained: “God knows all things, not only things actual but also things possible to Him or to creatures; and not only universals but also singulars. He knows all future contingent things, not only as they are in their causes, but also as each one of them is actually in itself.”

John Calvin (1509-1564) taught: “When we attribute foreknowledge to God, we mean that all things have ever been, and perpetually remain, before His eyes, so that to His knowledge nothing is future or past, but all things are present.”

Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) preached: “There is nothing that can be known which God does not know. There is nothing that ever was, or is, or shall be, which is not perfectly known to Him. His knowledge is infinite, and therefore it is perfect.”

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), one of the most important Protestant statements of faith, declares: “God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures.”

The London Baptist Confession (1689) states: “God’s decree does not take away the free will and responsibility of human beings. God knows all things that will happen, but His knowledge doesn’t force anyone to sin.”

Why Dake’s View of God’s Knowledge Is Dangerous

Dake’s teaching about God’s limited knowledge creates serious theological and practical problems for Christians. Understanding these problems helps us see why orthodox teaching on God’s omniscience is so important to preserve.

Responding to Dake’s Arguments About Omniscience

Let’s address some of Dake’s specific arguments and show why they don’t hold up under careful biblical examination.

Dake’s Argument: “God sends messengers to report to Him”

Biblical Response: When the Bible speaks of angels reporting to God (as in Job 1-2 or Zechariah 1), this is part of God’s administrative order, not because He needs information. It’s like a CEO having meetings with department heads – not because the CEO doesn’t know what’s happening, but because this is how He chooses to administrate. God involves angels in His work, but He doesn’t depend on them for knowledge.

Dake’s Argument: “God searches hearts to know them”

Biblical Response: When Scripture says God “searches” hearts (Jeremiah 17:10), the Hebrew word means to examine thoroughly or investigate carefully. This doesn’t mean God is learning; it means He examines everything completely before He judges. It’s like saying a judge “examines the evidence” – not because the judge doesn’t know the facts, but because justice requires careful consideration.

Dake’s Argument: “God tests people to know what they’ll do”

Biblical Response: God’s tests are not for His information but for ours. When God tested Abraham, it wasn’t to learn whether Abraham would obey, but to prove Abraham’s faith in actual history and to strengthen Abraham’s own faith through the experience. James 1:13 tells us God tests no one to learn if they’ll sin – He already knows our hearts completely.

Dake’s Argument: “The Bible says things didn’t enter God’s mind”

Biblical Response: This Hebrew idiom means these things didn’t originate from God’s mind – He didn’t command or desire them. It’s not saying God didn’t know they would happen, but that they came from human wickedness, not divine decree. God knows all evil that will occur without being the source of that evil.

Part II: Dake’s Errors Concerning God’s Omnipresence

What Dake Taught About God’s Presence

The word “omnipresent” means “present everywhere.” Orthodox Christianity has always taught that God, being infinite and spiritual, is present everywhere at once. However, Dake dramatically redefines this doctrine while still using the traditional term, teaching instead that God has a physical body located in one place.

From GPFM, Chapter: “God Goes From Place to Place,” page 57:

“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, as seen in Point 9 below. 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; 22:1-5); walks (Gen. 3:8; 18:1-22, 33); rides upon cherubs, the wind, clouds, and chariots drawn by cherubims (Ps. 18:10; 68:17; 104:3; Ezek. 1:1-28); and does and can do anything that any other person can do bodily that is right and good.”

From GPFM, Chapter: “God is Omnipotent,” page 63:

“Within God’s own realm He is omnipotent, but there are certain spheres in which He does not and cannot operate, and there are certain things He cannot do. We must therefore be sensible when we consider omnipotence—unlimited and universal power and authority within a certain sphere, or of a certain kind. God is Almighty and omnipotent in His own right of creation and redemption, and in His plan for man and all creations; but He has limited Himself in His dealings with free moral agents. He respects their will power and He gives them absolute right to act of their own free choice to conform to His will and consecrate themselves to the highest good of being and of the universe. He has laid down laws whereby they should live and conduct themselves, and has made penalties for all sin and rewards for all acts of obedience. In these matters God is omnipotent, but there are certain things He cannot do.”

