Exposing the Deception: How Leon Bible Misleads Readers About Dake’s Trinity Doctrine

Introduction: The Magnitude of the Deception

In his book Finis Jennings Dake: His Life and Ministry, Leon Bible attempts what can only be described as theological sleight of hand. He takes a man who explicitly taught that the Trinity consists of three separate Gods with three separate bodies and presents him as a defender of orthodox Christian doctrine. This isn’t a minor misrepresentation or honest misunderstanding—it’s a systematic effort to sanitize heretical teachings that strike at the very heart of Christian faith.

The stakes could not be higher. The doctrine of the Trinity isn’t a secondary issue or theological fine point—it’s the foundation of Christian monotheism. When we compromise on this doctrine, we’re not adjusting our understanding of a mystery; we’re abandoning the God of the Bible for “other gods” of human imagination. Leon Bible’s attempt to make Dake appear orthodox doesn’t just mislead readers about one teacher’s views; it endangers their understanding of who God is.

This article will demonstrate, through extensive quotation from both Leon Bible and Finis Dake, how Bible systematically misrepresents Dake’s teachings. We’ll show that while Bible quotes selective passages that make Dake sound orthodox, he ignores or suppresses the overwhelming evidence that Dake taught tritheism—a heresy the church condemned centuries ago.

Part I: Leon Bible’s Misleading Presentation

Setting Up the Deception

Leon Bible begins his defense of Dake’s Trinity doctrine with what appears to be scholarly thoroughness. He quotes multiple theological sources, creates comparison charts, and presents Dake’s definition of the Trinity alongside orthodox definitions. To the casual reader, this creates an impression of careful scholarship and honest comparison. But this apparent thoroughness masks a fundamental deception.

At first glance, this definition seems orthodox. Bible emphasizes that Dake taught “one in unity and eternal substance.” He even notes the similarity between Dake’s definition and Wesley’s definition. But this is where the deception begins. Bible quotes Dake selectively, choosing phrases that sound orthodox while ignoring the context and fuller explanations where Dake reveals what he actually means by these terms.

The Comparison Chart Manipulation

Leon Bible creates an elaborate comparison between Dake’s teaching and the Moody Handbook of Theology’s four requirements for a biblical definition of the Trinity:

Bible concludes: “Without doubt, Dake’s view of the Trinity is compatible with the orthodox view as stated in Moody. There can be no argument here.”² But this conclusion is only possible because Bible has carefully selected quotes while hiding Dake’s actual teachings. Let’s examine what Dake really taught about each of these points.

Part II: What Dake Actually Taught

Dake’s Real Definition of “One”

While Leon Bible quotes Dake saying the three persons are “one in unity and eternal substance,” he fails to mention that Dake explicitly redefines what “one” means when referring to God. Here’s what Dake actually taught:

Notice the critical distinction: Dake explicitly denies that God is numerically one. He teaches that “one” only means unified in purpose, like a team working together. This fundamentally changes the meaning of the Trinity. But there’s more:

This is the bombshell Leon Bible hides: Dake explicitly states God is NOT one in number but three separate beings with three separate bodies, souls, and spirits.

Three Separate Bodies: The Heart of the Heresy

The most damning evidence against Leon Bible’s portrayal comes from Dake’s extensive teaching that each person of the Trinity has a separate body. This isn’t a minor detail or passing comment—it’s central to Dake’s entire theological system:

Leon Bible completely omits this quote, which appears on the very same page he cites for other purposes. Why? Because it demolishes any claim that Dake held to orthodox Trinitarian doctrine. If each person of the Trinity has a separate body “in the same sense” as humans and angels have separate bodies, then we’re talking about three separate beings, not one God in three persons.

But Dake goes even further:

And concerning God’s physical limitations:

According to Dake, God the Father has a physical body located in heaven and must travel to visit earth. This is not the omnipresent God of Scripture but a limited, located deity.

Three Gods, Not One God

The logical conclusion of Dake’s teaching is inescapable: if there are three separate beings with three separate bodies, souls, and spirits, then there are three Gods. Dake himself embraces this conclusion, though he tries to maintain the language of “Trinity”:

Later on the same page, Dake states:

Notice the contradiction: Dake says Elohim is “not divided” while simultaneously teaching three separate beings with separate bodies. This is theological doublespeak. How can three beings with three bodies be “not divided”? Only by redefining “unity” to mean agreement in purpose rather than unity of being.

