Francis Chan is an American preacher, author, and former pastor who gained popularity as the founding pastor of Cornerstone Community Church in Simi Valley, California. He is known for his engaging preaching style, passion for discipleship, and bestselling books such as Crazy Love and Forgotten God. In recent years, Chan has shifted away from leading a traditional church to focus on house church movements and international missions. While his early ministry was characterized by an emphasis on biblical discipleship and radical devotion to Christ, concerns have arisen regarding some of his theological positions, associations, and teachings.
Why Francis Chan Should Be Regarded as a False Teacher and Avoided
1. Associating with and Endorsing False Teachers and Questionable Movements
One of the most concerning aspects of Francis Chan's ministry in recent years is his increasing association with and endorsement of teachers and movements that are known for promoting false teachings. He has shared platforms with and spoken favorably of individuals such as Todd White, Benny Hinn, and other figures associated with the Prosperity Gospel and the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). Chan has even participated in events where teachings and practices that are contrary to sound biblical doctrine were promoted, without offering any public clarification or correction.
The Bible warns believers to be discerning about whom they associate with and to avoid those who promote false teachings. Paul wrote, "Now I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who create divisions and obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them" (Romans 16:17). By partnering with and endorsing false teachers, Chan lends credibility to their teachings and creates confusion among his followers, leading them to believe that these teachings are compatible with the truth of Scripture.
2. The "Little Gods" Heresy and Francis Chan's Position
The "little gods" heresy is a dangerous and unbiblical teaching that has been propagated mainly by the Word of Faith movement. It asserts that human beings, particularly Christians, possess a divine nature and share in God's essence, essentially making them "little gods." This teaching is a serious departure from biblical doctrine and distorts the fundamental nature of the Creator/creature distinction.
The Bible is clear that God alone is infinite, sovereign, and all-powerful. He declares, "I am the LORD, and there is no other, besides me, there is no God" (Isaiah 45:5). Human beings are created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), but that does not mean they possess divinity or share in God’s nature in the sense that they become "little gods." Instead, being made in God's image means that humans reflect certain aspects of God's character (such as rationality, morality, and the ability to relate to others), but they remain finite, fallible, and dependent on God.
Concerns About Francis Chan's Statements
Francis Chan has made statements that seem to affirm the "little gods" idea or something closely resembling it. it is cause for concern because it blurs the crucial distinction between God as the Creator and humans as His creation. Here are some potential issues that arise if Chan’s teachings suggest or endorse this concept:
Confusing the Nature of God with the Nature of Humans: The Bible consistently teaches that God is wholly other, transcendent, and distinct from His creation. In contrast, the "little gods" heresy implies that humans can somehow share in God’s divine attributes, which is a direct contradiction of the biblical teaching that "there is none like you, O LORD; you are great, and your name is great in might" (Jeremiah 10:6). If Chan’s teaching implies that Christians possess a divine status or authority similar to God, it undermines the fundamental doctrine of God's uniqueness and sovereignty.
Encouraging Pride and Self-Exaltation: The "little gods" teaching elevates human beings to a status they were never intended to possess, fostering pride and self-exaltation rather than humility and submission before God. Scripture repeatedly emphasizes the humility required of believers: "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble" (James 4:6). If Chan is encouraging believers to think of themselves in terms that suggest divinity, this could lead to a distorted view of God and humanity, promoting arrogance rather than reverence.
Undermining the Need for Dependence on Christ: The Bible teaches that salvation, sanctification, and the power to live the Christian life come solely from Christ and the Holy Spirit's work within us, not from any inherent divinity or power of our own. We don't have hypostaic union with God as Jesus did. Paul wrote, "I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me" (Galatians 2:20). If Chan’s statements suggest that Christians possess a level of divinity or authority akin to God, it undermines the biblical truth that our dependence is entirely on Christ and His sufficiency. (link below)
3. Endorsing Transubstantiation
In recent years, Francis Chan has made statements suggesting that he is moving toward a belief in transubstantiation, the Roman Catholic doctrine that teaches that the bread and wine of communion literally become the body and blood of Christ. During one of his messages, Chan stated, "For 1500 years, there was never one person who said that what you are doing is just a symbol," implying that the early church universally believed in the real presence of Christ in the elements of the Lord's Supper.
