Finis Dake’s Denial of God’s Omniscience: A Biblical Examination of His Heretical Teaching

Introduction: The Gravity of Denying God’s Omniscience

Among the many theological errors propagated by Finis Jennings Dake, perhaps none is more serious than his denial of God’s omniscience—the biblical truth that God knows all things past, present, and future. This doctrine is not a minor theological point that Christians can disagree about; it strikes at the very heart of who God is. When we deny God’s omniscience, we deny His deity itself, for a God who does not know all things is not the God of the Bible.

Dake’s teachings on this subject represent a radical departure from historic Christian orthodoxy. Throughout church history, from the early church fathers through the Protestant Reformation and continuing to today, orthodox Christianity has unanimously affirmed that God possesses perfect and complete knowledge of all things. This includes not only what has happened and what is happening, but also what will happen and even what could happen under any conceivable circumstance.

The prophet Isaiah declared, “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” (Isaiah 46:9-10). This passage clearly teaches that God knows and declares future events before they occur. Yet Dake, in his writings, repeatedly contradicts this fundamental biblical truth.

What makes Dake’s error particularly dangerous is that he uses Christian theological terminology while changing the meanings of these terms. He speaks of God’s “knowledge” and even uses the word “omniscience,” but then proceeds to redefine these concepts in ways that empty them of their biblical meaning. This deceptive use of orthodox language while promoting unorthodox concepts has led many unsuspecting Christians astray.

Dake’s View: God as Limited by “Unpredictable Free Moral Agents”

In his book “God’s Plan for Man,” Dake makes statements that clearly reveal his denial of God’s omniscience. On page 54 of GPFM, Dake writes something that should alarm every Bible-believing Christian. He states that God’s plan was made “in conjunction with unpredictable free moral agents.” Let’s examine this statement carefully, for it reveals the heart of Dake’s error.

Notice carefully what Dake is saying here. He claims that free moral agents are “unpredictable” to God. If creatures are unpredictable to God, then by definition, God cannot know what they will do until they actually do it. This is a direct denial of God’s foreknowledge and omniscience. Dake tries to soften this by saying God is omniscient “by nature,” but then immediately contradicts himself by saying God “limits Himself” and “cannot” know what free creatures will choose.

This teaching reduces God to the level of a very intelligent but ultimately limited being who must wait to see what His creatures will decide before He can know their choices. This is not the God of the Bible who “declares the end from the beginning” (Isaiah 46:10). The God of Scripture doesn’t need to wait to see what will happen; He already knows all things perfectly and completely.

Throughout his writings, Dake consistently portrays God as being surprised by human choices, having to adjust His plans based on unexpected human decisions, and learning new information as history unfolds. This view, sometimes called “Open Theism” in modern theology, is a heretical departure from biblical Christianity. It makes God into a being who is growing in knowledge, which means He is not perfect and complete in Himself.

The Biblical Doctrine of Divine Omniscience

Before we examine more of Dake’s errors, let us establish clearly what the Bible teaches about God’s omniscience. The Scriptures are abundantly clear that God possesses perfect, complete, and exhaustive knowledge of all things—past, present, and future.

God Knows All Things: “Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite” (Psalm 147:5). The Hebrew word translated “infinite” here literally means “without number” or “beyond calculation.” God’s understanding cannot be measured or limited in any way.

God Knows the Future: “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world” (Acts 15:18). God doesn’t just know what He Himself will do; He knows all events that will occur throughout all of history. Jesus demonstrated this divine foreknowledge repeatedly, telling His disciples in advance about His betrayal, Peter’s denial, His death and resurrection, and countless other future events.

God Knows the Hearts of Men: “The LORD searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts” (1 Chronicles 28:9). God doesn’t need to wait to see what people will choose; He knows their thoughts and intentions even before they are fully formed in their own minds.