Part III: Leon Bible’s Tri-theism Defense—A Study in Misdirection

Perhaps the most egregious example of Leon Bible’s deception comes in his appendix titled “Tri-theism,” where he attempts to prove Dake didn’t teach this heresy. His argument reveals either stunning ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation.

Bible’s Definition vs. Reality

Bible then argues that since Dake uses the phrase “unity and eternal substance,” he must believe in unity of essence. But this ignores what Dake actually means by these terms. Let’s examine the evidence:

How can three beings with separate bodies, souls, and spirits share one essence? They can’t. When Dake speaks of “unity,” he means exactly what tritheists mean—unity of purpose and cooperation, not unity of being.

The “One God” Deception

Leon Bible makes much of the fact that Dake uses the phrase “one God” and never explicitly says “three Gods.” He writes:

This is technically true but fundamentally deceptive. Dake doesn’t use the phrase “three Gods” because he redefines “one God” to mean three separate beings working in unity. It’s like saying someone doesn’t teach polygamy because they call multiple wives “one marriage.” The terminology masks the reality.

Consider what Dake actually teaches:

• Three separate beings ✓
• Three separate bodies ✓
• Three separate souls ✓
• Three separate spirits ✓
• Three separate locations (the Father in heaven, must travel to earth) ✓
• Unity only in purpose and agreement ✓

This is tritheism in everything but name. Leon Bible’s defense amounts to saying, “Dake doesn’t call it tritheism, therefore it isn’t tritheism,” which is absurd.

Part IV: The Mormon Connection Bible Tries to Deny

In another appendix, Leon Bible attempts to distance Dake from Mormon theology. He lists several distinctions, but his arguments actually highlight the similarities rather than dispel them.

The Body of God

This is perhaps the most disingenuous argument in Bible’s entire book. Yes, Dake says God has a “spirit body” rather than “flesh and blood,” but he explicitly teaches this spirit body has all the same parts and limitations as a physical body:

What’s the practical difference between teaching God has a body of “flesh and bones” (Mormon) versus a “spirit body” with tangible parts that exists in space and time (Dake)? Both deny God’s incorporeality. Both limit God to spatial location. Both contradict Jesus’ statement that “God is spirit” (John 4:24).

Multiple Gods

Bible notes that Mormons believe in an infinite number of gods, while Dake only teaches three. But this is a difference in degree, not kind. The fundamental error is the same: denying monotheism. Whether you have three gods or three million, you’ve abandoned the biblical teaching that there is only one God.

These verses don’t say “the three Gods work as one” or “the Gods are unified in purpose.” They declare there is ONE God, numerically, absolutely, exclusively. Dake’s teaching contradicts this fundamental biblical truth just as much as Mormonism does.

Part V: How Dake Redefines Orthodox Terms

One of the most insidious aspects of Dake’s teaching—and Leon Bible’s defense of it—is how Dake uses orthodox theological terms while completely redefining their meaning. This allows Bible to quote Dake using traditional language while hiding the heretical content.

The Word “Trinity”

Dake uses the word “Trinity” frequently, which Bible presents as evidence of orthodoxy. But look at how Dake defines it:

By maintaining the word while changing the meaning, Dake creates confusion. Readers see “Trinity” and assume orthodox doctrine, never realizing Dake has gutted the term of its historic meaning.

The Phrase “One God”

Similarly, Dake continues to use the phrase “one God,” which Leon Bible eagerly highlights. But examine what Dake means:

This redefinition turns Christianity’s central confession of monotheism into an affirmation of polytheism disguised by wordplay.

The Term “Persons”

When orthodox theology speaks of three “persons” in the Trinity, it uses the term technically to indicate three centers of consciousness within one being. Dake uses “persons” to mean three separate beings:

Notice: “each and every separate person in the universe”—Dake explicitly places the persons of the Trinity in the same category as all other persons in the universe, each with their own separate body, soul, and spirit. This isn’t the orthodox doctrine of three persons in one being, but three separate beings entirely.

Part VI: The Theological Consequences of Dake’s Tritheism

Leon Bible’s attempt to sanitize Dake’s theology isn’t just academically dishonest—it’s spiritually dangerous. The consequences of accepting Dake’s tritheism cascade through every area of Christian faith and practice.

