9 Comments on Is Francis Chan Right That God Will Destroy Those Who Challenge Christian Leaders?

Martin Draga said : Guest a month ago

The vulnerability of christian believers is tested by such pastors who are in the same envelope as Francis Chan.These are self styled church leaders who are not looking for spiritual wealth but material wealth.They look for verses of the bible which can be easily manipulated and target vulnerable people.To avoid the detection of their falsehoods they come up with such threats as fronted by Chan by use of manipulated verses of the bible.The cause of reformation was the pride and power the leaders of the Church put in themselves inorder to amash wealth through false teachings.They became untourchables in their own right.The likes of Chan must be rejected and their falls teachings critically exposed.

CW said : Guest 5 months ago

I don't get why Chan was at Bethel in the first place, since that "church" is way out there on a limb when it comes to Biblical truth. If I were in his shoes, I would have a holy fear of being there at all, let alone speaking in its pulpit. IMHO, this could be why he's getting so far off in his theology (touching God's anointed, etc) -- because he is associating with unwise men who are likewise drifting away from the Truth. The Lord expressly addresses this issue in His Word, both OT and NT. I pray that Chan and the others will all get back into God's Word as it is written, get back on track with Him. Many souls are at stake.

Anna Rosa said : Guest 5 months ago

This is just wolves looking for cover. The Bible tells us to scrutinize all teachings, judge them, and refute false teachings and false teachers as we hold to what is true and defend the Biblical faith. That is our calling and thus obviously a good and not a bad thing. If that is not done, then the guard is down, any heresy can walk through the church door, any wolf can ascend to the pulpit, and the truth of the gospel can be distorted into 'another gospel' that is 'readily received,' all because it was considered 'not nice' to hold teachers to the Biblical standard. Was Paul being 'mean' when he refuted heresy and wolves by name? No. And neither are we, as we protect the Lord's sheep. And that anointing thing; it applies to all true Christians!

T. I. Miller said : Guest 5 months ago

DeMitchell, You are making a logical category fallacy. Examining a theological position is not judging the person that holds the position. Indeed the Apostle Paul invited people to put his teachings to the test. He praised them for carefully comparing his teaching with scripture. Christians are commanded to boldly defend the faith, it is not optional. Any Christian who posts on internet public domain should graciously accept feed back. One other point of logic. You are judging us by implying that we are erroneously using wrong standards to judge Chan's teaching. The Greek in Rom. 2 refers to condemning but not to discerning the (truthness) of a theological assertion. To sit by and let a root of error to grow into a widely held deception is not in the least bit pious or godly. To the contrary error only begets more error. Protecting the flock takes priority over risking hurting Chan's feelings.

Ronald DeMitchell said : Guest 5 months ago

Any Google Hangout groups where we can discuss issues like this? I've been reading Romans 2, and I believe it's wise for us all to make sure we are not in the same heresies that we are judging others for.

Annette D. said : Guest 5 months ago

I have confronted many pastors on questionable teachings, always without the presence of others, never spreading my questions throughout the church body...yet I was ignored, got the eye roll, or was told I see everything in black and white. It didn't matter that I wanted what was best for our church, that God would bless us for being true to His word; I was questioning "leadership". It saddened me that a pastor's word was above God's word, and that I had no right to question what was said. They never threatened me with what Chan said, but I had always hoped to have a relationship with my pastor in which we could talk. Very sad indeed.

T. I. Miller said : Guest 5 months ago

I am reminded of TV pastors referring to themselves as, " the Lords anointed ". Well not according to my concordance. Ninety percent of the references are O. T. , primarily under the law of Moses. It refers to Kings not pastors. It refers to the High Priest, not pastors. In the N. T. it primarily and almost exclusively, references Jesus King of kings. It is also used in reference to healing the infirm. Loosely tossing around terms in unbiblical contexts is foolish if not dangerous. What is behind all of this, it is job insecurity. Ought not humble pastors pray, " If it be they will, oh God, I will serve thee as a pastor ". This removes the motive to twist scripture to intimidate the sheep in order to cling to the seat of honor for yourself.

Anna Rosa said : Guest 5 months ago

No one could be more wrong than francis chan! The false unity bells are ringing louder than ever, something must be around the corner...

MB said : Guest 5 months ago

So does Chan's judgment, criticisms, condemnation, and even possible threats (toward anyone who might question or challenge the teachings of others) put himself in danger of God destroying Francis Chan? Yes, if we go by Chan's own construct/twisting of the Scriptures.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked