Fatherfisherfatherfisher wrote:How do you rank Dr. Dake among your sources and what's your opinion of him?
Hi Dolph,
For me the value of the Dake Bible is:
** in his effort to give strictly biblical reasons for the viewpoints he presents. Often this is done by means of a listing of relevant passages, and sometimes the lists seem overly lengthy or contain prooftexts that don't actually prove his point . . . but at least he is trying to base everything on what the Word of God actually says in multiple places, not just 1 or 2 pet passages (thus avoiding the charge of "prooftexting").
** in his frequent mention of the Hebrew and/or Greek words that can help to illuminate the meaning of a verse, AND how those same words may have been translated differently in other places in the KJV. As I've mentioned at various times in my posts here, it isn't really the Greek or Hebrew dictionary (lexicon) that determines the meaning of any given word, but how that word is actually used in the Bible. Dake's notes are very helpful in that regard.
** in his running outlines through the various books of the Bible. To me this is much more useful than mere section headings.
** and, of course, in being challenged by some of his interpretations; I don't always agree with him, and can see where some of the discomfort that many feel with some of his ideas comes from . . . but I am still challenged to look at the biblical basis for what he says and at least he gives his biblical reasons so I can think them through for myself
So all of that to say that he is right up there in terms of sources, and really stands apart from some of the others I use in the ways I've just listed. My opinion of him is that he was a man specially blessed by God in his grasp of the Word and his desire to be "literal" in explaining the Word.
I don't think he walked on water, but nor do I think he was the charlatan and false teacher some make him out to be (or I wouldn't be here).
I would say that is a fair and accurate description of Dake and his notes.
Like you I think Dake was off a little on some of his doctrine but I don't think it makes him a charlatan that others try to make him. I also don't think he would agree with those today that try to label him or put words into his mouth.
Also for those that accept the dispensational/futuristic view of eschatology Dake is one of the best writers on it.