We Lose Biblical Monotheism

If Dake is right, Christianity is not monotheistic but polytheistic. We don’t worship one God but three Gods who happen to work together. This places Christianity in the same category as pagan religions with their pantheons of cooperating (and sometimes competing) deities.

The first commandment becomes meaningless: “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3). If the Trinity itself consists of three Gods, then we already have “other gods.” The Shema, which Jesus called the greatest commandment (Mark 12:29), becomes a lie.

Prayer Becomes Confused

To which God do we pray? If there are three separate Gods, do we need to address each one separately? Can they hear us simultaneously if they have separate bodies in separate locations? Dake’s God the Father, limited to a body in heaven, cannot be omnipresent to hear all prayers at once.

The Incarnation Becomes Incoherent

If God already has a body (as Dake teaches about the Father), what’s significant about the incarnation? The wonder of Christmas—”the Word became flesh” (John 1:14)—loses its meaning if God already has a body. It becomes merely one bodied deity taking on a different kind of body.

Moreover, if the Son is a separate God with His own body, soul, and spirit before the incarnation, what exactly happened at the incarnation? Did one body replace another? Did the Son have two bodies—His eternal “spirit body” and His incarnate human body? Dake’s system creates theological chaos.

Salvation Becomes Uncertain

Which God saves us? If the Father, Son, and Spirit are three separate Gods, which one is responsible for salvation? Can they disagree about who should be saved? Paul says “God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19), but if Christ is a separate God, this statement becomes nonsensical.

The unity of the salvation plan requires the unity of God. If there are three Gods, we have no guarantee they share the same salvific will or that they won’t disagree about our eternal destiny.

Worship Becomes Idolatrous

Jesus declared, “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24). But Dake’s God has a body with physical parts, located in space. This isn’t the infinite, omnipresent Spirit revealed in Scripture but a localized, limited being.

When we worship Dake’s bodied, spatially-limited, numerically-multiple Gods, we’re not worshiping the God of the Bible. We’re worshiping a figment of human imagination, no matter how sincerely we use biblical language.

Part VII: Examining Leon Bible’s Motivations

Why would Leon Bible go to such lengths to misrepresent Dake’s teachings? Why quote selectively, hide damaging evidence, and create false comparisons to make heresy appear orthodox? Several possibilities present themselves:

Financial Motivation

Leon Bible’s book was published by Dake Publishing in 2006. The publisher has a clear financial interest in maintaining Dake’s reputation and continuing sales of his materials. Acknowledging that Dake taught heresy would devastate sales of the Dake Annotated Reference Bible and other publications. Bible’s whitewashing serves the publisher’s financial interests.

Theological Blindness

It’s possible Bible is so immersed in Dake’s system that he genuinely cannot see the problems. When someone spends years studying and teaching from Dake’s materials, they may become blind to obvious errors. The gradual redefinition of terms can deceive even sincere students.

However, this explanation seems unlikely given the systematic nature of Bible’s omissions. He consistently quotes passages that sound orthodox while omitting adjacent passages that reveal heresy. This pattern suggests deliberate selection rather than honest oversight.

Institutional Protection

Many churches and Bible schools have used Dake’s materials for decades. Admitting Dake taught heresy would require these institutions to acknowledge they’ve been promoting false doctrine. The reputational damage would be severe. Bible’s defense may represent an attempt to protect these institutions from embarrassment.

Personal Loyalty

Bible clearly admires Dake and wants to defend his legacy. This personal loyalty may override theological honesty. Rather than acknowledge his hero’s errors, Bible reshapes the evidence to support a predetermined conclusion.

Part VIII: The Pattern of Deception

Throughout his appendix on the Trinity, Leon Bible follows a consistent pattern of deception. Understanding this pattern helps readers recognize similar tactics in other defenses of false teaching.

Step 1: Quote Orthodox-Sounding Phrases

Bible begins by finding phrases in Dake that sound orthodox when taken out of context. “One in unity and eternal substance” sounds good until you realize Dake means three separate substances unified in purpose.

Step 2: Create False Parallels

Bible places Dake’s quotes alongside orthodox statements, creating an appearance of agreement. He makes charts showing “compatibility” while hiding the fundamental differences in meaning.

