Matt Slick, CARM owner - Too Slick to be Saved
Prideful Preselectionism
Matthew J. Slick says he is not preprogrammed or premade for hell like others are, but that he is premade for salvation like a robot, so he thinks. Is he really? He certainly seems to be the poster child for calvinism as far as internet websites and forums are concerned, but is it true? Is it reality or pride? Is it authentic salvation or is it a facsimile by way of mental gymnastics? Let the evidence speak for itself and the conclusion be certain: it is headiness, ideational, unrighteous and unholy.
A letter to Matt Slick was issued for him to repent of his false teachings, but he is unwilling to deal specifically as he falls back on legalisms. Thus, the slick teachings of M. Slick render some final conclusions.
The equivalent of today's Pharisees in the sphere of the kingdom of heaven believe original sin demands you have to be premade for salvation if you are going to be saved, requiring his god to premake people for salvation and premake other people for hell. Naturally Slick thinks by the power of his flesh he is one of those premade for heaven and not premade for hell. Is he really? This is evil, a false salvation, and does not glorify God. It is neither God's nature nor righteousness to save souls that way. God wants to walk with those who come to the cross as helpless sinners to receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. Praise the Lord!
The Seared Conscience
The Slick System is for the seared conscience. For example, you can only join his group membership if you affirm these false statements: "That Jesus Christ is presently true God and true man". I don't know any Christians who believe that Jesus is presently man. Jesus is at the right hand of the Father and presently not man. He is only man when in the creation in Person. Another error in the evangelical requirement of the CARM cult you must accept is "That man was created in the image of God but fell into sin and is, therefore, lost." Because Slick is a calvinist, what is he really saying when he says this? Yet, man did not lose being made in the image of God. Ergo, man is fallen, but not lost to the extent of no longer being made in God's image. Forever, we remain in the image of God. Though some are fallen, they still remain in God's image: spirit, soul and body. I am having a little fun here on this next point. As part of Slick's demands, unconsciously he needs this agreement: "You agree that homosexuality is a sin as is pedophilia and bestiality." I didn't realize this was a problem for evangelicals, but apparently to Slick's crowd, in their experiences, it needs be pointed out for things they need to be delivered from. What does that say of calvinism, pentecostalism and historicalism that these things are not already obvious?
After reading what M. Slick says he believes make sure you understand what it means. This is the definition of calvinism M. Sick adheres to, from his site:
"A system of Christian interpretation initiated by John Calvin. It emphasizes predestination and salvation. The five points of Calvinism were developed in response to the Arminian position. Calvinism teaches: 1) Total depravity: that man is touched by sin in all parts of his being: body, soul, mind, and emotions, 2) Unconditional Election: that God’s favor to Man is completely by God’s free choice and has nothing to do with Man. It is completely undeserved by Man and is not based on anything God sees in man (Eph. 1:1-11). Nor does God look into the future to see who would pick Him, 3) Limited atonement: that Christ did not bear the sins of every individual who ever lived, but instead only bore the sins of those who were elected into salvation (John 10:11,15), 4) Irresistible grace: that God's call to someone for salvation cannot be resisted, 5) Perseverance of the saints: that it is not possible to lose one's salvation (John 10:27-28)."
The response of Arminius was to expose the false teaching of calvinism. Calvin introduced his idea (Augustinian view), then Arminius saw that it was wrong and gave the truth of Calvin's mistaken assumptions. This is common knowledge of the Remonstrants which rejected calvinism. Arminius was not absolutely non-OSAS as many tout. In his writings, you find he says he seriously considers the possibility of our being once-saved-always-saved and it only seems as though in some verses there is an aspect of non-OSAS. What he may have not discerned is that in those verses, the Scriptures are referring to loss of rewards for non-overcomers. Call this osas arminian.
Our entire being is not "body, soul, mind, and emotions," since we also have a will. Our soul is our mind, will and emotion, while our spirit has the functions of intuition, communion and conscience. Man is tripartite: spirit, soul and body (Heb. 4.12, 1 Thess. 5.23). Man is totally deprave in that nothing of his flesh can save him, but man is not totally deprave in the sense that he can't, from the gift of being made in God's image, come to the cross as a helpless sinner to receive salvation as God draws any who shall receive Christ's atonement. God's free choice to save a soul is dependant on the condition of man coming to the cross. God does not save arbitrarily or premake robots. The inheritance of Eph. 1.1-11 is that God predestinates by foreknowing our free-choice (Rom. 8.29), a conditional election. When I mention this to Slick, he gets quite belligerent and just says "NO!" without reason. He simply self-declares: "Nor does God look into the future to see who would pick Him."