God Knows All Possibilities: Jesus said of the cities that rejected Him, “Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes” (Matthew 11:21). Here Jesus demonstrates knowledge not just of what will happen, but of what would have happened under different circumstances—what theologians call “middle knowledge” or knowledge of counterfactuals.

The biblical testimony is unanimous and overwhelming: God knows all things perfectly and completely. There is nothing that is hidden from His sight, nothing that surprises Him, nothing that He must learn through observation or experience.

Dake’s Redefinition of Prophecy

One of the ways Dake attempts to maintain his position while seeming to accept biblical prophecy is by redefining what prophecy means. In his book “Revelation Expounded,” Dake makes statements that reveal his view that even biblical prophecies are conditional and may not come to pass as stated.

According to Dake’s theology, when God makes a prophetic statement about the future, He is not declaring what He knows will certainly happen, but rather what He intends to make happen if circumstances permit. This transforms prophecy from a declaration of God’s certain foreknowledge into merely an expression of God’s intentions or desires that may or may not be fulfilled.

This view creates enormous problems for biblical interpretation. Consider the hundreds of specific prophecies about the coming Messiah in the Old Testament. According to Dake’s view, God didn’t actually know that Jesus would be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), or that He would be betrayed for thirty pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12-13), or that His hands and feet would be pierced (Psalm 22:16). Instead, these would merely be God’s hopes or plans that might or might not come to pass depending on the free choices of unpredictable moral agents.

But the Bible presents these prophecies as certain declarations of what will happen, not as conditional possibilities. Peter declares that Christ’s death occurred “by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God” (Acts 2:23). It wasn’t a possibility that might or might not happen; it was determined and foreknown by God from eternity past.

The Problem of “Conditional” Omniscience

Dake often tries to have it both ways by claiming that God is omniscient while simultaneously claiming that God cannot know certain things. This is like claiming that God is omnipotent while saying there are some things He cannot do, or that God is omnipresent while saying there are some places He cannot be. These are logical contradictions that cannot stand.

Dake attempts to avoid these conclusions by saying that God “limits Himself” or voluntarily chooses not to know certain things. But this doesn’t solve the problem; it actually makes it worse. A God who chooses not to know things is still not omniscient. Furthermore, the very idea that God could choose not to know something He could know is philosophically incoherent. Knowledge is not something that can be selectively turned off like a light switch.

The Bible never presents God as limiting His own knowledge. On the contrary, it consistently presents God’s omniscience as an essential aspect of His divine nature. “The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good” (Proverbs 15:3). God doesn’t close His eyes to give creatures privacy for their free choices; He sees and knows all things at all times.

Dake’s Misunderstanding of Free Will

At the root of Dake’s error is a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Dake believes that for human choices to be truly free, they must be unpredictable even to God. This reveals a deficient understanding of both divine omniscience and human freedom.

The Bible teaches that humans make real choices for which they are morally responsible, while at the same time affirming that God knows and even ordains these choices. Joseph’s brothers freely chose to sell him into slavery, acting according to their own evil desires, yet Joseph could say to them, “Ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good” (Genesis 50:20). Their choices were free and morally culpable, yet God had ordained these events for His purposes.

Similarly, those who crucified Christ acted according to their own free will and were held responsible for their actions, yet Peter could say they did “whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done” (Acts 4:28). Human freedom and divine foreordination are not contradictory in Scripture; they are complementary truths that we must hold in tension.

Dake’s error is in thinking that human freedom requires libertarian free will—the ability to choose otherwise in an absolute sense that makes choices unpredictable even to God. But this is not the biblical view of freedom. Biblical freedom is the ability to choose according to one’s own desires and nature, without external coercion. This kind of freedom is entirely compatible with God’s complete foreknowledge and even with His sovereign ordination of events.

The Influence of Process Theology

While Dake may not have been directly influenced by process theology (which was developing during his lifetime), his views share remarkable similarities with this heretical system. Process theology teaches that God is in process of becoming, that He is learning and growing along with His creation, and that He cannot know the future because the future doesn’t yet exist to be known.

Like process theologians, Dake presents a God who is temporally bound, experiencing surprise and disappointment as history unfolds in unexpected ways. This God must constantly adjust His plans based on the unpredictable choices of free creatures. He is more like a master chess player trying to stay ahead of His opponents than the sovereign Lord who “worketh all things after the counsel of his own will” (Ephesians 1:11).

This view of God has serious implications for Christian faith and practice. If God doesn’t know the future, how can we trust His promises? If God doesn’t know what choices we will make tomorrow, how can He promise to work all things together for our good (Romans 8:28)? If God is learning and growing in knowledge, how can we be sure that He won’t discover something tomorrow that will cause Him to change His mind about our salvation?

Dake’s View of Christ’s Knowledge

Dake’s denial of omniscience extends even to his understanding of Christ. In his exposition of Revelation 1:1, Dake claims that Christ “was not omniscient” during His earthly ministry and suggests that even after His resurrection and ascension, Christ had to receive revelation from the Father because He didn’t know everything.

While it is true that during His earthly ministry, Jesus voluntarily limited the use of His divine attributes (what theologians call the kenosis), Dake goes far beyond orthodox Christianity in suggesting that Christ actually ceased to be omniscient. The orthodox position is that Christ retained all His divine attributes but chose not to exercise them independently of the Father’s will. Dake’s position suggests that Christ actually lost His divine attributes, which would mean He ceased to be God.

Furthermore, Dake’s suggestion that even after His resurrection and ascension Christ lacks omniscience is completely contrary to Scripture. The resurrected and ascended Christ declares, “I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts” (Revelation 2:23), a claim to divine omniscience. The apostle Paul declares that in Christ “are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:3).

The Danger of Anthropomorphism

One of the ways Dake arrives at his erroneous views is through a hyper-literal interpretation of anthropomorphic language in Scripture. When the Bible speaks of God “repenting” or “changing His mind,” Dake takes these expressions literally, concluding that God must not have known what would happen and is therefore adjusting His plans based on new information.

However, orthodox theology has always recognized that such language is anthropomorphic—it describes God in human terms to help us understand His actions, not to literally describe His nature. When the Bible says God “repented” that He made man (Genesis 6:6), it is describing God’s holy response to sin in terms we can understand, not suggesting that God made a mistake or didn’t foresee human wickedness.

The Bible itself clarifies this point: “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent” (Numbers 23:19). And again, “The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent” (1 Samuel 15:29). These clear statements show that the anthropomorphic language of God “repenting” must be understood as a figure of speech, not a literal description of God changing His mind due to unforeseen circumstances.

The Trinity and Omniscience

Dake’s confusion about God’s omniscience is related to his broader errors concerning the Trinity. As documented in various critiques of his work, including a letter published in Christianity Today, Dake has been accused of teaching a form of tritheism—belief in three Gods rather than one God in three persons.

If the three persons of the Trinity are separate Gods (as Dake’s writings sometimes suggest), then it becomes possible to imagine that they might have different levels of knowledge or that they might need to communicate information to each other that one knows but another doesn’t. This would explain why Dake can speak of the Father giving revelation to the Son as if the Son didn’t already know it.

But orthodox Christianity teaches that the three persons of the Trinity share one divine essence and therefore share all divine attributes, including omniscience. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all possess complete and perfect knowledge of all things. When Scripture speaks of the Father revealing things to the Son, it is speaking of the economic Trinity (how the persons relate to each other in the work of redemption) not the ontological Trinity (their essential nature).

The Impact on Prayer and Providence

Dake’s denial of God’s omniscience has serious practical implications for Christian life, particularly in the areas of prayer and trust in divine providence. If God doesn’t know what will happen in the future, how can He answer prayers about future events? How can He promise to supply all our needs (Philippians 4:19) if He doesn’t know what those needs will be?