Step 3: Ignore Contradictory Evidence

Bible systematically ignores or omits Dake’s clear statements that God is three separate beings with three bodies. He never addresses the implications of God having physical parts or being limited to location.

Step 4: Redefine the Controversy

Bible frames the issue as whether Dake uses certain phrases (“three gods,” “Trinity”) rather than what Dake actually teaches. This allows him to claim victory based on terminology while ignoring substance.

Step 5: Attack Strawmen

Bible refutes positions Dake’s critics don’t hold (like claiming Dake is identical to Mormons) while ignoring their actual criticisms (that Dake teaches three separate divine beings).

Step 6: Appeal to Authority

Bible repeatedly notes that many people use Dake’s Bible and find it helpful, as if popularity validates theology. He implies that questioning Dake means questioning all these sincere believers.

Part IX: Specific Examples of Bible’s Deceptive Quotations

Let’s examine specific instances where Leon Bible quotes Dake in misleading ways, showing exactly how he manipulates the evidence:

Example 1: The Definition of Trinity

Bible quotes the definition but hides the explanation that reveals three separate beings.

Example 2: Unity of the Godhead

Bible quotes the part that sounds orthodox (“not a divided Deity”) while omitting the part that reveals heresy (“not one in number”).

Example 3: Equality of the Persons

Bible emphasizes equality while hiding that Dake’s “equal” Gods are spatially limited beings who must travel from place to place.

Part X: Responding to Potential Objections

Those defending Leon Bible’s portrayal might raise several objections. Let’s address them:

Objection 1: “Dake uses the word ‘Trinity’ so he must be orthodox”

Response: Using orthodox terminology doesn’t guarantee orthodox theology. Jehovah’s Witnesses use the term “Jesus Christ” but deny His deity. Mormons use “God the Father” but teach He was once a man. The question isn’t what terms Dake uses but what he means by them. When Dake defines Trinity as three separate beings with separate bodies, he’s using orthodox language to teach heresy.

Objection 2: “Dake says there is ‘one God’ not three”

Response: Dake explicitly states God is “not one in number” but only “one in unity.” He compares it to how man and woman become “one flesh” in marriage—two separate people united in purpose. This is linguistic manipulation, not biblical monotheism. Saying three separate beings are “one God” because they work together is like saying three separate countries are “one nation” because they’re allies.

Objection 3: “You’re taking Dake out of context”

Response: We’re providing more context than Leon Bible does. Bible quotes fragments that sound orthodox while we’re showing the fuller passages that reveal what Dake actually meant. The context makes Dake’s tritheism more obvious, not less.

Objection 4: “Many godly people have been blessed by Dake’s Bible”

Response: God can use imperfect tools, but that doesn’t validate the errors. Many people have been blessed by Bible translations that contain mistakes, but we still correct the mistakes. The issue isn’t whether God has used Dake’s Bible despite its errors, but whether we should promote teachings that fundamentally distort the nature of God.

Objection 5: “This is just theological nitpicking”

Response: The nature of God is not a minor issue. Whether God is one being or three beings isn’t a “fine point” but the foundation of biblical faith. The difference between monotheism and polytheism isn’t “nitpicking” but the difference between Christianity and paganism.

Part XI: The Broader Pattern of Dake’s Errors

Dake’s tritheism doesn’t exist in isolation. It connects to a broader pattern of theological errors that Leon Bible also attempts to minimize or hide:

The Physical God Error

Dake’s teaching that God has a body with physical parts isn’t a separate error but directly connected to his tritheism. If God has a body, He’s limited to location. If each Person has a separate body, they’re separate beings. The corporeality of God and the plurality of Gods are two sides of the same heretical coin.

The Limited Omniscience Error

If God has a body in heaven, how does He know what happens on earth? Dake’s answer reveals another heresy:

This creates a divided knowledge in the Godhead. The Father doesn’t directly know everything—He depends on the Spirit for information about events outside heaven. This makes God’s omniscience derivative and dependent rather than essential and immediate.

The Spatial Limitation Error

Dake repeatedly describes God “coming down” from heaven to earth, which he interprets literally:

This isn’t the omnipresent God of Scripture who fills heaven and earth (Jeremiah 23:24) but a localized deity who must travel to be present. Leon Bible never addresses these clear denials of God’s omnipresence.

