Opening Reflection: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1, NKJV). If God Himself is called “the Word,” then surely the words we use about Him matter deeply. The battle for truth has always been, in many ways, a battle over words and their meanings.
Imagine you’re having a conversation with a friend about your favorite restaurant. You both agree it’s “the best place in town.” You’re nodding and smiling, thinking you’re in complete agreement. But then you discover something shocking—when your friend says “restaurant,” they mean a gas station that sells hot dogs, while you’re talking about a five-star Italian bistro. You were using the same word but meaning completely different things. This kind of confusion can be funny when it’s about restaurants, but when it happens with fundamental Christian doctrine, it can lead people into serious spiritual danger.
This is exactly what happens when false teachers like Finis Jennings Dake use familiar Christian words while completely changing their meanings. They say “Trinity,” but they mean three separate Gods. They say “one God,” but they mean one in purpose only, not one in essence. They use our vocabulary but speak a different theological language entirely. This deliberate redefinition of terms is one of the most effective—and deceptive—tools in the false teacher’s arsenal.
Throughout church history, the most dangerous heresies have often hidden behind orthodox-sounding language. The ancient heretic Arius said Jesus was “God,” but he meant “a god” who was created. The modalist Sabellius spoke of “Father, Son, and Spirit,” but he meant one person wearing three masks. Today, cults like the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons use all our Christian words—God, Jesus, salvation, heaven—but they’ve emptied these words of their biblical meaning and filled them with completely different content. When we don’t protect our theological vocabulary, we lose our ability to communicate and preserve the truth.
The Importance of Theological Precision
Why Definitions Matter
Words are the containers that carry meaning from one mind to another. When we say “God,” this word carries specific content—eternal, infinite, all-powerful, all-knowing, present everywhere, unchanging, holy, just, loving. These aren’t just abstract concepts; they describe the living God who has revealed Himself in Scripture. If someone comes along and says “God” but means a limited being with a physical body who exists in only one place at a time (as Dake taught), they’re not talking about the God of the Bible at all. They’re talking about something else entirely while using the same label.
Consider how this works in everyday life. If a doctor tells you that you need “medicine,” it matters enormously what they mean by that word. Are they talking about antibiotics to cure an infection, chemotherapy for cancer, or aspirin for a headache? The word “medicine” alone isn’t enough—we need to know precisely what it contains. In the same way, when someone says they believe in the “Trinity,” we need to know what they mean by that term. Do they mean one God in three persons (orthodox Christianity), or three separate Gods (tritheism), or one God in three modes (modalism)?
The apostle Paul understood the crucial importance of theological precision. When writing to the Galatians, he didn’t just warn them about “different teaching.” He specifically said, “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:8, KJV). Paul knew that changing the content of the gospel—even while using gospel language—was spiritually deadly. The same principle applies to all fundamental Christian doctrines, especially our doctrine of God.
Warning: When someone says they believe in the “Trinity” or that “Jesus is God,” always ask clarifying questions. What do they mean by Trinity? In what sense is Jesus God? Many cults have learned to use orthodox language to gain acceptance while teaching heretical doctrine.
Historical Battles Over Words
The early church fathers understood that the battle for truth was often a battle over single words or even single letters. At the Council of Nicaea in AD 325, the entire debate between orthodox Christianity and Arianism came down to one Greek letter—the difference between homoousios (same essence) and homoiousios (similar essence). That single letter “i” (iota in Greek) made the difference between saying Jesus is truly God and saying Jesus is merely like God. The orthodox party, led by Athanasius, fought fiercely for precision because they understood that truth hangs on exact terminology.
Some people mocked this controversy, saying the church was splitting over a single letter. But Athanasius and the orthodox bishops understood what was at stake. If Jesus is only similar to God rather than the same essence as God, then He cannot save us. A creature, no matter how exalted, cannot redeem other creatures. Only God can save, so Jesus must be fully God. That one letter carried the entire weight of the gospel.