According to Dake’s theology, when we pray about future situations, we are essentially giving God information He doesn’t have. We are updating Him on our circumstances and helping Him plan His response. This transforms prayer from communion with an all-knowing Father who knows what we need before we ask (Matthew 6:8) into a briefing session where we inform God about situations He couldn’t have foreseen.

Similarly, if God doesn’t know the future, His providence becomes reactive rather than proactive. Instead of working all things according to His eternal purpose, God is constantly adjusting and readjusting His plans based on unexpected developments. This view robs believers of the comfort that comes from knowing that God has ordained their steps and that nothing can happen to them outside of His perfect will and foreknowledge.

The Problem of Biblical Prophecy

If Dake’s view were correct, the entire phenomenon of biblical prophecy becomes inexplicable. How could Isaiah predict the name of Cyrus over a century before he was born (Isaiah 44:28; 45:1)? How could Daniel predict the exact succession of world empires centuries in advance (Daniel 2, 7)? How could Jesus predict the destruction of Jerusalem with such specific detail (Luke 21:20-24)?

Dake attempts to deal with this problem by suggesting that many prophecies are conditional, but this doesn’t work for the specific, detailed predictions found throughout Scripture. When the Bible gives specific names, dates, and details about future events, these cannot be dismissed as merely conditional possibilities.

Consider the remarkable prophecy of Isaiah 53, written seven hundred years before Christ, which describes in detail the suffering and death of the Messiah. According to Dake’s view, God didn’t actually know that Christ would be “wounded for our transgressions” or that He would be “numbered with the transgressors.” These were just hopes or plans that might not have come to pass if free moral agents had made different choices.

But this makes nonsense of the New Testament’s treatment of Old Testament prophecy. The apostles consistently present the fulfillment of prophecy as proof of God’s sovereign control over history and validation of Jesus’ identity as the Messiah. If these prophecies were just educated guesses or contingent possibilities, they would prove nothing.

The Absurdity of a Learning God

Think about what Dake’s position really means: God is learning new things every moment of every day. Every time a human being makes a choice, God gains new knowledge He didn’t have before. Every time a sparrow falls to the ground, God learns something He didn’t previously know. This means God is constantly changing, constantly growing in knowledge, constantly being surprised by developments He didn’t foresee.

This is not the God of the Bible who declares, “I am the LORD, I change not” (Malachi 3:6). The biblical God is perfect and complete in Himself, lacking nothing, needing nothing, learning nothing. He is “the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning” (James 1:17).

A God who is learning is a God who is imperfect, for if He were perfect, He would already know everything and have nothing to learn. A learning God is a God who is improving, which means He was previously deficient. This is not a God worthy of worship, but a being who is himself in process of development.

The Scriptural Testimony to God’s Exhaustive Foreknowledge

Let us examine more closely what Scripture actually teaches about God’s foreknowledge. The testimony is overwhelming and unanimous: God knows all things that will come to pass, down to the smallest detail.

God knows the number of our days: “Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, the days fashioned for me, when as yet there were none of them” (Psalm 139:16, NKJV). Before we were even born, God knew exactly how many days we would live and what would happen on each of those days.

God knows our words before we speak them: “For there is not a word in my tongue, but, lo, O LORD, thou knowest it altogether” (Psalm 139:4). God doesn’t wait to hear what we will say; He knows our words before they are formed on our tongues.

God knows the thoughts and intentions of the heart: “The word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. 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” (Hebrews 4:12-13).

God’s foreknowledge includes evil acts: “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain” (Acts 2:23). Even the most heinous act in history—the crucifixion of the Son of God—was foreknown and even determined by God’s counsel.

The Philosophical Problems with Dake’s Position

Beyond the biblical problems, Dake’s position faces insurmountable philosophical difficulties. If God doesn’t know the future, then the future must be unknowable in principle. But if the future is unknowable in principle, then it doesn’t exist in any meaningful sense. This leads to a view of time where only the present moment is real, the past no longer exists, and the future has not yet come into being.