This statement is historically inaccurate and misleading. The early church held a variety of views on the nature of the Lord’s Supper, and the doctrine of transubstantiation was not formally established by the Roman Catholic Church until the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. By the time of the Reformation, this doctrine was firmly in place, but many Reformers, including Martin Luther, John Calvin, and others, strongly opposed it.
The Reformed View of the Lord's Supper
In contrast to the Roman Catholic teaching of transubstantiation, the Reformed and Presbyterian view, articulated by John Calvin and others, understands the Lord's Supper as more than just a memorial. While the bread and wine do symbolize Christ's body and blood, the Reformed tradition holds that the Lord's Supper is a true means of grace, a sacrament through which believers experience spiritual communion with Christ. This view is often referred to as the "Real Spiritual Presence," emphasizing that Christ is present in the Supper not physically but spiritually, by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Calvin argued that believers genuinely partake of Christ’s body and blood in a spiritual sense, and this participation nourishes their faith and strengthens their union with Christ. The Westminster Confession of Faith reflects this view, stating that the worthy receivers "do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually, receive and feed upon Christ crucified, and all benefits of his death" (WCF 29.7).
Thus, the Reformed perspective emphasizes that the Lord’s Supper is a moment when believers are spiritually nourished by Christ and experience His grace in a real and profound way. It is not merely a remembrance of Christ's sacrifice but an actual means through which God administers grace to His people, affirming the covenant relationship He has established with them.
Why Protestants Reject Transubstantiation
Protestants reject transubstantiation for several key reasons:
Contradiction with the Once-for-All Sacrifice of Christ: The Bible teaches that Christ's sacrifice was a singular, once-for-all event (Hebrews 10:10-14). Transubstantiation implies that Christ is sacrificed anew every time the Mass is celebrated, which undermines the finality and sufficiency of His atoning work. The Reformers emphasized that "Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him" (Hebrews 9:28).
Potential Idolatry: Transubstantiation encourages the worship of the elements (bread and wine) as though they were literally Christ’s body and blood. This practice leads to idolatry, as it shifts the focus from Christ Himself to the created elements. The Second Commandment warns against idolatry, and Jesus instructed that true worship is to be in "spirit and truth" (John 4:24).
Unbiblical and Superstitious "Hocus Pocus": The phrase "hocus pocus" is thought to have originated as a mockery of the Latin words spoken during the Mass, "hoc est corpus meum" ("this is my body"), which were believed to magically transform the elements into Christ’s literal body and blood. The Reformers rejected this mystical and superstitious understanding of the sacraments, emphasizing that the elements remain bread and wine and that any grace received through the sacrament is through faith in Christ, not through magical incantations or transformations.
Why Chan’s and the RCC View is Dangerous
Francis Chan's statements and apparent leaning toward transubstantiation present a significant concern for several reasons:
Confusion Over the Nature of Christ’s Sacrifice: By aligning with the Roman Catholic view, Chan risks obscuring the biblical truth that Christ’s sacrifice was once for all. This misunderstanding could lead his followers to believe that they need repeated access to Christ’s body and blood through the Mass, thus undermining the assurance of salvation that comes from trusting in Christ’s finished work.
Encouraging Idolatrous Practices: Chan’s endorsement of transubstantiation may lead his followers to venerate the communion elements in a way that borders on idolatry, rather than focusing on the spiritual reality of communion with Christ through faith.
Diverting from Biblical Simplicity and Clarity: The simplicity of the Gospel is that believers are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. When teachings like transubstantiation are introduced, they add unnecessary complexity and ritualism that can distract from the sufficiency of Christ's work on the cross.
Conclusion
The Reformed understanding of the Lord’s Supper emphasizes that it is both a symbolic remembrance and a true means of grace, where believers spiritually commune with Christ by faith. The elements themselves do not change, but the Holy Spirit works through the sacrament to strengthen believers. Francis Chan's apparent movement toward the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation is concerning because it misrepresents the nature of Christ’s sacrifice, introduces elements of idolatry, and departs from the biblical and Reformed understanding of communion as a means of grace.
It is essential for believers to remain rooted in the truth of Scripture, holding fast to the doctrines that affirm the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ and the spiritual nourishment He provides to His people through the means of grace. Chan’s statements, whether intentional or not, risk leading his followers into error and confusion regarding the central truths of the Christian faith.
In a sermon that went viral, Chan expressed his belief in transubstantiation, the doctrine that the bread and wine of communion become the literal Body and Blood of Christ. He claimed that for the first 1,500 years of church history, this belief was universally held, which aligns more with Roman Catholic teachings than traditional Protestant or Evangelical perspectives. This view has caused many Protestants to believe Chan is moving toward a more Catholic understanding of communion, a stance that deviates from mainstream evangelical beliefs about the Lord’s Supper as symbolic (Relevant Radio)
4. Promoting a Mystical and Experience-Driven Approach to Faith
Francis Chan has increasingly emphasized the importance of experiencing God in ways that often go beyond what is prescribed in Scripture. While it is essential for Christians to have a personal and vibrant relationship with God, Chan's emphasis on mystical experiences, miracles, and supernatural manifestations can lead believers to prioritize subjective experiences over the objective truth of God's Word.
The Bible teaches that genuine faith is rooted in the truth of Scripture and not in emotional or mystical experiences. The apostle Peter emphasized the importance of the "prophetic word," saying, "You will do well to pay attention to it, as to a lamp shining in a dark place" (2 Peter 1:19). Paul warned against being deceived by false experiences and encouraged believers to "test all things" (1 Thessalonians 5:21). By promoting an experience-driven faith, Chan opens the door to potential deception and distracts believers from the solid foundation of God's Word.
5. Elevating Unity Over Biblical Truth
Francis Chan frequently emphasizes the importance of unity among Christians, which is commendable in its proper context. However, Chan's pursuit of unity often comes at the expense of sound doctrine, leading him to overlook or downplay significant theological differences for the sake of achieving a superficial sense of unity. This approach has led him to collaborate with individuals and groups who promote teachings that are contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture.
The Bible teaches that true unity must be based on shared commitment to the truth of God's Word. Jesus prayed for His followers, "Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth" (John 17:17). Paul warned against compromising doctrine for the sake of unity, instructing believers to "speak the truth in love" (Ephesians 4:15) and to "guard the deposit entrusted to you" (1 Timothy 6:20). By prioritizing unity over doctrinal fidelity, Chan undermines the importance of holding to the truth and exposes his followers to teachings that deviate from Scripture.
Conclusion from Scripture
The Bible consistently warns against false teachers who distort the truth, compromise sound doctrine, or lead others into error. Paul wrote, "For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ" (2 Corinthians 11:13). While Francis Chan’s early ministry demonstrated a commitment to biblical teaching, his recent associations with false teachers, embrace of mystical experiences, lack of doctrinal clarity, and tendency to prioritize unity over truth align with teachings that deviate from the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Jesus warned, "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves" (Matthew 7:15). True teachers of God's Word will always point people to Christ, call them to repentance, and uphold the authority and sufficiency of Scripture. In contrast, Chan’s recent teachings and associations often direct people toward experiences, compromised theology, and partnerships that undermine the truth of God’s Word.
For these reasons, based on the authority of Scripture, Francis Chan should be regarded as a false teacher, and his teachings should be approached with great caution. Christians are called to "test everything; hold fast what is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21) and to remain grounded in the truth of God’s Word, which is "living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword" (Hebrews 4:12).
The true Gospel is about repentance, faith in Jesus Christ, and the transforming power of God’s grace. It calls believers to live lives of holiness, obedience, and submission to Christ’s Lordship, not to pursue mystical experiences, associations with false teachers, or teachings that compromise the authority of Scripture. Therefore, believers should be cautious about following Francis Chan’s recent teachings and remain faithful to the unchanging truth of God’s Word, which offers the way to eternal life, true spiritual growth, and genuine transformation through Christ alone.
-----
Francis Chan Says He's Both God and Man by Chris Rosebrough