Chapter 03: The Root Problem – Dake’s Hyper-literal Hermeneutic

Have you ever played the telephone game? One person whispers a message to the next person, and by the time it gets to the last person, the message is completely different from what it started as. Now imagine if someone decided to take every single word in that mixed-up message as the absolute truth, even when it doesn’t make sense. That’s kind of what Finis Dake did with the Bible – but the results were much more serious than a silly game.

Dake, Finis Jennings. Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Publishing, 1963. See also Dake, Finis Jennings. Revelation Expounded. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Publishing, 1950; and Dake, Finis Jennings. God’s Plan for Man. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Publishing, 1949.

Finis Dake thought he had discovered the key to understanding the Bible perfectly. He believed that every single word should be taken in its most literal, physical sense possible. If the Bible says God has hands, then Dake insisted God must have actual, physical hands – just like you and me, only bigger. If it says God has eyes, then God must have real eyeballs. This might sound logical at first, but as we’ll see, this way of reading the Bible leads to some very serious problems.

What Is Hyperliteralism and Why Is It Dangerous?

Let’s start by understanding what we mean by “hyperliteralism.” The prefix “hyper” means “too much” or “excessive.” So hyperliteralism means taking things too literally – more literally than they were meant to be taken. It’s like if your mom said “I’ve told you a million times to clean your room” and you insisted she must have actually counted to exactly one million. That would be hyperliteral.

Now, believing what the Bible literally says is good! When the Bible says Jesus rose from the dead, we believe He actually, physically rose from the dead. When it says God created the heavens and the earth, we believe He really did create them. This is normal literal interpretation, and it’s the right way to read most of the Bible.

But hyperliteralism goes too far. It refuses to recognize that the Bible uses figures of speech, symbols, and poetic language just like we do in everyday conversation. When the Bible says God is a “rock” (Psalm 18:2), hyperliteralism would say God is literally made of stone. When it says believers are the “salt of the earth” (Matthew 5:13), hyperliteralism would say Christians are literally made of sodium chloride.

Dake himself explained his approach this way: “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”¹ He further stated: “Remember this: Take the Bible literally wherever it is at all possible. When the language cannot be taken literally, then we know it is figurative. Since it is possible for literal fire to be in Hell and since there is nothing to even suggest that it is not literal we had better believe that the fire is as literal as it is in all other literal passages describing other places.”¹¹

This might sound reasonable, but the problem is that Dake decided for himself what was “possible” to be literal, and he almost always chose the most literal meaning, even when it created contradictions or led to bizarre conclusions. He ignored the context, the type of literature, and the way language naturally works.

The Danger Becomes Real

Why is this dangerous? Because when you read the Bible this way, you end up creating a different message than what God actually gave us. It’s like taking a beautiful poem about love and insisting it’s actually a scientific textbook. You miss the real meaning and create a false one instead.

Here’s a simple example: The Bible says God “rides upon the wings of the wind” (Psalm 18:10). Using Dake’s hyperliteral method, we would have to believe that God actually sits on top of wind molecules and travels around like that. But anyone can see this is poetic language describing God’s power and majesty, not a literal description of divine transportation!

The danger gets much worse when this method is applied to important theological truths. When Dake reads that God has “eyes” and “hands,” he concludes that God must have a physical body. He wrote: “He has a personal spirit body, a personal soul, and personal spirit in the same sense each human being, angel, or any other being has his own body, soul, and spirit”². But Jesus clearly said “God is spirit” (John 4:24). This creates a massive contradiction that Dake tries to solve by saying God has a “spirit body” – which is like saying something is both hot and cold at the same time. Dake insisted: “Neither does the Bible say that the bodily parts of God are figures of speech or mere human expressions trying to convey some idea of God, or that they do away with the reality of God’s body. All figures of speech emphasize and make as real or more real the ideas they express than if literal language were used.”¹²

How Dake’s “Plain Reading” Isn’t Actually Plain

One of the most confusing things about Dake’s approach is that he claimed to be taking the “plain” meaning of Scripture. He wrote that “he would never teach anything which could not be proven by at least two or three plain Scriptures”³. This sounds very spiritual and careful, doesn’t it?

But here’s the problem: Dake’s “plain” reading often wasn’t plain at all. It was actually very complicated and required ignoring obvious facts about how language works. Let me show you what I mean.

The Problem with “Plain” Meanings

When we talk to each other, we naturally use figures of speech all the time:

• “It’s raining cats and dogs” (It’s raining heavily)
• “I’m so hungry I could eat a horse” (I’m very hungry)
• “Time flies when you’re having fun” (Time seems to pass quickly)
• “Break a leg!” (Good luck!)
• “That test was a piece of cake” (The test was easy)

Nobody thinks these phrases mean what they literally say. We automatically understand them as figures of speech. The Bible uses the same kind of language, but Dake often refused to recognize this. He argued: “The law of biblical interpretation is to take the Bible literally when it is at all possible, and when the language cannot be literal we know it is figurative.”¹³

For example, look at how Dake handled the biblical teaching about the Trinity. The Bible clearly teaches there is only one God, but this one God exists as three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This is a mystery that Christians have believed for 2,000 years. But Dake, using his hyperliteral method, came to a shocking conclusion.