This pattern repeated throughout church history. The Council of Constantinople (381) had to clarify that the Holy Spirit is “the Lord and Giver of life” because some were teaching He was merely a force or power. The Council of Chalcedon (451) had to specify that Christ is “truly God and truly man” in “two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation” because various groups were distorting the incarnation. Each phrase, each word, was carefully chosen to preserve biblical truth against specific errors.
The Protestant Reformation involved similar battles over words. When the Reformers said “faith alone” (sola fide), Rome responded that they too believed in faith—but they meant faith plus works. When the Reformers said “grace alone” (sola gratia), Rome agreed that grace was necessary—but they meant grace plus merit. The addition or subtraction of single words—”alone,” “plus”—determined whether someone held to the biblical gospel or a false gospel.
The Creedal Tradition
The great creeds of the church—the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed, the Chalcedonian Definition—are essentially exercises in theological precision. They define what Christians mean when we use certain words. They build fences around orthodox doctrine to protect it from heretical distortion. Every phrase has been carefully crafted, often through intense debate and prayer, to express biblical truth accurately.
Take the Nicene Creed’s description of Jesus: “God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father.” Each phrase excludes a specific error. “God from God” excludes the idea that Jesus is a created being. “True God from true God” excludes the idea that Jesus is a lesser deity. “Begotten, not made” distinguishes eternal generation from creation. “Of one substance with the Father” excludes Arianism. The creed isn’t just making positive statements; it’s building protective walls around the truth.
Modern evangelicals sometimes dismiss creeds as “dead tradition” or “man-made formulas.” But this attitude leaves them vulnerable to ancient errors dressed in modern language. When someone has no creedal foundation, they can be swept away by any teaching that sounds biblical on the surface. Dake himself rejected the creedal tradition, claiming he needed only the Bible. But by rejecting the theological precision of the creeds, he fell into errors the church had refuted centuries ago.
How Cults Redefine Christian Terms
Same Words, Different Meanings
Every major cult has mastered the art of using Christian vocabulary while completely changing the definitions. This allows them to sound orthodox to the untrained ear while teaching damnable heresy. They can knock on doors and say, “We believe in Jesus Christ,” and most people will assume they mean what Christians have always meant by those words. But they don’t.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses provide a perfect example. They say they believe in “Jesus Christ,” but they mean Michael the Archangel, the first and greatest creation of Jehovah. They say they believe in “salvation,” but they mean working to earn a place in God’s earthly kingdom. They say they believe in the “Holy Spirit,” but they mean God’s active force, like electricity, not a person. They even say they believe in the “trinity” (with a small “t”), by which they mean Jehovah, Jesus, and God’s active force—three different things, not three persons in one God.
The Mormons (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) have perfected this deceptive practice even further. They use all our words—Father, Son, Holy Spirit, salvation, grace, faith, atonement, heaven, eternal life. But here’s what they actually mean: The Father is an exalted man with a physical body who lives near a star called Kolob. Jesus is his literal spirit child (as are we and Lucifer). The Holy Spirit is a separate god. Salvation comes in levels, with the highest requiring Mormon temple ceremonies. Grace kicks in only after you’ve done all you can do. The atonement happened primarily in the Garden of Gethsemane, not on the cross. Heaven has three levels, and only Mormons who keep all the commandments reach the highest. Eternal life means becoming a god yourself.
Practical Application: When discussing faith with someone from an unknown or questionable background, don’t assume you’re using terms the same way. Ask questions like: “When you say Jesus is God’s Son, what do you mean by that?” or “Help me understand what you mean by salvation.” Listen carefully to their answers, not just for the words they use but for the meaning behind those words.
Examples from JWs, LDS, and Others
Let’s look more specifically at how various groups redefine key Christian terms:
The Word “God”:
• Orthodox Christianity: The one eternal, infinite, unchangeable being who exists as three persons—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
• Jehovah’s Witnesses: Only the Father (Jehovah) is God. Jesus is “a god” (small g), a created being.
• Mormons: One of many gods. The Father has a physical body and was once a man on another planet who progressed to godhood.
• Christian Science: God is “Divine Mind” or “Principle,” not a personal being.
• Unity School: God is the “Christ consciousness” within all people.
• Dake’s Teaching: Three separate Gods with physical bodies who work together.