“God limits Himself, according to His own revelation of Himself, along other lines, whether by nature or by choice is not always stated. For example, God’s com-“

From GPFM, Chapter: “God is Omnipotent” (continued), page 496:

“In Phil. 2:5-11 we have the fact stated that the second person of the Trinity, before He became man, was ‘in the form of God,’ i.e., had a spirit-body as the other men of the Spirit each still has. He thought it not robbery to be equal to God, but humbled Himself and took human form to pay the penalty for man and redeem men to God. For this humiliation He was highly exalted on the right hand of the Father. The Greek word for ‘robbery’ is harpagmos, a thing to be grasped after. It is translated ‘pluck’ (John 10:28-29); ‘catcheth’ (Matt. 13:19; John 10:12); ‘caught up’ (1 Thes. 4:17) and ‘pulling’ (Jude 23). From these meanings of the word, we can see that Christ did not try to hold on to equality with God, but for a promised purpose was willing to lay aside His equality to become man to redeem. He laid aside His God body to take a human body, His immortality to become mortal, His Godship to become a servant, His spirit-form to take human form, His omnipresence to be limited in presence like men, His omniscience to grow in knowledge and learn obedience like men, His omnipotence to receive power from the Spirit to do the works and will of God as retained of all men, and other powers to be limited as a man to prove to men and set an example before them that by the same means of grace He used they can live the same life and do the same works that He did (John 14:12). For proof of these claims see Lesson Twenty-one, Points IV and VIII.”

Additional Quotes from Dake Study Bible on God’s Body

In the Dake Annotated Reference Bible, Dake makes even more explicit claims about God having a physical body:

“God made ‘man’ in His image, ‘Him both’ male and female (Gen. 1:27). It has no reference to deity, but to the humanity of the Son of God, who became the Christ or the ‘Anointed One’ 30 years after He was born of Mary (Mt. 3:16; Jn. 3:34; Isa. 11:1; 42:1-8; 61:1; Acts 10:38). God ‘made’ Him both male and Christ (Acts 2:36). The flesh is ‘Messiah’ (Dan. 9:24-26; Jn. 1:41; 4:25)”

Analysis of Dake’s Teaching on Omnipresence

When we examine these quotes, we discover that Dake is teaching several unbiblical things about God’s presence and nature:

What Conservative Christians Have Always Believed About God’s Omnipresence

Throughout church history, Christians have consistently taught that God is spirit (not physical) and is truly present everywhere at once. This belief comes directly from Scripture and has been central to Christian theology from the beginning.

Biblical Foundation for True Omnipresence

The Bible clearly teaches that God is everywhere present and that He does not have a physical body like humans do. Let’s examine the key passages:

John 4:24 states clearly: “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.”

This verse explicitly tells us that God IS spirit – not that He HAS a spirit, but that His very nature is spiritual, not physical. This is why Jesus told the woman at the well that location doesn’t matter in worship – because God isn’t confined to any location.

Jeremiah 23:23-24 declares: “Am I a God at hand, saith the LORD, and not a God afar off? Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the LORD. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the LORD.”

God explicitly says He “fills” heaven and earth. This doesn’t mean His influence fills them while His body is elsewhere – it means He Himself fills all of creation. No one can hide from God because He is actually present everywhere.

Psalm 139:7-10 asks: “Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence? If I ascend up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; Even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold me.”

David isn’t saying God’s influence is everywhere while God Himself is in heaven. He’s saying there’s nowhere he can go where God isn’t already there. This is true omnipresence.

1 Kings 8:27 records Solomon’s prayer: “But will God indeed dwell on the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?”

Solomon understood that God cannot be contained in any location, not even in the highest heavens. A God with a physical body could be contained, but the true God cannot be.

Acts 17:27-28 teaches: “That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being.”

Paul tells the Greek philosophers that we exist “in” God – we live and move within Him. This would be impossible if God had a physical body located in heaven.

Isaiah 66:1 declares: “Thus saith the LORD, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?”

This poetic language shows God’s immensity – heaven is His throne and earth His footstool. This describes God’s greatness, not a literally giant physical body.

Understanding the Passages Dake Misinterprets About God’s Body

Dake builds his case for God having a physical body by taking anthropomorphic language literally. Let’s examine why this approach is wrong:

The Biblical Teaching on Anthropomorphisms

The Bible frequently uses anthropomorphisms – human descriptions of God – to help us understand Him. These are not literal descriptions of God’s nature but accommodations to our limited understanding. Consider these examples:

The Bible speaks of God’s “eyes” (2 Chronicles 16:9), “ears” (Psalm 34:15), “hands” (Isaiah 41:10), “feet” (Nahum 1:3), “arms” (Deuteronomy 33:27), and “fingers” (Exodus 31:18). It also speaks of God’s “wings” (Psalm 91:4) – but no one argues God is literally a bird!

The Bible describes God as “repenting” (Genesis 6:6), “forgetting” (Isaiah 43:25), “remembering” (Genesis 8:1), “waking up” (Psalm 44:23), and “resting” (Genesis 2:2). These are anthropomorphic descriptions helping us understand God’s actions in terms we can grasp.

If we took all these descriptions literally, we’d have a God with body parts of humans and animals, who sleeps and wakes, forgets and remembers, changes His mind, and needs rest. This contradicts clear biblical teaching about God’s nature.

Historic Christian Teaching on God’s Omnipresence

Throughout church history, Christian theologians have consistently affirmed that God is spirit and is truly present everywhere. This has been orthodox Christian doctrine from the earliest days of the church.

The Apostles’ Creed (2nd century) begins: “I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.” The term “Almighty” (Pantokrator in Greek) implies God’s presence and power everywhere.

Athanasius (296-373 AD) wrote: “God is not contained, but is Himself the place of all things. He is outside of all things according to His essence, but in all things through His power.”

Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD) taught: “God is not diffused through space by size so that half of Him should be in half of the world and half in the other half of it. He is wholly present in all of it in such a way as to be wholly in heaven alone and wholly in earth alone, and wholly in heaven and earth together.”

John of Damascus (675-749 AD) explained: “God does not exist in a place. For He who is uncircumscribed, and who circumscribes all things, is not in a place. Place is where the circumscribed nature is circumscribed. But God is not a body.”

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) wrote: “God is in all things by His presence, power and substance. He is not in them as part of their substance or as an accident, but as an agent is present to that upon which it works.”

Martin Luther (1483-1546) taught: “God is substantially present everywhere, in and through all creatures, in all their parts and places, so that the world is full of God and He fills all.”

John Calvin (1509-1564) explained: “The essence of God is incomprehensible; His greatness fills all things. We must guard against imagining that God is confined to heaven as if He were enclosed there.”

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) states: “God is a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions; immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty.”

The London Baptist Confession (1689) declares: “The Lord our God 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.”

Why Dake’s View of God’s Presence Is Dangerous

Dake’s teaching that God has a physical body located in one place creates serious theological problems and contradicts fundamental biblical truths. Let’s examine why this matters so much.

The Importance of the Incarnation

One of the most serious problems with Dake’s teaching is how it undermines the significance of the Incarnation. If God always had a body, why was it special that Jesus took on human flesh?

The Bible teaches that the Incarnation was unique and miraculous – “the Word was made flesh” (John 1:14). This was extraordinary precisely because God is spirit and doesn’t have a body. When the second person of the Trinity took on human nature, it was an unprecedented act of humility and love.

Philippians 2:6-7 says Christ “being in the form of God… took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men.” The contrast here is between the divine nature (spirit) and human nature (physical). If God already had a physical form, this passage loses its meaning.

Dake tries to argue that “form of God” means a spirit-body, but this contradicts the entire point of the passage. The miracle of the Incarnation is that the infinite, omnipresent God limited Himself to a physical body for our salvation.

Part III: Comparing Dake’s Teachings with Orthodox Christianity

To help readers clearly see the differences between Dake’s teachings and historic Christian doctrine, let’s present a comprehensive comparison table:

Part IV: The Historical Development of These Doctrines

Early Church Teaching (1st-5th Centuries)

From the very beginning of Christianity, the church has affirmed God’s complete knowledge and spiritual omnipresence. These weren’t later developments but were understood from the apostolic age.