Do you see what happened? Dake took the word “one” and completely changed its meaning! When the Bible says God is “one,” Dake says it doesn’t mean the number one – it means three separate beings working together. That’s like saying when I have “one” apple, I actually have three apples that are cooperating! This isn’t a “plain” reading at all – it’s changing the meaning of basic words.

Making Simple Things Complicated

Another problem with Dake’s supposedly “plain” reading is that it often made simple biblical teachings incredibly complicated. Let’s look at a few examples:

Example 1: God’s Presence

The Bible simply says that God is everywhere present. David wrote, “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” (Psalm 139:7-8). This seems pretty clear – God is everywhere.

But Dake’s hyperliteralism created a problem. If God has a physical body (as Dake claimed), then He can’t be everywhere – a body can only be in one place at a time. So Dake had to come up with a complicated explanation. He wrote: “God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are all present where there are beings with whom they have dealings; but they are not omnibody, that is, their bodies are not omnipresent. All three go from place to place bodily as other beings in the universe do”⁶

So instead of the simple biblical teaching that God is everywhere, Dake gives us a complicated system where God’s body is stuck in one place and He has to get reports from angels to know what’s happening on earth! This isn’t a plain reading – it’s making things much more complicated than the Bible does.

Example 2: God’s Knowledge

The Bible teaches that God knows everything. “Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite” (Psalm 147:5). Pretty straightforward, right? God’s understanding has no limits.

But Dake’s system couldn’t accept this simple truth. Since he believed God has a physical body with physical eyes, God can only know what those eyes can see. So Dake taught that God has to learn things and discover information as time goes on. He actually limited God’s knowledge!

This created huge problems for understanding biblical prophecy. If God doesn’t know the future perfectly, how can He make accurate predictions? Dake had to create elaborate explanations for how God makes educated guesses about the future based on His current knowledge. Again, this isn’t a plain reading – it’s making the Bible far more complicated than it really is.

When “The Bible Says What It Means” Goes Wrong

Dake and his followers often use the phrase “The Bible says what it means and means what it says.” This sounds good, and in many cases it’s true. When the Bible says “Thou shalt not steal” (Exodus 20:15), it means exactly that – don’t take things that don’t belong to you. Simple and clear. Dake explained: “The primary meaning of words and their common use in a particular age in which they are used… The agreement of Scripture in its several parts… Understanding of how to interpret prophecy, poetry, allegories, symbols, parables, figures of speech, types, and all other forms of human expression.”¹⁵ Yet he then ignored these very principles!

But this phrase becomes dangerous when it’s used to ignore the different types of literature in the Bible and the normal way human language works. The Bible contains many different types of writing:

Each type of literature has its own rules for how to understand it. You don’t read a poem the same way you read a history book. You don’t interpret a personal letter the same way you interpret a symbolic vision. But Dake largely ignored these distinctions and tried to force everything into a hyperliteral mold.

When Poetry Becomes “Science”

Let me give you a clear example of how this goes wrong. In Psalm 91:4, we read: “He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust.” This is obviously poetic language comparing God’s protection to a mother bird protecting her chicks. It’s a beautiful image that helps us understand God’s tender care for us.

But using Dake’s method, we would have to conclude that God literally has feathers and wings! The problem is, in other places Dake teaches that God has hands and feet like a human. So does God have a human body or a bird body? Or is He some kind of human-bird hybrid? Do you see how ridiculous this becomes?

The truth is simple: the Bible is using metaphorical language to help us understand spiritual truths. God doesn’t have literal wings any more than He is a literal rock (Psalm 18:2) or a literal consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29). These are figures of speech that reveal truths about God’s nature – His protection, His stability, His holiness.

When Symbols Become Physical

Another area where Dake’s hyperliteralism causes major problems is in understanding biblical symbols, especially in prophetic books like Revelation. Revelation is full of symbolic language – beasts with multiple heads, a woman clothed with the sun, stars falling from heaven, and so on.

Most Christians throughout history have understood that these are symbols representing spiritual and political realities. The beast represents evil kingdoms or leaders. The woman represents God’s people. The falling stars might represent fallen angels or political upheavals. The exact interpretation might vary, but everyone agrees these are symbols, not literal descriptions.

But Dake, committed to his hyperliteral approach, insisted that many of these things should be taken literally whenever possible. This led to some very strange interpretations. For example, when Revelation mentions locusts with faces like men and hair like women (Revelation 9:7-8), Dake suggested these might be actual hybrid creatures that will exist in the end times.

Ironically, even Dake couldn’t maintain consistent hyperliteralism. When it came to certain obvious symbols (like the sword coming out of Jesus’s mouth in Revelation 1:16), even he had to admit they were figurative. But he provided no consistent method for determining when something should be taken literally versus figuratively – it seemed to depend on his personal opinion.