The Word “Trinity”:
• Orthodox Christianity: One God eternally existing in three distinct persons who share the same divine essence.
• Modalism (Oneness Pentecostalism): One God who reveals himself in three modes or masks—sometimes as Father, sometimes as Son, sometimes as Spirit.
• Tritheism (Dake, some Word-Faith teachers): Three separate Gods who are united in purpose but not in essence.
• Arianism (JWs): No trinity at all—only Jehovah is God; Jesus is created; the Spirit is a force.
The Word “Salvation”:
• Orthodox Christianity: Deliverance from sin and its consequences through faith in Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection, by grace alone.
• Jehovah’s Witnesses: Earning life in paradise earth (for most) or heaven (for 144,000) through door-to-door witnessing and obedience to the Watchtower organization.
• Mormons: Universal resurrection (for all) plus potential exaltation to godhood (for faithful Mormons) through obedience to Mormon laws and temple rituals.
• Roman Catholicism: Initial justification by grace through faith and baptism, maintained through sacraments and good works, potentially lost through mortal sin.
• Dake’s System: A legal transaction that can be lost through any sin if not immediately confessed.
The Deception Strategy
Why do cults go to such lengths to use our vocabulary while changing the meanings? The answer is simple: deception is most effective when it appears as truth. Satan himself “is transformed into an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14, KJV), and his ministers transform themselves “as the ministers of righteousness” (v. 15). They don’t announce themselves as false teachers; they claim to be Christian ministers bringing the true gospel.
This strategy works because most Christians are trusting people who take others at their word. When someone says they believe in Jesus, we want to embrace them as brothers and sisters. When they use our language, we assume they share our faith. This charitable assumption, while admirable in many contexts, becomes dangerous when dealing with those who deliberately misuse theological terminology.
The strategy also works because many Christians lack theological education. They know what they believe, but they can’t articulate it precisely. They’ve never studied the creeds or understood why certain words matter. So when a cultist uses familiar words with unfamiliar meanings, they don’t catch the deception. They hear “Trinity” and assume orthodox doctrine, never realizing the speaker means three separate Gods.
Dake’s Specific Redefinitions
“Trinity” = Three Separate Beings
Perhaps the most egregious example of theological redefinition is Dake’s use of the word “Trinity.” He keeps the word—it appears throughout his writings—but he completely changes its meaning. Where orthodox Christianity has always meant one God in three persons, Dake means three separate Gods who work together.
In his Bible notes on John 1:1, Dake writes: “The doctrine of the 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” (Dake Annotated Reference Bible, New Testament, p. 96). Notice how he uses the orthodox word “Trinity” and even the traditional phrase “persons in the Godhead,” but then defines these persons as completely separate beings with separate bodies.
This is like saying, “I believe in monotheism—there is only one God, and His names are Zeus, Apollo, and Athena.” You’re using the word “monotheism” (belief in one God) while actually describing polytheism (belief in many gods). The word has become meaningless, or worse, actively deceptive.
What makes Dake’s redefinition particularly dangerous is that he doesn’t announce it clearly. He doesn’t say, “I reject the traditional doctrine of the Trinity and believe in three Gods instead.” Rather, he continues using Trinity language while smuggling in tritheistic content. Unwary readers, seeing familiar terminology, assume Dake is orthodox. They don’t realize he’s using their vocabulary to teach heresy.
“One God” = One in Purpose Only
Dake also redefines what it means to say God is “one.” When the Bible declares, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD” (Deuteronomy 6:4, KJV), it means there is only one divine being, one God by nature. But Dake explains this “oneness” as merely unity of purpose or agreement, like a husband and wife being “one flesh” or believers being “one body.”
In his notes on Deuteronomy 6:4, Dake writes: “One here is ‘echad (H259), united, alike; the same as Adam and Eve being one flesh (Gen. 2:24), many members in one body (1 Cor. 12:12), and many persons in one God” (Dake Bible, Old Testament, p. 245). He’s arguing that God’s oneness is the same kind as human unity—separate persons working together, not one being.