But this view of time is problematic for Christianity. If the future doesn’t exist for God to know, then God’s promises about the future become meaningless. God cannot promise what He cannot know. He cannot guarantee eternal life if He doesn’t know what will happen in eternity. He cannot promise that Christ will return if He doesn’t know whether circumstances will permit it.

Furthermore, if God exists in time as Dake suggests (experiencing past, present, and future sequentially like we do), then God is subject to time rather than being its creator. This makes time a force or reality greater than God, existing independently of Him and constraining Him. But the Bible teaches that God created time along with the universe and exists outside of it: “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God” (Psalm 90:2).

The Heretical Nature of Dake’s Teaching

It’s important to understand that Dake’s denial of God’s omniscience is not a minor interpretive difference or a secondary issue about which Christians can agree to disagree. This is a fundamental departure from orthodox Christianity that places Dake outside the bounds of biblical faith.

Throughout church history, the omniscience of God has been recognized as an essential attribute of deity. The early church fathers, the medieval theologians, the Protestant Reformers, and orthodox Christians of all traditions have unanimously affirmed that God possesses perfect and complete knowledge of all things, including the future. To deny this is to deny a fundamental aspect of God’s nature.

Across all denominational lines, orthodox Christianity has maintained that God’s omniscience is not negotiable. It is part of what makes God, God. To deny it is to worship a different god than the one revealed in Scripture.

The Connection to Other Errors

Dake’s denial of God’s omniscience is not an isolated error but is connected to a whole system of theological mistakes. His deficient view of God’s knowledge is related to his errors concerning:

The Trinity: As mentioned earlier, Dake’s confused teaching about the Trinity, suggesting three separate beings rather than one God in three persons, creates the conceptual space for imagining that the persons of the Godhead might have different levels of knowledge.

The Nature of God: Dake famously taught that God has a physical body, complete with specific measurements. This physicalist view of God naturally leads to seeing God as limited and bound by space and time, unable to transcend the limitations that affect physical beings.

Christology: Dake’s teaching that Christ ceased to be omniscient during the incarnation (rather than voluntarily restricting the use of His omniscience) reveals a deficient understanding of the hypostatic union—the doctrine that Christ is fully God and fully man in one person.

Soteriology: If God doesn’t know the future, then He couldn’t have chosen the elect before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4), couldn’t have written names in the Lamb’s book of life from the foundation of the world (Revelation 13:8), and couldn’t guarantee the perseverance of the saints.

Eschatology: Dake’s elaborate prophetic schemes become meaningless if God doesn’t actually know what will happen in the future. His detailed timelines and predictions are reduced to speculation about what God hopes might happen rather than declarations of what God knows will happen.

The Practical Dangers for Believers

The practical implications of accepting Dake’s teaching are severe and dangerous for Christian faith and life:

1. Loss of Confidence in Prayer: If God doesn’t know the future, we cannot pray with confidence about future needs or situations. We cannot trust that God is working all things together for our good because He doesn’t know what “all things” will include.

2. Uncertainty About Salvation: If God doesn’t know what choices we will make in the future, He cannot guarantee that we will persevere in faith. Our salvation becomes uncertain, dependent on choices that even God cannot foresee.

3. Meaningless Prophecy: Biblical prophecy becomes reduced to divine wishful thinking rather than certain declarations of future events. This undermines the authority and reliability of Scripture.

4. Diminished Worship: How can we worship a God who is learning and growing? How can we trust a God who is constantly being surprised? The God of Dake’s theology is not worthy of the worship Scripture commands.

5. Theological Confusion: Accepting Dake’s view requires rejecting or reinterpreting hundreds of clear biblical passages. This leads to a pick-and-choose approach to Scripture that undermines biblical authority.