The Didache (circa 70 AD), one of the earliest Christian documents outside the New Testament, refers to God as “the Lord Almighty who sees all things.” This shows the earliest Christians understood God’s complete knowledge.

Clement of Rome (died 99 AD), who knew the apostles personally, wrote: “Nothing is hidden from Him, but even our secret thoughts are open before Him.” This first-century teaching affirms God’s omniscience.

Irenaeus (130-202 AD), a student of Polycarp who knew the Apostle John, taught: “God is not contained in space, but He is the space of all things. He existed before creation and contains all things within Himself.”

Origen (185-254 AD) explained: “God does not exist in space at all. He is of a nature which cannot be confined by any limits. He is everywhere and nowhere – everywhere by His power and providence, nowhere in the sense of being contained.”

Athanasius (296-373 AD), the great defender of the Trinity, wrote extensively about God’s omniscience and omnipresence, arguing these attributes were essential to God’s divine nature and distinguished Him from creation.

The Council of Nicaea (325 AD) and the Council of Constantinople (381 AD) affirmed credal statements that assume God’s omniscience and omnipresence, though they focused primarily on the Trinity.

Medieval Period Teaching (6th-15th Centuries)

During the medieval period, Christian theologians developed more precise philosophical language to express biblical truths about God’s attributes, but they maintained the same essential beliefs.

Gregory the Great (540-604 AD) taught: “God is within all things, but not included; outside all things, but not excluded; above all things, but not raised up; below all things, but not depressed.”

John of Damascus (675-749 AD) wrote the influential “Exposition of the Orthodox Faith,” systematically explaining that God is “above all substance and nature” and “fills all things” while remaining distinct from creation.

Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109) developed the ontological argument for God’s existence, which assumes God’s perfect knowledge and presence as necessary attributes of the greatest conceivable being.

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) provided the most comprehensive medieval treatment of God’s attributes in his “Summa Theologica,” demonstrating from both Scripture and reason that God must be omniscient and omnipresent to be truly God.

Duns Scotus (1266-1308) and William of Ockham (1287-1347) debated fine points about how God’s knowledge relates to human freedom, but both affirmed God’s complete omniscience and spiritual omnipresence.

Reformation Era Teaching (16th-17th Centuries)

The Protestant Reformers strongly affirmed traditional teaching about God’s attributes while emphasizing their biblical basis over philosophical speculation.

Martin Luther emphasized God’s omnipresence in his debates about the Lord’s Supper, arguing that Christ’s divine nature enables Him to be truly present everywhere, including in the communion elements.

John Calvin systematically expounded God’s attributes in his “Institutes of the Christian Religion,” providing extensive biblical support for God’s complete knowledge and spiritual omnipresence.

The Reformed Confessions – including the Belgic Confession (1561), the Heidelberg Catechism (1563), the Westminster Standards (1640s), and the London Baptist Confession (1689) – all explicitly affirm God’s omniscience and deny that God has a physical body.

The Catholic Counter-Reformation at the Council of Trent (1545-1563) also reaffirmed traditional teaching about God’s attributes, showing that despite many disagreements, Protestants and Catholics agreed on these fundamental truths about God’s nature.

Modern Orthodox Teaching (18th Century-Present)

Despite various theological controversies in modern times, mainstream Christianity has maintained consistent teaching about God’s omniscience and omnipresence.

Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), America’s greatest theologian, wrote extensively about God’s attributes, demonstrating their necessity for God’s providence and human responsibility.

Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892), the “Prince of Preachers,” frequently preached on God’s omniscience and omnipresence, considering them essential to Christian comfort and assurance.

Charles Hodge (1797-1878) at Princeton Seminary provided systematic theological education that grounded generations of pastors in orthodox teaching about God’s attributes.

B.B. Warfield (1851-1921), also at Princeton, defended traditional attributes of God against modernist attempts to limit or redefine them.

Contemporary Evangelical Statements like the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978) and various evangelical systematic theologies continue to affirm God’s complete omniscience and spiritual omnipresence as essential, non-negotiable doctrines.