This fundamentally changes the nature of God. If the three persons are one only in purpose, then they could theoretically disagree. They could have different wills, different knowledge, different power. They would be three Gods forming a committee, not the one true God of Scripture. The Father could want one thing while the Son wants another. The Spirit could know something the Father doesn’t know. This isn’t the God revealed in the Bible.
“Persons” = Completely Separate Individuals
The word “person” in Trinitarian theology (from the Latin persona and Greek hypostasis) has a technical meaning. It refers to a distinct subsistence within the divine essence—real distinctions that don’t divide the essence. The Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit, but all three are the same God. They share one divine nature, one divine will (though expressed in three distinct ways), one divine knowledge, one divine power.
But Dake uses “person” in the modern sense of completely separate individuals. In his system, the three persons of the Trinity are as separate as three human persons. They have separate bodies, separate locations, separate souls, separate spirits. In God’s Plan for Man, he writes: “Each person has His own distinct and separate body, soul, and spirit” (p. 35). This isn’t three persons in one God; it’s three separate Gods who happen to work together.
The danger here is that many Christians already struggle to understand what theologians mean by “person” in the Trinity. When Dake uses the word in its common modern sense, it seems to make more sense to them. “Oh, three persons like three people—that’s easier to understand!” But this easier understanding is heretical. It turns Christianity into paganism with Christian vocabulary.
Protecting Theological Language
The Importance of Catechesis
The word “catechesis” comes from the Greek word meaning “to echo” or “to resound.” It refers to the systematic instruction in the faith that the early church provided to new believers. Before someone could be baptized, they went through extensive catechesis—learning what Christians believe and why, understanding the meaning of Christian vocabulary, being grounded in sound doctrine.
Today, many churches have abandoned serious catechesis. New believers are baptized with little or no doctrinal instruction. They join the church without understanding what the church believes. Is it any wonder they fall prey to false teaching? They haven’t been equipped to recognize error because they haven’t been grounded in truth.
Effective catechesis teaches not just what we believe but why we believe it and how to articulate it precisely. It covers:
The Doctrine of God: Who is God? What do we mean by Trinity? Why do we say “three persons, one essence”? What errors does this exclude? Catechumens (those being catechized) learn to use theological vocabulary correctly and understand why precision matters.
The Person and Work of Christ: Who is Jesus? What do we mean by “truly God and truly man”? What happened at the incarnation? Why did He have to die? What did His resurrection accomplish? Each term is carefully defined and distinguished from heretical alternatives.
Salvation: What is sin? What is grace? What is faith? How are we justified? What is sanctification? What is glorification? New believers learn the vocabulary of salvation and how various groups distort these terms.
The Church and Sacraments: What is the church? What is baptism? What is communion? How do these means of grace function? Proper understanding prevents both superstition and neglect of these ordained practices.
Key Point: Churches that neglect catechesis are like armies that send soldiers into battle without training. They may have enthusiasm and sincerity, but they lack the equipment to stand against error. Every church should have a systematic plan for grounding believers in sound doctrine.
Teaching Precise Definitions
When teaching doctrine, we must insist on precise definitions. This doesn’t mean being pedantic or harsh, but it does mean being clear and accurate. When we say “God,” we must explain what we mean—and what we don’t mean. When we say “Trinity,” we must carefully define the term and distinguish it from both modalism and tritheism.
Here are practical ways to teach precise definitions:
Use Historical Creeds: The creeds provide time-tested language for expressing Christian truth. Teach through the Apostles’ Creed or Nicene Creed phrase by phrase. Explain why each word was chosen and what error it excludes. Show how the creeds protect biblical truth.
Provide Contrasts: Don’t just teach what we believe; show how it differs from errors. When teaching the Trinity, explain modalism (one person in three modes) and tritheism (three separate Gods) as contrasts. When teaching salvation by grace, contrast it with salvation by works. Clear contrasts help people recognize error.
Define Technical Terms: Don’t assume people understand theological vocabulary. When you use words like “justification,” “sanctification,” “propitiation,” or “hypostatic union,” take time to define them clearly. Give examples. Show how they’re used in Scripture. Build people’s theological vocabulary gradually but steadily.
Use Visual Aids: Some theological concepts benefit from visual representation. The traditional Trinity Shield diagram, while imperfect, helps people visualize the distinction of persons and unity of essence. Charts comparing orthodox doctrine with various errors can clarify differences. Just remember that all analogies and diagrams have limitations.
Test Understanding: Don’t assume that because you’ve taught something, it’s been understood. Ask questions. Have people explain doctrines back to you in their own words. Give gentle correction when their explanations reveal misunderstanding. Testing isn’t about grades; it’s about ensuring clear comprehension.
Recognizing Redefinition Attempts
Christians must develop the ability to recognize when someone is redefining theological terms. Here are warning signs to watch for:
Qualifying Orthodox Terms: When someone says “Trinity, but not in the traditional sense” or “Jesus is God, but not in the way you think,” red flags should go up. Orthodox doctrine doesn’t need such qualifiers. If someone needs to redefine standard terms, they’re probably teaching something non-standard.
Novel Interpretations: Beware of teachers who claim to have discovered “new revelation” or “deeper meaning” that the church has missed for 2,000 years. Dake claimed his hyperliteral interpretation method revealed truths hidden from previous generations. But God’s truth doesn’t change, and the core doctrines of the faith have been clearly understood since the apostles.
Avoiding Clear Statements: False teachers often speak in circles, using many words but never making clear affirmations. When asked, “Is Jesus fully God, co-eternal and co-equal with the Father?” they give long, complex answers that never simply say “yes.” Clear truth can be stated clearly; error hides in complexity.
Appealing to Special Knowledge: Cults often claim you need their special materials to understand the Bible correctly. Jehovah’s Witnesses say you need Watchtower publications. Mormons point to their additional scriptures. Dake’s followers treat his notes as essential for understanding Scripture. But the Bible is clear enough on essential doctrines for any believer to understand with the Spirit’s help.
Changing Subject When Pressed: When you ask specific questions about what someone means by theological terms, do they answer directly or change the subject? False teachers often deflect from precise theological discussion to emotional appeals, personal testimony, or attacks on “dead religion.” Truth stands up to scrutiny; error avoids it.
The Contemporary Language Challenge
Modern Meanings vs. Theological Meanings
One of our greatest challenges today is that many theological terms have different meanings in contemporary usage than they do in theology. The word “person” is a perfect example. In modern English, a person is a separate individual being. But in Trinitarian theology, “person” (translating hypostasis or persona) means a distinct subsistence within the one divine essence. The Father, Son, and Spirit are three persons but not three separate beings.
Similarly, the word “spirit” in contemporary usage often means something ghostly, ethereal, or simply non-physical. But in biblical theology, spirit (Hebrew ruach, Greek pneuma) refers to the immaterial aspect of being that includes mind, will, and consciousness. When Jesus says “God is spirit” (John 4:24), He’s not saying God is a ghost but that God is immaterial, not composed of physical matter.
The word “faith” presents another challenge. In modern usage, faith often means believing something without evidence, a blind leap in the dark. But biblical faith (pistis) means trust based on evidence, confidence in God’s revealed truth. It’s not believing without reason but trusting based on good reasons. This distinction matters enormously when we teach salvation by faith.
Even the word “love” has been transformed in modern usage. Contemporary culture defines love primarily as a feeling or emotion. But biblical love (agape) is primarily a choice, a commitment to seek another’s highest good regardless of feelings. When God commands us to love our enemies, He’s not commanding an emotion but a decision to act for their benefit.
Updating Language vs. Preserving Truth
This creates a dilemma: Should we update our theological language to match modern usage, or preserve traditional terminology? Both approaches have dangers. If we abandon traditional language, we lose precision and connection with historic Christianity. If we insist on ancient terminology without explanation, we fail to communicate clearly with modern people.
The solution isn’t choosing one approach over the other but doing both simultaneously. We must preserve the precise theological vocabulary that has served the church for centuries while also translating and explaining these terms for contemporary understanding. This requires more work than either approach alone, but it’s essential for passing on the faith intact.