Part XII: The Historical Context of the Heresy

To understand the severity of Dake’s error, we must place it in historical context. The church has faced and rejected this heresy before.

The Arian Heresy (4th Century)

Arius taught that the Son was a separate being from the Father, created before time but not eternal. The Council of Nicaea (325 AD) condemned this, affirming that the Son is “of the same substance” (homoousios) as the Father. Dake’s teaching that the Father and Son have separate bodies, souls, and spirits is actually worse than Arianism—at least Arius maintained there was only one God.

The Anthropomorphite Heresy (4th Century)

Some Egyptian monks taught that God has a human form with physical body parts. The church rejected this, affirming God’s incorporeality. Dake resurrects this heresy with his detailed descriptions of God’s body parts.

Social Trinitarianism (Modern)

Some modern theologians propose a “social Trinity” of three centers of consciousness so distinct they border on tritheism. Even these theologians, however, maintain that the three persons share one essence. Dake goes beyond even the most extreme social Trinitarians by teaching three separate beings with separate bodies.

Part XIII: The Damage to Core Christian Doctrines

Leon Bible’s attempt to make Dake appear orthodox isn’t just misleading—it’s destructive to essential Christian doctrines:

Damage to the Doctrine of God

If we accept Dake’s teaching (and Bible’s defense of it), we lose the biblical God entirely. Instead of the infinite, omnipresent, incorporeal Spirit revealed in Scripture, we have three limited, located, bodied beings. This isn’t a minor adjustment but a complete replacement of the true God with false gods.

Damage to Christology

If Christ is a separate God with His own body, soul, and spirit, the incarnation becomes incomprehensible. How can He be truly God and truly man if “God” means a separate being with His own body? How can He be the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15) if God isn’t invisible but has a visible body?

Damage to Pneumatology

If the Holy Spirit is a separate God with His own body, how can He indwell believers? A body can only be in one location. Yet Scripture teaches the Spirit dwells in all believers simultaneously. Dake’s bodied Spirit cannot accomplish what Scripture attributes to Him.

Damage to Soteriology

Salvation requires one mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5). But if there are three Gods, which one are we separated from by sin? Which one does Christ mediate with? Can the three Gods disagree about salvation? The unity of the salvation plan depends on the unity of God.

Damage to Ecclesiology

The church is the body of Christ, indwelt by one Spirit, serving one God and Father. But if there are three separate Gods, is the church divided in its allegiance? Do different members serve different persons of the separated Trinity? The unity of the church depends on the unity of God.

Damage to Eschatology

Scripture presents a unified vision of the end times, with God accomplishing His purposes through Christ by the Spirit. But if these are three separate Gods, whose plan prevails? Can they have different eschatological goals? The coherence of biblical prophecy depends on the unity of God.

Part XIV: Why This Matters for Today’s Church

Some might ask why we should care about Leon Bible’s misrepresentation of Dake’s teachings. After all, both men are deceased, and these books were written years ago. But the issues at stake remain critically important:

The Dake Bible Remains Popular

The Dake Annotated Reference Bible continues to sell thousands of copies annually. New generations of believers are reading Dake’s notes, assuming they represent sound biblical interpretation. Leon Bible’s book provides cover for this continued distribution of heresy, assuring readers that Dake was orthodox when he clearly wasn’t.

Truth Matters

Christians are called to be people of truth. When a prominent Christian publisher distributes books that deliberately misrepresent theological teachings, it damages our witness. We cannot claim to serve the God of truth while tolerating or promoting deception.

Doctrinal Foundations Matter

The nature of God isn’t a secondary issue but the foundation of all Christian doctrine. Every other belief we hold depends on who God is. When we compromise on the doctrine of God, everything else eventually crumbles. Today’s church faces enough challenges without having its foundations undermined from within.

Discernment Must Be Developed

Leon Bible’s deceptive tactics provide a case study in how false teaching is promoted and defended. By understanding his methods—selective quotation, redefinition of terms, false comparisons—believers can better recognize similar deceptions. In an age of theological confusion, such discernment is essential.

Publishing Integrity Matters

Christian publishers have a responsibility to promote truth, not protect sales. When Dake Publishing releases books defending obvious heresy, it prioritizes profit over truth. The Christian publishing industry needs to be held accountable for what it promotes.

Part XV: What Should Be Done?

Given the severity of the deception we’ve documented, what response is appropriate?

For Individuals

1. Stop using the Dake Bible for study. While the Scripture text itself remains God’s Word, the notes promote heresy. There are many excellent study Bibles with orthodox notes available.

2. Warn others. If you know people using the Dake Bible, share this information with them. Many users are unaware of Dake’s heretical teachings because of books like Leon Bible’s that provide false assurance.

3. Practice discernment. Learn to recognize the tactics used to promote false teaching. Don’t assume that because something is published by a Christian publisher or uses Christian language, it must be biblical.

For Pastors and Teachers

1. Address the issue publicly. If members of your congregation use the Dake Bible, teach on the nature of God and specifically address Dake’s errors. Don’t allow false teaching to spread through silence.

2. Teach biblical hermeneutics. Help your people understand how to interpret Scripture properly, recognizing the difference between what the text says and what commentators claim it says.

3. Provide orthodox alternatives. Recommend solid study Bibles and commentaries that maintain biblical truth about God’s nature.

For Publishers

1. Stop publishing Dake’s materials. No financial benefit justifies promoting heresy. Dake Publishing should cease distribution of materials that fundamentally distort the nature of God.

2. Issue corrections. Publishers who have promoted Leon Bible’s misleading book should issue statements acknowledging the misrepresentation and correcting the record.

3. Implement theological review. Establish processes to ensure published materials align with orthodox Christian doctrine, especially on fundamental issues like the nature of God.

For Christian Bookstores

1. Remove Dake materials from shelves. Bookstores bear responsibility for what they sell. Promoting heretical materials for profit contradicts Christian witness.

2. Educate staff. Ensure employees understand basic Christian doctrine so they can guide customers away from problematic materials.

3. Promote sound resources. Actively recommend study Bibles and commentaries that maintain biblical orthodoxy.

Part XVI: A Personal Word to Dake Bible Users

If you’ve been using the Dake Bible and are just now learning about these issues, you might feel confused, angry, or betrayed. These are appropriate responses. You’ve been misled, not just by Dake, but by those like Leon Bible who assured you Dake was orthodox. Here’s some pastoral counsel:

Don’t Panic About Your Faith

Your faith is in Christ, not in Dake or his Bible. The errors in Dake’s notes don’t invalidate your genuine faith or relationship with God. Many sincere believers have used the Dake Bible without adopting its heresies because they were reading Scripture, not just the notes.

Do Examine What You’ve Learned

Take time to evaluate what you’ve absorbed from Dake’s notes. Have you adopted any of his wrong views about God’s nature? Have you been teaching others that God has a body or that the Trinity consists of three separate beings? If so, these views need to be corrected.

Find Sound Resources

Replace the Dake Bible with a study Bible that maintains orthodox doctrine. Some excellent options include:

• The ESV Study Bible
• The NIV Study Bible
• The MacArthur Study Bible
• The Reformation Study Bible
• The CSB Study Bible

Each of these maintains biblical teaching about God’s nature while providing helpful study notes.

Learn from the Experience

Use this as an opportunity to develop better discernment. Learn to test everything against Scripture itself, not just against what commentators say about Scripture. Remember that even well-intentioned teachers can be wrong on important issues.

Help Others

If you know others using the Dake Bible, share what you’ve learned. Do so with gentleness and respect, remembering that you too were misled. Focus on the positive—helping them know the true God—rather than just criticizing Dake.

Part XVII: The True Biblical Doctrine of the Trinity

Having exposed the deception about Dake’s theology, let’s clearly affirm what Scripture actually teaches about the Trinity:

One God

This isn’t “one” in purpose or agreement but one in being, essence, and number. There are no other Gods besides this one God.

Three Distinct Persons

Within the one being of God exist three distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These are not three modes or manifestations but three distinct persons who relate to one another:

• The Father sends the Son (John 3:16)
• The Son prays to the Father (John 17)
• The Spirit proceeds from the Father (John 15:26)
• The Son sends the Spirit (John 16:7)

Yet these three persons are not three Gods but one God.

God is Spirit

God does not have a body. He is not limited by spatial location. He is omnipresent—fully present everywhere simultaneously. “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” (Jeremiah 23:24).