6. Pastoral Inadequacy: How can pastors comfort the grieving or counsel the troubled if God Himself doesn’t know what the future holds? The pastoral ministry depends on confidence in God’s sovereign control over all things.

Responding to Potential Objections

Defenders of Dake might raise several objections to this critique. Let’s address the most common ones:

Objection 1: “Dake uses the word ‘omniscient,’ so he must believe in omniscience.”

Response: Using orthodox terminology while redefining it is a common tactic of false teachers. The question is not whether Dake uses the word “omniscient” but what he means by it. When he says God “cannot” know what free creatures will choose, he has emptied the term of its meaning.

Objection 2: “Dake is just emphasizing human free will and responsibility.”

Response: Human responsibility doesn’t require that our choices be unpredictable to God. The Bible consistently affirms both divine sovereignty (including foreknowledge) and human responsibility. We don’t need to deny one to affirm the other.

Objection 3: “God voluntarily limits Himself to allow for human freedom.”

Response: Even if God could voluntarily limit His power (which is debatable), He cannot limit His knowledge. Knowledge is not something that can be turned on and off. Either God knows something or He doesn’t. If He doesn’t know the future, He is not omniscient.

Objection 4: “The Bible uses anthropomorphic language about God learning or changing His mind.”

Response: The Bible also explicitly states that God does not repent or change His mind like a man (Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29). We must interpret the anthropomorphic language in light of the clear didactic passages about God’s nature.

Objection 5: “This is a secondary issue that Christians can disagree about.”

Response: The attributes of God are not secondary issues. They define who God is. A god who is not omniscient is not the God of the Bible. This is a matter of fundamental orthodoxy, not a minor interpretive difference.

The Testimony of Church History

Throughout church history, Christians have unanimously affirmed God’s omniscience. Let’s briefly survey how the church has consistently maintained this doctrine:

The Early Church Fathers:

Augustine wrote extensively on God’s foreknowledge, arguing that God’s eternal perspective allows Him to know all things without destroying human freedom. In his work “City of God,” Augustine states, “God knows all things before they come to pass” and argues that this knowledge doesn’t necessitate fatalism.

John Chrysostom, despite being from the more free-will-oriented Eastern tradition, still affirmed God’s complete foreknowledge: “God knows all things before they come into being, and nothing escapes His knowledge.”

The Medieval Period:

Thomas Aquinas, in his Summa Theologica, devoted extensive discussion to God’s knowledge, arguing that God knows all things—past, present, and future—in one eternal act of knowing. He writes, “God knows all things, not only things actual but also things possible.”

Anselm of Canterbury argued that God’s knowledge is perfect and includes all future contingents. He maintained that God’s foreknowledge doesn’t eliminate human freedom but establishes it within God’s providential order.

The Reformation:

Martin Luther strongly affirmed God’s omniscience, writing in “The Bondage of the Will” that God “foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His immutable, eternal, and infallible will.”

John Calvin, in his Institutes, writes: “When we attribute foreknowledge to God, we mean that all things have ever been, and perpetually remain, under His eyes, so that to His knowledge nothing is future or past, but all things are present.”

The Post-Reformation Period:

The Reformed confessions unanimously affirm God’s omniscience. The Westminster Confession states that God’s knowledge is “infinite, infallible, and independent of the creature, so as nothing is to Him contingent or uncertain.”

Even Arminian theologians, who emphasize human free will more than Calvinists, have historically affirmed God’s complete foreknowledge. James Arminius himself wrote: “God knows all things possible, whether they be in the capability of God or of the creature… He knows all things that will exist.”

Biblical Passages That Refute Dake’s Position

Let’s examine specific biblical passages that directly contradict Dake’s teaching:

Isaiah 46:9-10: “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 couldn’t be clearer. God declares “the end from the beginning” and “things that are not yet done.” This is not conditional knowledge or educated guessing; this is certain knowledge of future events.

Psalm 139:1-6: “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. Thou hast beset me behind and before, and laid thine hand upon me. Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it.”