Part V: Why These Doctrines Matter for Christian Life

The Impact on Prayer

Our understanding of God’s omniscience and omnipresence profoundly affects how we pray. If God truly knows all things and is everywhere present, then:

We can pray with confidence – God already knows our needs before we ask (Matthew 6:8), so we’re not informing Him but aligning ourselves with His will. He knows the perfect answer to every request.

We can pray anywhere – Since God is omnipresent, we don’t need a special location or building. Whether in a prison cell, hospital bed, or remote wilderness, God is equally present to hear us.

We can pray about anything – God’s omniscience means He understands our situations completely. We don’t need to explain context or background; He knows it better than we do.

We can trust God’s answers – Because God knows the future, He can answer our prayers in ways that account for things we can’t foresee. His “no” or “wait” comes from perfect knowledge.

But if Dake were correct and God doesn’t know the future or isn’t truly present everywhere, prayer becomes problematic. How could God promise to work all things for our good if He doesn’t know what will happen? How can He hear simultaneous prayers from millions of believers if He’s limited to one location?

The Impact on Suffering

When Christians face trials, God’s omniscience and omnipresence provide essential comfort:

God is never surprised by our suffering – He knew it would come and has already prepared grace sufficient for it. Nothing catches Him off guard or unprepared.

God is present in our pain – We’re never alone in suffering because God is truly with us, not just watching from heaven. His presence brings comfort no human presence can provide.

God knows the purpose – Because God knows all things, He can use our suffering for purposes we can’t see. Joseph could say “you meant it for evil, but God meant it for good” because God knew the outcome.

God knows when it will end – Our trials aren’t open-ended question marks to God. He knows exactly how long they’ll last and what will come after.

Dake’s theology removes these comforts. If God is learning along with us and is physically located in heaven, we’re essentially alone in our suffering, hoping God figures out a solution.

The Impact on Guidance

Christians seek God’s guidance for life decisions, trusting that He knows what’s best. This assumes:

God knows all possible futures – When God guides us toward or away from something, He knows all the consequences of each choice. His guidance accounts for things we couldn’t possibly know.

God is present to guide – Through His Spirit, God actively leads believers. This requires His actual presence, not just distant influence.

God’s Word is reliable – The Bible’s guidance assumes God knew what situations we would face when He inspired it. Prophecies and promises depend on God’s foreknowledge.

God orchestrates circumstances – Providence means God arranges events for our good. This requires knowing how all things will work together.

If God doesn’t know future free choices, His guidance becomes merely good advice based on limited information. He might guide us into disaster because He didn’t foresee someone else’s choices.

The Impact on Salvation

The doctrine of salvation depends heavily on God’s omniscience and omnipresence:

Election and foreknowledge – Romans 8:29 says God foreknew those He predestined. Whether one holds Calvinist or Arminian views, both require God to know future human choices.

The certainty of salvation – Jesus said no one could snatch His sheep from His hand (John 10:28). This promise requires God to know all future threats to our salvation.

The efficacy of Christ’s sacrifice – Jesus died for sins not yet committed. This requires God to know all future sins that would need forgiveness.

The seal of the Spirit – The Holy Spirit seals believers until the day of redemption (Ephesians 4:30). This requires God to be present with each believer and to know they will persevere.

Dake’s view undermines salvation’s security. If God doesn’t know who will ultimately be saved, how can He make promises about eternal life? How can Christ be preparing a place for us if He doesn’t know who will come?

The Impact on Worship

True worship flows from a proper understanding of who God is:

Worship in spirit and truth – Jesus said true worshippers worship the Father in spirit and truth (John 4:23). This assumes God is spirit, not physical, and can be worshipped anywhere.

Corporate worship – When believers gather worldwide for worship, God is present with each assembly simultaneously. A physical God couldn’t be present with millions of worship services at once.

Private worship – Every believer can have intimate communion with God because He’s fully present with each one. We don’t share a divided God who must rotate His attention.

Worship’s foundation – We worship God for His infinite perfections. A God who learns, needs information, and is limited to one location is less worthy of absolute worship.

Dake’s theology diminishes worship by diminishing God. Why worship a being who’s essentially a very powerful version of ourselves, complete with a physical body and knowledge limitations?

Part VI: Responding to Potential Objections

Objection 1: “But Dake Uses Scripture to Support His Views”

It’s true that Dake quotes many Bible verses, but he consistently misinterprets them by:

Ignoring context – Taking verses out of their historical and literary context to support predetermined conclusions.