The Mystery and the Clarity

The Trinity involves mystery—how can three persons be one God? But it also involves clarity—Scripture clearly teaches both that God is one and that Father, Son, and Spirit are distinct persons who are each fully God. We affirm both truths without fully comprehending how they fit together.

This isn’t irrationality but recognition that the infinite God transcends finite human understanding. We can know truly without knowing exhaustively.

Part XVIII: Conclusion—The Cost of Deception

Leon Bible’s attempt to rehabilitate Dake’s reputation comes at an enormous cost. By misrepresenting clear heresy as orthodox doctrine, Bible doesn’t just mislead readers about one teacher’s views—he undermines their ability to recognize and reject false teaching about God Himself.

The Cost to Truth

When Christian authors and publishers deliberately misrepresent theological teachings, they damage the cause of truth. How can we call others to honesty when we tolerate deception within our own ranks? Leon Bible’s book represents a betrayal of the basic Christian commitment to truthfulness.

The Cost to Souls

Those who accept Dake’s teaching about God—believing it to be orthodox because of books like Bible’s—are being led into idolatry. They’re worshiping three limited, bodied beings rather than the one infinite, spiritual God of Scripture. This isn’t a minor theological error but a fundamental misdirection of worship.

The Cost to the Church

When heresy is defended as orthodoxy, it confuses the church’s witness. How can we proclaim the one true God to the world when we can’t even agree on who that God is? How can we call others to abandon false gods when we’ve redefined the true God into three false gods?

The Cost to Future Generations

Books like Leon Bible’s provide cover for the continued propagation of Dake’s heresies. Future generations of believers, assuming these defenses are legitimate, will continue to be misled. The damage multiplies over time as error is passed from one generation to the next.

Final Words: A Call to Biblical Fidelity

This extensive examination of Leon Bible’s deception regarding Dake’s theology issues a clear call: we must return to biblical fidelity in our doctrine of God. No teacher’s reputation, no publisher’s profits, no institutional embarrassment justifies compromising the truth about who God is.

The God revealed in Scripture—one in essence, three in persons, infinite, spiritual, omnipresent—deserves our worship, trust, and proclamation. The false gods of human imagination—whether Dake’s three bodied deities or any other distortion—must be rejected utterly.

May this examination serve not merely to expose error but to establish truth. May it lead not to endless controversy but to clearer proclamation of the one true God. May it result not in division but in unity around biblical truth.

And may Leon Bible’s deceptive defense of heresy serve as a warning: when we compromise on the nature of God, we lose everything. But when we hold fast to biblical truth about who God is, we have a foundation that cannot be shaken.

The old paths—the biblical revelation of the one true God, existing eternally in three persons—remain the good way. Let us walk therein, rejecting all deviations, no matter how cleverly defended.

To the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen. (Jude 25)

---

Sources Cited

¹ Leon Bible, Finis Jennings Dake: His Life and Ministry (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Publishing, 2006), Appendix Nine: Trinity.

² Ibid.

³ Finis Jennings Dake, God’s Plan for Man (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1949), 51.

⁴ Finis Jennings Dake, Dake Annotated Reference Bible (Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963), note on Deuteronomy 6:4.

⁵ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 51.

⁶ Dake, Dake Annotated Reference Bible, note on Genesis 1:26.

⁷ Ibid., note on Jeremiah 23:24.

⁸ Ibid., note on Genesis 11:5.

⁹ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 51.

¹⁰ Ibid.

¹¹ Bible, Finis Jennings Dake, Appendix Ten: Tri-theism.

¹² Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 51.

¹³ Bible, Finis Jennings Dake, Appendix Ten.

¹⁴ Ibid., Appendix Eleven: The Mormon Doctrine of God.

¹⁵ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 56.

¹⁶ Ibid., 51.

¹⁷ Bible, Finis Jennings Dake, Appendix Nine.

¹⁸ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 51.

¹⁹ Bible, Finis Jennings Dake, Appendix Nine.

²⁰ Dake, God’s Plan for Man, 51.

²¹ Bible, Finis Jennings Dake, Appendix Nine.

²² Dake, Dake Annotated Reference Bible, note on Genesis 11:5.

²³ Ibid., note on Jeremiah 23:24.

²⁴ Ibid., note on Genesis 11:5.

© 2025, DakeBible.org. All rights reserved.