David marvels at God’s exhaustive knowledge of his life, including his thoughts before he thinks them and his words before he speaks them. This is not the limited knowledge of Dake’s god but the infinite knowledge of the biblical God.

Acts 15:18: “Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.”

James declares at the Jerusalem Council that all of God’s works are known to Him from the beginning. This includes not just God’s own actions but all of history, since God works all things according to the counsel of His will (Ephesians 1:11).

1 John 3:20: “For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.”

John’s simple statement that God “knoweth all things” leaves no room for Dake’s limitations. The Greek word here (πάντα, panta) means “all things” without exception or qualification.

Hebrews 4:13: “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 in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is “naked and opened” before Him. This comprehensive knowledge cannot be reconciled with Dake’s claim that God cannot know what free creatures will choose.

The Logical Implications of Denying Omniscience

If we follow Dake’s logic to its conclusion, we arrive at absurd and unbiblical results:

1. God Cannot Guarantee Prophecy: If God doesn’t know what free creatures will choose, He cannot guarantee that any prophecy involving human action will come to pass. This would make God a liar when He claims to declare “the end from the beginning” (Isaiah 46:10).

2. God Cannot Have an Eternal Plan: Ephesians 1:11 says God “worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.” But if God doesn’t know the future, He cannot have a definite plan. He must constantly adjust His purposes based on unexpected human choices.

3. God Cannot Be Immutable: If God is constantly learning new information, He is constantly changing. His knowledge today is greater than His knowledge yesterday. This contradicts the biblical teaching that God does not change (Malachi 3:6; James 1:17).

4. God Cannot Be Perfect: A perfect being lacks nothing and needs nothing. But if God lacks knowledge of the future, He is not perfect. He is deficient in knowledge and must acquire it through observation and experience.

5. God Cannot Be Sovereign: True sovereignty requires control, and control requires knowledge. A God who doesn’t know what will happen cannot be truly sovereign over His creation. He is at the mercy of unforeseen circumstances.

6. God Cannot Be Worshipped as Supreme: Why should we worship a God who knows less about tomorrow than we might guess? Why trust a God who is as surprised by events as we are? The God of Dake’s theology is not supreme and thus not worthy of supreme devotion.

The Comfort of God’s Omniscience

In contrast to the uncertainty and anxiety that Dake’s theology produces, the biblical doctrine of God’s omniscience provides great comfort to believers:

We Can Trust God’s Promises: Because God knows the future perfectly, His promises are certain. When He says He will never leave us nor forsake us (Hebrews 13:5), we can be confident that no unforeseen circumstance will prevent Him from keeping this promise.

We Can Have Peace in Trials: Knowing that God foresaw our trials and permitted them for our good (Romans 8:28) gives us peace in the midst of suffering. Nothing catches God by surprise; everything is part of His perfect plan.

We Can Pray with Confidence: Jesus tells us that our Father knows what we need before we ask (Matthew 6:8). We don’t need to inform God or update Him on our situation; He already knows it perfectly and has already planned His perfect response.

We Can Face the Future Without Fear: Because God knows the future and is in control of it, we don’t need to fear what tomorrow may bring. Our times are in His hands (Psalm 31:15), and He has already prepared the way before us.

We Can Rest in God’s Wisdom: God’s decisions are based on perfect knowledge of all consequences and possibilities. We can trust His wisdom even when we don’t understand His ways, knowing that He sees the end from the beginning.

A Call to Reject Dake’s Errors

Given the clear biblical testimony and the unanimous witness of orthodox Christianity throughout history, we must firmly reject Dake’s denial of God’s omniscience. This is not a matter of personal preference or interpretive difference; it is a matter of fundamental biblical truth.

Those who have been influenced by Dake’s teaching need to recognize the seriousness of this error. To deny God’s omniscience is to deny His deity. It is to worship a different god than the one revealed in Scripture. It is to place oneself outside the bounds of biblical Christianity.