For example, when teaching about the Trinity, we can say: “God is three persons in one essence. Now, when theologians say ‘persons,’ they don’t mean three separate individuals like three humans. They mean three distinct centers of consciousness and relationship within the one divine being. The Father, Son, and Spirit are distinct—the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Spirit—but they’re not separate. They share one divine nature, one divine essence, one divine being.”
This approach preserves the traditional language (“three persons, one essence”) while explaining what it means in terms modern people can grasp. We’re not changing the doctrine or abandoning precision; we’re building bridges of understanding.
Finding Balance
Finding the right balance requires wisdom and sensitivity. Here are principles for maintaining this balance:
Preserve Core Terminology: Some terms are so central to Christian faith that they must be preserved and taught. Words like Trinity, incarnation, justification, sanctification, and atonement carry specific theological content that can’t be replaced without loss. We must teach people these terms and their meanings.
Explain Carefully: Never assume people understand theological terms. Always explain, define, and illustrate. Use examples, analogies, and contrasts to clarify meaning. Remember that explanation isn’t dumbing down; it’s building up understanding.
Use Multiple Translations: When teaching Scripture, use multiple Bible translations to show how different English words can express the same Greek or Hebrew concept. This helps people understand that our theological vocabulary attempts to capture biblical meaning, not create new meaning.
Connect to Church History: Show people that our theological language connects us to Christians throughout history. When we say “Trinity,” we’re using the same concept (though translated into English) that Athanasius used in Greek, Augustine used in Latin, and Luther used in German. We’re part of a continuous tradition of faith.
Address Contemporary Confusion: Explicitly address ways modern usage differs from theological usage. Say things like, “When we say ‘person’ in the Trinity, we don’t mean what you normally mean by person in everyday conversation.” This prevents misunderstanding.
Test and Correct: Regularly test whether people are understanding terms correctly. When you hear someone misuse theological language, gently correct them. This isn’t about being the theology police but about ensuring clear communication of truth.
Critical Warning: The moment we stop caring about theological precision is the moment we open the door to error. Every major heresy in church history began with someone saying, “Let’s not get hung up on words.” But words matter because truth matters, and truth matters because God matters.
Conclusion: Standing Guard Over Truth
As we conclude this examination of how false teachers like Dake redefine Christian terminology, we must remember why this matters. This isn’t about winning theological debates or showing off our knowledge. It’s about preserving the truth that saves souls, protecting the sheep from wolves, and passing on the faith intact to the next generation.
Paul charged Timothy: “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called” (1 Timothy 6:20, KJV). The phrase “keep that which is committed to thy trust” literally means “guard the deposit.” We’ve been entrusted with a deposit of truth, expressed in specific words and concepts, and we must guard it carefully.
This doesn’t mean we become rigid traditionalists who can’t communicate with modern people. But it does mean we refuse to let the content of our faith be changed while keeping the same labels. We must be like the faithful scribes Jesus described, who bring out of their treasure “things new and old” (Matthew 13:52)—presenting eternal truth in fresh ways without changing the truth itself.
When someone like Dake comes along and says “Trinity” while meaning “three Gods,” we must expose the deception. When cults use our vocabulary with different definitions, we must clarify the confusion. When theological terms are misunderstood or misused, we must provide patient instruction. This is part of our calling as Christians—to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3, KJV).
Remember, the battle over words is ultimately a battle over truth, and the battle over truth is ultimately a battle over God Himself. When we allow God to be redefined as three separate beings with physical bodies (as Dake taught), we’re not just changing vocabulary—we’re changing gods. We’re abandoning the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob for a god of human imagination.
Practical Application: A Personal Action Plan
How can you protect yourself and others from theological redefinition? Here’s a practical action plan:
1. Learn the Historic Definitions: Study the great creeds and confessions. Understand what Christians have always meant by essential terms. Get a good systematic theology book and work through it carefully.
2. Ask Clarifying Questions: When someone uses theological terms, don’t assume you know what they mean. Ask for clarification. “What do you mean by Trinity?” “In what sense is Jesus God?” “How do you understand salvation?”
3. Compare with Scripture: Always test theological claims against the full teaching of Scripture, not just isolated proof texts. Does this definition align with everything the Bible teaches about this topic?