Missing genre – Treating poetic, apocalyptic, or anthropomorphic language as literal description when the genre indicates otherwise.

Selective reading – Emphasizing passages that seem to support his view while ignoring or explaining away clear passages that contradict it.

Wooden literalism – Refusing to recognize obvious figures of speech and symbolic language that Scripture itself indicates shouldn’t be taken literally.

Simply quoting Scripture doesn’t make an interpretation correct. The Pharisees quoted Scripture to Jesus, but He showed they misunderstood it. Satan quoted Scripture when tempting Jesus, but twisted its meaning. We must interpret Scripture with Scripture, considering the whole counsel of God.

Objection 2: “Doesn’t God’s Testing of People Prove He Doesn’t Know?”

When God tests people (like Abraham in Genesis 22), the Hebrew word “to know” often means “to know by experience” or “to demonstrate.” Consider these points:

God’s tests benefit the person being tested, not God. Abraham’s faith was strengthened through the test. His descendants could look back to his proven faithfulness. The test created an actual historical event that demonstrated Abraham’s faith.

If God truly didn’t know what Abraham would do, the test would be cruel. God would be risking Isaac’s life on an experiment. Instead, God knew the outcome and arranged everything accordingly (including the ram caught in the thicket).

James 1:13 says God doesn’t tempt anyone to evil because He already knows what’s in their hearts. Tests reveal to us and others what God already knows.

Objection 3: “How Can God Have Emotions If He Knows Everything?”

Some argue that if God knows the future, He can’t genuinely grieve over sin or rejoice over repentance. This misunderstands both God’s knowledge and His emotions:

God’s omniscience doesn’t make Him emotionally detached. A parent watching a recording of their child’s first steps still feels joy, even though they know what happens. How much more can the infinite God experience genuine emotions about events He foreknows!

God exists outside time differently than we do. What is future to us is present to Him. He experiences all moments with the immediacy of “now” while also knowing their sequence and relationship.

God’s emotions are perfect and consistent with His nature. His grief over sin is eternal and constant, as is His joy over righteousness. These aren’t mood swings based on surprises but settled dispositions of His holy nature.

Objection 4: “Doesn’t Human Free Will Require God Not to Know?”

This common objection assumes that if God knows what we’ll choose, we’re not really free. However:

Knowledge doesn’t equal causation – Knowing something will happen doesn’t cause it to happen. A history teacher knows what Napoleon did at Waterloo without causing it.

God’s knowledge is different from ours – God doesn’t predict the future based on present trends; He sees it with the same certainty we see the past. This doesn’t eliminate freedom any more than history books eliminate Napoleon’s freedom.

Biblical examples – Scripture consistently shows God knowing future free choices without eliminating responsibility. Jesus knew Judas would betray Him, yet Judas was fully responsible for his choice.

The alternative is worse – If God doesn’t know future free choices, He can’t make promises, prophecies become guesses, and providence becomes impossible.

Objection 5: “Isn’t This Just Philosophical Speculation?”

Some might argue that debates about God’s attributes are just human philosophy imposed on Scripture. However:

These doctrines come directly from Scripture. We’re not starting with philosophy and looking for proof texts; we’re starting with biblical texts and drawing necessary conclusions.

The Bible itself reasons from God’s nature to specific conclusions. For example, Hebrews 6:18 argues from God’s inability to lie to the certainty of His promises.

Rejecting logic and reasoning leads to absurdity. Dake himself uses logic to argue his points. The question isn’t whether to use reasoning but whether our reasoning is biblical.

Church history shows these aren’t new philosophical inventions but have been understood from Scripture since the apostolic age.

Part VII: The Broader Theological Impact

Connection to Other Doctrines

Dake’s errors about God’s omniscience and omnipresence don’t exist in isolation. They affect numerous other Christian doctrines:

The Influence of Dake’s Teaching

While many users of the Dake Study Bible may not realize it contains these unorthodox teachings, the influence has been significant in some circles:

Some Pentecostal and Charismatic groups have adopted aspects of Dake’s theology without realizing its departure from orthodox Christianity. This has led to confused teaching about God’s nature in some churches.