The Difference Between Literal and Literalistic

This is a really important distinction that many people miss. Being “literal” and being “literalistic” are not the same thing, even though they sound similar. Let me explain the difference:

Literal interpretation means taking the text in its normal, natural sense according to the type of literature it is. If it’s historical narrative, you read it as history. If it’s poetry, you read it as poetry. If the author intended to communicate a fact, you take it as fact. If the author used a figure of speech, you understand it as a figure of speech.

Literalistic interpretation means forcing everything to have a physical, material meaning regardless of context, genre, or the author’s obvious intent. It’s taking figures of speech as scientific descriptions and metaphors as physical realities.

Here’s a simple chart to show the difference:

The literal interpretation understands what the author meant to communicate. The literalistic interpretation ignores the author’s intent and forces a wooden, physical meaning that often makes no sense and contradicts other Scripture.

Why This Distinction Matters So Much

This might seem like a small difference, but it has huge consequences for our understanding of God and the Bible. When you take a literalistic approach like Dake did, you end up with:

• A God who has a physical body and is therefore limited in space
• A God who doesn’t know everything and has to learn as He goes
• Three separate Gods instead of one God in three persons
• Racist teachings based on misunderstood passages
• Bizarre interpretations of prophecy that miss the real message

But when you take a proper literal approach, recognizing figures of speech and different genres, you get:

• The true biblical God who is spirit and omnipresent
• A God who knows all things from eternity
• The orthodox doctrine of the Trinity
• The unity of all believers in Christ regardless of race
• A clear understanding of God’s prophetic message

The difference between literal and literalistic isn’t just academic – it determines whether you understand the true God of the Bible or create a false god of your own imagination.

Case Studies in Interpretive Failure

Now let’s look at specific examples of how Dake’s hyperliteral method led him into serious theological errors. These aren’t minor mistakes but major departures from biblical truth that affect the very foundation of Christian faith.

Case Study 1: God’s Physical Body

One of Dake’s most shocking teachings was that God the Father has a physical body complete with hands, feet, eyes, ears, nose, mouth, and all other body parts. He based this on passages that speak of God’s “hand” or “eyes” or other body parts.

In his notes on John 4:24 (where Jesus says “God is a Spirit”), Dake wrote: “God is a Spirit Being, not the sun, moon, stars; nor an image of wood, stone, or metal; and not beast or man… He is a person with a personal spirit body, a personal soul, and a personal spirit, like that of angels, and like that of man except His body is of spirit substance instead of flesh and bones”⁷

And in his listing of “63 Facts About God,” Dake includes: “He has a spirit body (Dan. 7:9-14; 10:5-19; Isa. 6; Ez. 1; Rev. 4)… Shape (Jn. 5:37)… Form (Phil. 2:5-7)… Back parts (Ex. 33:23)… Heart (Gen. 6:6; 8:21)… Hands (Ps. 102:25-26; Heb. 1:10)… Fingers (Ps. 8:3-6; Ex. 31:18)… Eyes (Ps. 11:4; 18:24; 33:18)… Ears (Ps. 18:6; 34:15)”⁸

This is a perfect example of hyperliteralistic interpretation gone wrong. Let’s think about this carefully:

First problem: If God has a body, He can only be in one place at a time. A body, by definition, takes up space and has location. But the Bible clearly teaches that God is omnipresent – everywhere at once. David said you can’t flee from God’s presence (Psalm 139:7-10). Jeremiah quotes God saying, “Do not I fill heaven and earth?” (Jeremiah 23:24). A God with a body cannot fill heaven and earth. Dake argued: “There can be no true figure of speech to convey an idea unless the idea conveyed is real; so if God’s bodily parts are mere figures they are true figures of the real bodily parts of God.”¹⁶

Second problem: Jesus specifically said “God is spirit” (John 4:24), not “God has a spirit” or “God has a spirit body.” The Greek text is clear – God’s essential nature is spirit. Spirit, by definition, doesn’t have physical form or body parts. Dake tries to get around this by inventing the concept of a “spirit body,” but this is like saying something is a “square circle” – the terms contradict each other.

Third problem: If we take every mention of God’s body parts literally, we run into absurdities. The Bible mentions God’s wings (Psalm 91:4). Does God have both arms and wings? Is He part human, part bird? This shows the absurdity of taking all these descriptions literally. They are obviously anthropomorphisms – human characteristics attributed to God to help us understand His actions and nature.

The right understanding: The Bible uses human body parts metaphorically to describe God’s activities in terms we can understand. God’s “eyes” represent His omniscience (all-knowing). His “hand” represents His power and action. His “ear” represents His attention to our prayers. These aren’t literal body parts but figurative descriptions of divine attributes.

Case Study 2: Three Gods Instead of One

Perhaps Dake’s most serious error was his teaching about the Trinity. Orthodox Christianity has always taught that there is one God who exists in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These three persons are distinct but not separate – they share the same divine essence.

But Dake, applying his hyperliteral method, concluded that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three completely separate beings. He wrote: “What we mean by Divine Trinity is that there are three separate and distinct persons in the Godhead, each one having His own personal spirit body, personal soul, and personal spirit in the same sense each human being, angel, or any other being has his own body, soul, and spirit”⁹ He further claimed: “The old idea that God exists as three persons in one person is not only unscriptural, but it is ridiculous to say the least.”¹⁷

This is not Christianity – it’s polytheism (belief in multiple gods). Let’s see why this is such a serious error:

First, it contradicts the most basic biblical teaching about God. The foundation of Old Testament faith is the Shema: “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD” (Deuteronomy 6:4). Not three Lords, but one. Isaiah repeatedly emphasizes that there is only one God: “I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me” (Isaiah 45:5).

Second, it makes nonsense of Jesus’s statements about His relationship with the Father. Jesus said, “I and my Father are one” (John 10:30). If they’re completely separate beings, this statement is meaningless. The Jews understood Jesus was claiming to be God, which is why they tried to stone Him (John 10:31-33). But in Dake’s system, Jesus wasn’t claiming to be the one God but just another separate god.

Third, it destroys the very nature of God. If there are three separate gods, which one do we worship? Do they ever disagree? Could they potentially conflict with each other? Are they all equally powerful, or is one supreme? These questions show the theological chaos that results from Dake’s position.

Dake tried to defend his position by redefining the word “one” to mean “united in purpose” rather than “one in number.” But this is exactly the kind of word-twisting that makes his “plain reading” not plain at all. When the Bible says there is one God, it means numerically one, not three beings who happen to agree with each other. He wrote: “There are over 500 plain scriptures that refer to the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as being THREE SEPARATE AND DISTINCT PERSONS, each with His own personal body, soul, and spirit in the sense that all other persons have them.”¹⁸

Case Study 3: The Gap Theory and Pre-Adamite Races

Another strange teaching that came from Dake’s hyperliteralism was his elaborate “Gap Theory.” He believed there was a gap of perhaps millions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, during which a whole civilization existed and was destroyed.

Dake based this partly on Genesis 1:2, which says the earth “was without form, and void.” The Hebrew word translated “was” can also mean “became.” So Dake insisted the verse should read “the earth became without form and void,” implying it had previously been formed and inhabited.

This led Dake to create an entire mythology about a pre-Adamic race that lived on earth under the rule of Lucifer before he rebelled against God. According to Dake: “Before his defeat he had a throne and therefore a kingdom and subjects to rule over. His kingdom was under the clouds, under the stars, and under heaven—therefore, on earth. Having weakened the nations over whom he ruled, and wanting to be like God and take His place in heaven, Lucifer led the invasion of heaven”¹⁰ He elaborated: “Lucifer ruled for God for an unknown period before he rebelled and invaded heaven to dethrone God… He was defeated, and his kingdom on Earth was destroyed by a flood and by the fierce anger of God.”¹⁹

Dake specifically taught: “The pre-Adamites were Earthly creatures as proved by the fact that they were drowned in the pre-Adamite flood… They are called ‘nations’ (Isa. 14:12-14), ‘man’ (Jer. 4:23-26); and they were subject to drowning which proves that they were mortal creatures the same as present man.”²⁰

This interpretation has numerous problems:

First, it’s based on forcing one possible translation of one Hebrew word while ignoring the natural reading of the text. The phrase “without form and void” simply describes the initial unformed state of creation before God shaped and filled it during the six days.

Second, it contradicts clear biblical teaching. Romans 5:12 says “by one man [Adam] sin entered into the world, and death by sin.” If there was a whole race that sinned and died before Adam, this statement is false.

Third, it’s entirely speculative. Dake created an elaborate story about pre-Adamite races, Lucifer’s earthly kingdom, and a pre-Genesis flood, none of which is actually in the Bible. This isn’t interpretation – it’s imagination.

Case Study 4: God Learning and Changing His Mind

Dake’s hyperliteralism also led him to deny God’s omniscience (all-knowing nature). When the Bible says God “repented” or “changed His mind,” Dake took this literally to mean God didn’t know what would happen and had to adjust His plans when surprised by human actions.

For example, Genesis 6:6 says “it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth.” Dake interpreted this to mean God actually regretted creating humanity because He didn’t foresee how wicked they would become. But this interpretation creates massive theological problems:

It contradicts clear statements about God’s knowledge:

• “Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite” (Psalm 147:5)
• “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world” (Acts 15:18)
• “Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done” (Isaiah 46:10)

It makes prophecy impossible. If God doesn’t know the future, how can He make accurate predictions? Yet the Bible is full of detailed prophecies that came true exactly as predicted.

It undermines our confidence in God’s promises. If God can be surprised and change His mind, how can we trust His promises of salvation and eternal life?

The right understanding is that the Bible uses anthropomorphic language (human-like descriptions) to help us understand God’s actions. When it says God “repented,” it’s describing how God’s treatment of people changed in response to their actions, not that God was surprised or made a mistake. God knew all along what would happen, but He relates to us in real time as we make our choices.

Numbers 23:19 makes this clear: “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent.” When the Bible says God doesn’t repent, it means He doesn’t change His mind like humans do – out of ignorance or error. When it says God does repent, it’s using human language to describe divine action in response to human behavior.

How Proper Interpretation Protects Orthodox Faith

Now that we’ve seen how Dake’s hyperliteralism led to serious errors, let’s understand how proper biblical interpretation protects us from these mistakes and preserves true Christian faith.

The Importance of Context

One of the most important rules of biblical interpretation is: context determines meaning. You can’t just grab a verse out of its context and decide what it means. You need to consider:

Dake regularly violated these principles. He would take a single verse or even part of a verse and build an entire doctrine on it without considering the context. This is like taking one sentence from a novel and trying to understand the whole story from just that sentence. He insisted: “The Bible is a simple book to understand if we will believe it as it is written and let it be our rule of faith and practice.”²¹ Yet his method made simple truths incredibly complex!

Understanding Literary Genres

The Bible isn’t all one type of writing. Just like a library has different sections – history, poetry, fiction, science, biography – the Bible contains different genres of literature. Each genre has its own rules for interpretation:

Historical Narrative (like Exodus or Acts): These describe real events that actually happened. We read them as historical accounts, though they may use figures of speech like any historical writing does.

Poetry (like Psalms or Song of Solomon): These use extensive figurative language, parallelism, and imagery. We don’t expect scientific precision but emotional and spiritual truth expressed beautifully.

Wisdom Literature (like Proverbs or Ecclesiastes): These give general principles for life, not absolute promises. When Proverbs says “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6), it’s stating a general principle, not guaranteeing that every properly trained child will never rebel.

Prophecy (like Isaiah or Jeremiah): These contain messages from God that often use symbolic language and may have multiple levels of fulfillment – near and far, partial and complete.

Apocalyptic (like parts of Daniel and Revelation): These use extensive symbolism to reveal spiritual realities. Numbers, colors, and creatures often represent concepts rather than literal things.

Epistles (like Romans or Ephesians): These are letters addressing specific situations in specific churches. While they contain universal truths, we must understand the original situation to properly apply them today.

Dake’s error was treating all these genres the same way – forcing a wooden literalism on poetry, apocalyptic visions, and figurative language just as much as on historical narrative.

Recognizing Figures of Speech

The Bible uses all the same figures of speech we use in everyday language. Learning to recognize them protects us from Dake’s errors:

Metaphor: Saying something is something else to show similarity. “The LORD is my shepherd” (Psalm 23:1) doesn’t mean God is literally a sheep herder but that He cares for us like a shepherd cares for sheep.

Simile: Comparing things using “like” or “as.” “All flesh is as grass” (1 Peter 1:24) doesn’t mean humans are plants but that human life is temporary like grass.

Hyperbole: Deliberate exaggeration for emphasis. When Jesus said “If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out” (Matthew 5:29), He wasn’t literally telling us to mutilate ourselves but emphasizing how seriously we should deal with sin.

Anthropomorphism: Attributing human characteristics to God to help us understand Him. When the Bible speaks of God’s “hand” or “eyes,” it’s describing His power and knowledge in terms we can grasp. Dake rejected this, saying: “No meaning should be given to any Scripture beyond that which a natural and literal interpretation yields.”²²

Personification: Attributing personal characteristics to impersonal things. When wisdom is portrayed as a woman calling in the streets (Proverbs 1:20-21), wisdom isn’t literally a person but is being personified to make the teaching more vivid.

The Analogy of Faith

One of the most important principles that would have saved Dake from his errors is called the “analogy of faith.” This means that Scripture interprets Scripture. Since the Bible doesn’t contradict itself (because God doesn’t contradict Himself), we must interpret unclear or difficult passages in light of clear passages.

For example, when we read passages that seem to suggest God changes His mind, we interpret them in light of clear passages that say God doesn’t change (Malachi 3:6, James 1:17). The clear passages help us understand that the “change” language is anthropomorphic, not literal.

When we read about God’s “eyes” or “hands,” we interpret these in light of Jesus’s clear statement that “God is spirit” (John 4:24). The clear teaching about God’s spiritual nature helps us understand that the body part language is metaphorical.

Dake repeatedly violated this principle by taking difficult or unclear passages and using them to override clear biblical teaching. This is backwards – we should always let the clear interpret the unclear, not the other way around.

The Role of Church History

Another protection against error is learning from church history. Christians have been studying the Bible for 2,000 years. When someone like Dake comes up with a “new” interpretation that contradicts what Christians have always believed, that should be a huge red flag.

For example, Christians have always believed in one God in three persons (the Trinity). This doctrine was clarified at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and has been believed by Catholics, Orthodox, and Protestants ever since. When Dake teaches three separate Gods, he’s not just disagreeing with some Christians – he’s rejecting what all orthodox Christians have always believed.

This doesn’t mean tradition is equal to Scripture, but it does mean we should be very suspicious of “new revelations” that contradict 2,000 years of Christian understanding. The Holy Spirit has been guiding the church into truth all this time – it’s arrogant to think everyone before us got it wrong and we’re the first to understand correctly.

How Dake’s Method Affects Everything Else

What makes Dake’s hyperliteralism especially dangerous is that it doesn’t just affect one or two doctrines – it corrupts the entire theological system. When your method of interpretation is wrong, everything you build on that foundation will be crooked.

The Domino Effect of Bad Hermeneutics

Think of theology like a house of dominoes. Each doctrine is connected to others. When you knock one down, others fall too. Dake’s hyperliteral method knocked down the first domino, and the rest followed:

Do you see how one wrong interpretation leads to another and another? By the end, the God of Dake’s system isn’t the God of the Bible at all but a limited, fallible being who resembles the gods of Greek mythology more than the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Impact on Practical Christian Living

These theological errors don’t stay in the realm of theory – they affect how people live their Christian lives. Consider how Dake’s errors impact believers:

Prayer: If God has a physical body located in heaven and doesn’t know everything, how can He hear the prayers of millions of Christians around the world at the same time? Dake’s followers might doubt whether God even hears their prayers.

Trust: If God can be surprised and change His mind, how can we trust His promises? Maybe He’ll discover something that makes Him reconsider our salvation!

Worship: How can we worship three separate Gods? Which one do we pray to? Do they ever disagree? The confusion undermines true worship.

Fellowship: If different races aren’t meant to fellowship together (as Dake taught in his Gap Theory), then multiracial churches are disobedient to God. This divides the body of Christ and contradicts the gospel’s unifying power.

Witness: How can we share the gospel when our theology presents a confusing picture of multiple gods with bodies who don’t know everything? This isn’t good news – it’s confusion.

Assurance: If God is limited in power and knowledge, can He really keep His promise of eternal life? Can He guarantee our salvation? Dake’s theology undermines the believer’s assurance.

The Influence on Others

Perhaps most tragically, Dake’s errors didn’t die with him. His study Bible continues to be printed and sold. His interpretive method influenced other teachers who have spread similar or even worse errors. Some prominent prosperity gospel teachers have cited Dake as an influence, using his methods to justify their own false teachings.

When false teaching is presented in the format of a study Bible, printed right alongside Scripture, it gains an authority it doesn’t deserve. Many sincere Christians, wanting to understand the Bible better, have been led astray by Dake’s notes, thinking they were getting scholarly insight when they were actually getting heretical speculation.

The Alternative: Sound Biblical Interpretation

So if Dake’s hyperliteralism is wrong, what’s the right way to interpret the Bible? Here are the key principles of sound biblical interpretation that protect us from error:

Examples of Proper Interpretation

Let’s apply these principles to some of the passages Dake misinterpreted:

Example 1: “The eyes of the LORD are in every place” (Proverbs 15:3)

Dake’s interpretation: God has physical eyes that somehow see everywhere.

Correct interpretation: This is poetic language describing God’s omniscience. The proverb is teaching that God knows everything that happens everywhere – both evil and good. Nothing is hidden from Him. The “eyes” are a metaphor for knowledge and awareness, not literal organs of sight.

Example 2: “It repented the LORD that he had made man” (Genesis 6:6)

Dake’s interpretation: God didn’t know humans would become so evil and regretted His decision to create them.

Correct interpretation: This is anthropomorphic language describing God’s response to human sin from a human perspective. The Hebrew word translated “repented” can also mean “was grieved.” God is expressing profound sorrow over human wickedness. He knew this would happen (He’s omniscient) but relates to it in real time. The passage emphasizes the seriousness of sin and God’s emotional response to it, not a change in God’s nature or knowledge.

Example 3: “I and my Father are one” (John 10:30)

Dake’s interpretation: Jesus and the Father are united in purpose but are two separate Gods.

Correct interpretation: Jesus is claiming essential unity with the Father – they are one in essence/nature while being distinct persons. The Jews understood this as a claim to deity, which is why they immediately tried to stone Him for blasphemy (verses 31-33). The Greek word for “one” (hen) is neuter, indicating one in essence, not masculine (heis) which would mean one person. This supports the doctrine of the Trinity – one God in three persons.

Why This Matters for Today’s Church

You might wonder why we’re spending so much time on the errors of someone who died in 1987. Why does Dake’s hyperliteralism matter for Christians today? The answer is that his influence continues, and his interpretive method is still causing problems in churches around the world.

The Ongoing Influence

First, the Dake Study Bible is still in print and widely used, especially in Pentecostal and Charismatic churches. Many pastors and Bible teachers have been influenced by Dake’s notes, often without realizing how far they depart from orthodox Christianity. When error is printed right alongside Scripture, it gains a false credibility.

Second, Dake’s interpretive method – even when his specific conclusions are rejected – continues to influence how many people read the Bible. The hyperliteral approach that ignores context, genre, and figures of speech is still common. Many of the errors in contemporary Christianity can be traced back to this flawed hermeneutical method.

Third, some of today’s most popular false teachers cite Dake as an influence. The “Word of Faith” movement, with its teachings about humans being “little gods” and having the same creative power as God, draws heavily on Dake’s theology. When we understand Dake’s errors, we can better recognize and refute these contemporary false teachings.

Lessons for Bible Study

Understanding Dake’s errors teaches us important lessons about how to study the Bible correctly:

Lesson 1: Humility is Essential
Dake was so confident in his interpretations that he rejected 2,000 years of Christian understanding. He thought he had discovered truths that all previous Christians had missed. This pride led to serious error. We need to approach the Bible humbly, willing to learn from others and test our understanding against the wisdom of the broader church.

Lesson 2: Method Matters
How we interpret the Bible is just as important as that we read it. A wrong method will lead to wrong conclusions no matter how sincere we are or how much we study. We need to learn and apply sound principles of interpretation.

Lesson 3: Theology is Interconnected
We can’t pick and choose which doctrines to believe. Biblical truth is interconnected – when we compromise one area, it affects everything else. Dake’s error about God’s nature led to errors about the Trinity, which led to errors about salvation, which led to errors about Christian living.

Lesson 4: Words Have Meaning
When Dake redefined “one” to mean “united in purpose” rather than “one in number,” he was changing the fundamental meaning of Scripture. We must be careful not to redefine biblical terms to fit our preferences or preconceptions.

Lesson 5: The Dangers of Novel Interpretation
If your interpretation of Scripture is completely new – if no Christian in 2,000 years has understood it the way you do – you’re almost certainly wrong. The Holy Spirit has been guiding the church into truth throughout history. While our understanding can grow and develop, fundamental truths don’t change.

Protecting Our Churches

How can churches protect themselves from the kind of errors Dake promoted? Here are practical steps:

The Heart of the Matter: Knowing the True God

At its core, the issue with Dake’s hyperliteralism isn’t just about interpretation methods or theological precision. It’s about knowing and worshiping the true God versus creating a god of our own imagination.

When Dake’s method turns the infinite, omnipresent, omniscient, spiritual God of the Bible into a limited, localized, learning, physical being (or three beings), it’s not just a theological error – it’s idolatry. It’s creating a false god and calling it by the true God’s name.

Jesus said, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent” (John 17:3). Eternal life depends on knowing the true God, not a distorted version of Him. That’s why these issues matter so much.

The God of the Bible

The true God revealed in Scripture is:

• One God in Three Persons: Not three Gods but one God existing eternally as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
• Spirit: Not having a physical body but being pure spirit, unlimited by space or matter
• Omnipresent: Present everywhere at once, not localized in heaven
• Omniscient: Knowing all things perfectly from eternity, never learning or discovering
• Omnipotent: All-powerful, able to do anything consistent with His perfect nature
• Immutable: Unchanging in His being, perfections, purposes, and promises
• Holy: Perfectly pure and set apart, the standard of all righteousness
• Love: The very essence of love, demonstrated supremely in Christ’s sacrifice

This is the God who created us, sustains us, saves us, and will one day bring us home to Himself. This is the God worthy of our worship, trust, and obedience. This is the God obscured and distorted by Dake’s hyperliteral interpretation.

The Importance of Truth

Some people might say, “Does it really matter? As long as people love Jesus and try to live good lives, why worry about theological details?” This attitude, while sounding humble and peaceful, is actually dangerous.

Truth matters because:

1. God Commands It: We’re commanded to “worship in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24). God cares about being known and worshiped as He truly is, not as we imagine Him to be.

2. Error Has Consequences: False doctrine leads to false practice. Dake’s errors led to racist teachings, confusion about salvation, and distorted views of Christian living.

3. The Gospel Is at Stake: If we get God wrong, we get the gospel wrong. How can we proclaim salvation if we don’t know who God is or what He’s done?

4. Love Requires Truth: Jesus said “If ye love me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15). We can’t truly love God while believing and teaching lies about Him.

5. Others Are Affected: Our beliefs influence others. When we embrace error, we lead others astray. Jesus warned severely against causing others to stumble (Matthew 18:6).

Moving Forward: A Call to Biblical Faithfulness

As we conclude this examination of Dake’s hyperliteral hermeneutic, what should our response be?

For Those Influenced by Dake

If you’ve been using a Dake Study Bible or have been influenced by his teachings, don’t panic but do take action:

1. Compare what you’ve learned from Dake with the clear teaching of Scripture
2. Consult reliable theological resources and orthodox study Bibles
3. Talk with mature Christians and trained pastors about areas of confusion
4. Be willing to abandon error, even if you’ve believed it for years
5. Remember that God is gracious and patient with us as we grow in understanding

For Pastors and Teachers

If you’re in a position of teaching others:

1. Examine your own understanding to ensure you haven’t unconsciously absorbed Dake’s errors
2. Teach your congregation proper principles of biblical interpretation
3. Address Dake’s errors specifically if his study Bible is popular in your community
4. Recommend reliable study resources to replace problematic ones
5. Be patient with those who’ve been misled but firm about biblical truth

For All Christians

Every believer should:

1. Develop good Bible study habits based on sound interpretation principles
2. Be discerning about teachers and resources
3. Value the wisdom of historic Christianity while keeping Scripture as the final authority
4. Pursue truth in love, being gracious with those in error while standing firm on biblical doctrine
5. Remember that the goal is not just correct theology but knowing and loving the true God

Conclusion: The Root and Its Fruit

We’ve seen that Dake’s hyperliteral hermeneutic is indeed the root problem underlying all his theological errors. Like a tree with diseased roots, everything that grows from this flawed foundation is corrupted. His method of forcing physical, material meanings onto figurative and metaphorical language led to:

• A physical God limited in space and knowledge
• Three separate Gods instead of one God in three persons
• Racist theology that divides the body of Christ
• Speculative myths about pre-Adamite races and gap theories
• A diminished view of God’s attributes and abilities
• Confusion about the nature of salvation and Christian living

But understanding the root problem also points us to the solution. When we interpret the Bible properly – considering context, recognizing genres, understanding figures of speech, and letting Scripture interpret Scripture – we discover the glorious truth of who God really is and what He’s done for us in Christ.

The Bible is God’s revelation to us, given so we can know Him and His ways. It uses human language with all its richness and variety to communicate divine truth. When we respect both the divine origin and the human characteristics of Scripture, we can understand its message clearly and accurately.

Dake’s error wasn’t in taking the Bible seriously or believing it’s true. His error was in forcing it to say things it doesn’t say by ignoring the normal rules of language and literature. In trying to be “more literal,” he actually departed from what the Bible literally teaches.

The root problem has been exposed. The hyperliteral hermeneutic that seemed so spiritual – “just taking God at His word” – has been shown to be a distortion that actually prevents us from understanding what God is really saying. Now, armed with this understanding, we can move forward to examine the specific doctrinal errors that grew from this poisonous root, always remembering that our goal is not just correct theology but true worship of the living God.

In the next chapters, we’ll see how this root problem of hyperliteralism affected Dake’s understanding of God’s nature, the Trinity, and other fundamental Christian doctrines. But now you have the tools to recognize why these errors occurred and how to avoid them in your own Bible study.

Remember: God has spoken to us in His Word. He wants us to understand it. He’s given us His Spirit to guide us into truth. When we approach Scripture humbly, carefully, and prayerfully, using sound principles of interpretation, we can know what God has revealed and rest confidently in His truth.

The Bible is clear enough for a child to understand the way of salvation, yet deep enough to challenge the greatest scholars. It uses normal human language to communicate divine truth. And when we read it as it was meant to be read – not forcing it to say what we think it should say, but listening to what it actually says – we encounter the living God who speaks to us through His living Word.

This is the alternative to Dake’s hyperliteralism: not a lesser view of Scripture, but a higher one that respects both its divine inspiration and its human characteristics. Not a complicated system that only scholars can understand, but the simple recognition that God has spoken to us in language we can understand if we’ll just pay attention to how language actually works.

The root problem has been identified. The solution has been presented. Now it’s up to each of us to apply these truths in our own study of God’s Word, always remembering that the goal is not just knowledge but relationship with the God who has revealed Himself to us in Scripture and supremely in His Son, Jesus Christ.

---

Footnotes

¹ Finis Jennings Dake, Revelation Expounded (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950), Preface.

² Finis Jennings Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), 280 (note on 1 John 5:7).

³ Dake, Revelation Expounded, Preface.

⁴ Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, 280 (New Testament note on 1 John 5:7, “89 Proofs of A Divine Trinity”).

⁵ Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, 280 (New Testament note on 1 John 5:7).

⁶ Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, Old Testament page not specified (note on omnipresence).

⁷ Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, 169 (New Testament note on John 4:24).

⁸ Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, 412 (Old Testament note, “63 Facts About God”).

⁹ Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, 280 (New Testament note on 1 John 5:7).

¹⁰ Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, 4 (Old Testament note on Genesis 1:2); see also Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), chapters on the pre-Adamite world.

¹¹ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1977), 752-753.

¹² Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 54.

¹³ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 753.

¹⁴ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 448.

¹⁵ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 43.

¹⁶ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 54.

¹⁷ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 65.

¹⁸ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 498.

¹⁹ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 132.

²⁰ Finis Jennings Dake, “Ages and Dispensations,” Chapter 2, section II.

²¹ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 39.

²² Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 47.

---

Bibliography

Dake, Finis Jennings. Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963.

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

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

Dake, Finis Jennings. Revelation Expounded. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1950.

Dake, Finis Jennings. “Ages and Dispensations.” Unpublished manuscript.

Dake, Finis Jennings. “Heavenly Hosts.” Unpublished manuscript.

Dake, Finis Jennings. Bible Truth Unmasked. Atlanta, GA: Bible Research Foundation, 1950.

© 2025, DakeBible.org. All rights reserved.