Churches and Christian institutions that have been using Dake’s materials need to reconsider their choice of resources. How can we build strong Christians on such a deficient foundation? How can we teach people to trust God when we’re using materials that deny His essential attributes?

Christian bookstores and publishers need to exercise better discernment about the materials they promote. The fact that something is popular or sells well doesn’t mean it’s biblically sound. We have a responsibility to protect God’s people from false teaching, not to profit from its distribution.

The True Biblical God

In contrast to Dake’s limited deity, the Bible presents us with a God of infinite perfections:

He is Omniscient: “Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite” (Psalm 147:5). God knows all things—past, present, and future—with perfect and complete knowledge. Nothing is hidden from His sight; nothing surprises Him; nothing is uncertain to Him.

He is Omnipotent: “For with God nothing shall be impossible” (Luke 1:37). God has unlimited power to accomplish His will. He is not frustrated by circumstances or thwarted by opposition. What He purposes, He accomplishes.

He is Omnipresent: “Whither shall I go from thy spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy presence?” (Psalm 139:7). God is fully present everywhere at all times. He is not limited by space or location but fills all things with His presence.

He is Immutable: “For I am the LORD, I change not” (Malachi 3:6). God does not change in His being, attributes, purposes, or promises. He is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:8).

He is Sovereign: “Our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased” (Psalm 115:3). God rules over all things with absolute authority. Nothing happens outside His sovereign will and control.

He is Eternal: “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God” (Psalm 90:2). God exists outside of time, seeing all of history in an eternal present.

This is the God worthy of our worship, trust, and obedience. This is the God who can save us completely and keep us eternally. This is the God revealed in Scripture—not the limited, learning, surprised deity of Dake’s imagination.

Conclusion: Standing for Biblical Truth

The denial of God’s omniscience is not a small error that can be overlooked. It strikes at the very heart of the Christian faith. It reduces God to a finite being, struggling to keep up with His creation, constantly surprised by developments He didn’t foresee, unable to guarantee His promises or ensure His purposes.

Finis Dake’s teaching on this subject represents a serious departure from biblical Christianity. Despite his use of Christian terminology and his apparent zeal for Bible study, his fundamental errors about the nature of God place him outside the bounds of orthodox Christianity. His influence has led many astray, teaching them to worship a god who doesn’t exist while neglecting the true God revealed in Scripture.

As conservative Christians committed to biblical truth, we must stand firmly against such errors. We must teach and defend the biblical doctrine of God’s omniscience, recognizing it as an essential attribute of deity that cannot be compromised or redefined. We must warn others about the dangers of Dake’s teaching and guide them toward resources that faithfully represent biblical Christianity.

The stakes are too high for compromise. The god of Dake’s theology cannot save because he doesn’t know what he needs to save us from. He cannot guide because he doesn’t know where the path leads. He cannot comfort because he’s as uncertain about the future as we are. He cannot be trusted because his promises are contingent on circumstances he cannot foresee.

But the God of the Bible—the true and living God—knows all things perfectly and completely. He declares the end from the beginning. He works all things according to the counsel of His will. He knows what we need before we ask. He has ordained our days before we live them. He cannot be surprised, cannot be defeated, cannot be improved upon, and cannot fail.

This is the God we worship. This is the God we proclaim. This is the God revealed in Scripture. And this is the God whose omniscience we must defend against all who would deny or diminish it.

May God grant us wisdom and courage to stand for biblical truth, to expose error wherever we find it, and to lead others to a true knowledge of the omniscient God who alone is worthy of our worship and trust. May we never compromise on the essential attributes of God, recognizing that to do so is to abandon the faith once delivered to the saints.

Let us close with the words of the apostle Paul, who understood the infinite knowledge of God and marveled at its depth: “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen” (Romans 11:33-36).

© 2025, DakeBible.org. All rights reserved.