4. Teach Others: Share what you learn with family, friends, and church members. The best way to solidify your own understanding is to teach others.
5. Stay Vigilant: False teaching doesn’t usually announce itself. It creeps in through familiar words with changed meanings. Stay alert. Keep learning. Keep growing in discernment.
6. Pray for Wisdom: James 1:5 promises that God gives wisdom generously to those who ask. Regularly pray for discernment to recognize truth and error.
Final Thoughts: The Power of True Words
Words have power. God created the universe with words: “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light” (Genesis 1:3, KJV). Jesus Christ is called “the Word” who became flesh (John 1:14). We are saved through hearing and believing the word of the gospel (Romans 10:17). And we are sanctified by the truth of God’s word (John 17:17).
Because words have such power, Satan works to corrupt them. He began in Eden by questioning God’s words: “Yea, hath God said?” (Genesis 3:1, KJV). He continues today by redefining God’s words, keeping the familiar sounds while changing the meaning. This is why we must be vigilant guardians of theological vocabulary.
But we don’t guard theological language out of stubborn traditionalism or intellectual pride. We guard it because these words carry the truth about God, and knowing God rightly is eternal life (John 17:3). When we preserve accurate theological vocabulary, we preserve the pathway to knowing God. When we allow that vocabulary to be corrupted, we create obstacles to true knowledge of God.
Let us then be faithful stewards of the words entrusted to us. Let us teach them clearly, defend them boldly, and pass them on intact. Let us be like Paul, who could say at the end of his life: “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith” (2 Timothy 4:7, KJV). The faith Paul kept wasn’t just a feeling or experience—it was a body of truth expressed in specific words and concepts, the same truth we’re called to keep today.
May God give us wisdom to recognize when eternal truth is being disguised as error, and when deadly error is being disguised as truth. May He give us courage to stand for precise biblical doctrine even when others call us divisive or pedantic. And may He give us grace to speak the truth in love, always remembering that our goal isn’t to win arguments but to preserve the truth that sets people free.
“Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding” (Proverbs 23:23, KJV). In a world full of theological counterfeits, let us hold fast to the genuine article. Let us know what we believe, why we believe it, and how to articulate it clearly. And let us never allow the precious words of our faith to be stolen, corrupted, or redefined by those who would lead God’s people astray.
Bibliography
Athanasius. Four Discourses Against the Arians. Translated by John Henry Newman. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1881.
Augustine. On the Trinity. Translated by Arthur West Haddan. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1873.
Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1941.
Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960.
Carson, D. A. The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.
Dake, Finis Jennings. Dake Annotated Reference Bible. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Bible Sales, 1963.
Dake, Finis Jennings. God’s Plan for Man. Lawrenceville, GA: Dake Publishing, 1949.
Frame, John M. The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1987.
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994.
Hodge, Charles. Systematic Theology. 3 vols. New York: Scribner, 1872-73.
Kelly, J. N. D. Early Christian Doctrines. 5th ed. London: Continuum, 1977.
Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan, 1952.
MacArthur, John. Reckless Faith: When the Church Loses Its Will to Discern. Wheaton: Crossway, 1994.
Martin, Walter. The Kingdom of the Cults. Revised ed. Minneapolis: Bethany House, 2003.
McGrath, Alister E. Christian Theology: An Introduction. 5th ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.
Metzger, Bruce M. The Jehovah’s Witnesses and Jesus Christ. Princeton: Theology Today, 1953.
Packer, J. I. Knowing God. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1973.
Rhodes, Ron. The Challenge of the Cults and New Religions. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001.
Schaff, Philip, ed. The Creeds of Christendom. 3 vols. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1877.
Sproul, R. C. Essential Truths of the Christian Faith. Wheaton: Tyndale House, 1992.
Spurgeon, Charles H. The Sword and the Trowel. London: Passmore & Alabaster, 1887.
Torrey, R. A. What the Bible Teaches. New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1898.
Warfield, Benjamin B. The Trinity. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1915.
Wells, David F. No Place for Truth: Or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.
© 2025, DakeBible.org. All rights reserved.