The “Open Theism” movement, while not directly connected to Dake, promotes similar ideas about God not knowing future free choices. Dake’s earlier teaching may have helped prepare the way for this movement’s acceptance in some evangelical circles.

Various “Word of Faith” teachers have used Dake’s limited God to support their teaching that faith-filled words can force God to act, since He supposedly doesn’t know what will happen until we speak.

Some spiritual warfare teachings assume God needs us to inform Him about demonic activity (through “spiritual mapping” and similar practices), reflecting Dake’s idea that God needs information from others.

The Importance of Sound Doctrine

Paul warned Timothy to “take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee” (1 Timothy 4:16). Sound doctrine matters because:

It shapes our relationship with God – We can’t properly relate to God if we don’t know who He truly is. Wrong doctrine leads to wrong practice.

It affects our witness – When Christians teach a limited, physical God who doesn’t know the future, we’re not presenting the God of the Bible to the world.

It impacts future generations – What we teach today shapes tomorrow’s church. Error compounds over time if not corrected.

It determines our worship – We become like what we worship. A small god creates small Christians; the infinite God calls us to infinite devotion.

Part VIII: Practical Guidelines for Discernment

How to Evaluate Teaching About God

Given the importance of these doctrines, Christians need practical tools for evaluating teaching about God’s attributes. Here are some guidelines:

Resources for Further Study

For readers wanting to study these doctrines more deeply, here are recommended resources from reliable conservative Christian scholars:

On God’s Attributes Generally:

• A.W. Tozer, “The Knowledge of the Holy” – A devotional yet theologically sound exploration of God’s attributes
• J.I. Packer, “Knowing God” – Combines theological precision with practical application
• Stephen Charnock, “The Existence and Attributes of God” – A Puritan classic with exhaustive biblical treatment
• Arthur Pink, “The Attributes of God” – Clear, biblical exposition accessible to average readers

On God’s Omniscience Specifically:

• William Lane Craig, “The Only Wise God” – Addresses philosophical objections while maintaining biblical fidelity
• John Frame, “The Doctrine of God” – Reformed perspective with careful attention to Scripture
• Norman Geisler, “Creating God in the Image of Man?” – Direct response to Open Theism and similar errors

On God’s Omnipresence Specifically:

• Wayne Grudem, “Systematic Theology” (chapters on God’s attributes) – Clear, accessible, thoroughly biblical
• Louis Berkhof, “Systematic Theology” – Standard Reformed treatment with historical perspective
• Thomas Oden, “The Living God” – Shows consensus across Christian traditions

Historical Confessions and Creeds:

• Westminster Confession of Faith with Scripture proofs
• London Baptist Confession of 1689
• Heidelberg Catechism
• Augsburg Confession (Lutheran)
• Thirty-Nine Articles (Anglican)

Conclusion: Standing Firm on Biblical Truth

This review has examined Finis Dake’s teachings about God’s omniscience and omnipresence in “God’s Plan for Man,” demonstrating how they depart from both biblical truth and historic Christian orthodoxy. We’ve seen that:

Dake redefined God’s omniscience to mean God doesn’t know future free choices, must learn through observation, needs angels to report information, and can be surprised by events. This contradicts clear biblical teaching that God knows all things, including every future event and human decision.

Dake redefined God’s omnipresence to mean God has a physical body located in heaven, moves from place to place, and is only spiritually (not personally) present everywhere. This contradicts Scripture’s teaching that God is spirit and fills heaven and earth with His actual presence.

These errors affect numerous other doctrines including the Trinity, salvation, providence, prayer, and worship. They diminish God from the infinite, all-knowing Creator to a limited being not fundamentally different from His creation.

Historic Christianity has consistently affirmed God’s true omniscience and omnipresence based on clear biblical teaching. From the apostolic age through today, orthodox Christians have recognized these attributes as essential to God’s nature.

The practical implications are serious. Dake’s theology undermines confidence in God’s promises, the efficacy of prayer, the security of salvation, and the comfort of God’s presence in trials.

Soli Deo Gloria – To God Alone Be Glory

© 2025, DakeBible.org. All rights reserved.