The salvation offered is for everyone and all of creation (Jesus died for the sins of the whole world). This is called unlimited atonement. But, not all receive Redemption, because free-will stipulates you have a free-choice to refuse God's saving grace. This is called resistible grace. His little flock are His sheep (John 10.11,15). God never does anything arbitrarily, so that He does not save someone if that person does not truly come to the cross repentantly and as a humble sinner. Under the teaching of calvinism there is no reason why Hitler could not be saved; thus, your conscience slowly becomes seared under calvinism to be open to the idea of the salvation of Hitler. Preservation of the Saints (John 10.27-28) is true, for when God foresees whom to give eternal life to it is eternal, that is, forever. The Saints need not persevere to stay saved forever. In fact, no matter what the believer does, he is saved forever. He may lose rewards of reigning during the millennium, but because God has infinite foreknowledge whom to saved when He gave eternal life, it was because it was because that person authentically came to the cross. The reason this is not understood by Slick is because he doesn't even believe in the millennium-to-come (Rev. 20.2-7). He is a historicalist.
The Truth Will Set You Free
Compare the calvinism definition with osas arminian on Slick's own site:
"There are five main tenets of Arminianism [osas arminian]: 1) God elects or reproves on the basis of foreseen faith [choice] or unbelief [free-will made in God's image able to refuse God's grace], 2) Christ died for all men and for every man, although only believers are saved [unlimited atonement, John 10:11,15], 3) Man is so depraved that divine grace is necessary unto faith or any good deed [a conditional election-man is fallen not totally deprave, and he is required to come to the cross to receive saving grace, not by deed, but by the choice afforded to all men made in God's image which God foreknows, even before the foundations of the world, Eph. 1:1-11], 4) This grace may be resisted [resistible grace], 5) Whether all who are truly regenerate will certainly persevere in the faith is a point which needs further investigation [actually, most arminians believe in OSAS, John 10:27-28]."
Additional false fruit of M. Slick are as follows:
"I was a pastor for 2 years and am ordained. I am Reformed in doctrine, amillennial in eschatology, contemporary in worship, and believe in the spiritual gifts. (It's tough finding a church that has the same nuances of theological flavor that I have.)"
Ordained? From the examination thus we must conclude this ordination is not by the Holy Spirit. Reformed is a word which when used by a calvinist, simply means calvinism. Rev. 20.3 says the nations will no longer be deceived in the millennial kingdom, thus no longer war. Amillennialism says we are in that time period now. Contemporary worship could never hold to such false teachings. I can not find any church that believes these so-called nuances. There are many denominations, sects and cults though that do. Slick also believes in gibberish babble of false tongues which also requires the alteration of the Word of God. In the Bible you can find no gibberish babble of Pentecostalism (revived montanism).
And elsewhere, he believes that we are first saved by God or are given faith, then we choose God. This is the essence of the robot teaching (for control), the pride of the tares, claiming they are premade for salvation in trying to look like the saved wheat. Few people know this, but let me say forthrightly, Slick knows he is not a Christian and is purposefully using Christianity to point to himself and his organization.
Discerning
Predestination is by foreknowledge, revealed in the Word; the correct delineation and application of God's remedy in His God's foreknowledge is twisted by M. Slick. This the way legalists read the Bible. They do not give glory to God who longs to see the choice man makes in His image, for these are the ones He wants to be with. Praise the Lord!
What you should be able to see is the pride of calvinism, proclaiming "emphasis on salvation" (a quote from Slick). What an arrogant statement. As opposed to what other kind of Christianity that does not emphasize salvation? There is something wrong with someone when they need to say their form of Christianity emphasizes salvation. It is a proud statement to say the least, for all Christians are saved, and Christ's redemption is the same new birth for each of us, passing through the same doorway, who are chosen by God. The reason we know we are chosen is it comforts us. He graced us with His life because before the foundations of the world He foreknew the choice we would make to thus give us His uncreated life, and now that we are saved, we know we were called, drawn and chosen. The frustration of a calvinist has steam coming out of his ears when say these things.
Additional insight will reveal total depravity also means killing God's image that man is made in. Slick tries to conceal this consequence of his false teaching of total depravity. Killing the image of God is not possible though since all men are all made in the image of God, no matter how righteous or unrighteous. That is what Genesis 1.27 says. Though man is fallen (not totally deprave-requiring to be premade to choose salvation) the man is still made in God's image, always and forever, even unto hell or heaven.
If man's election has nothing to do with man, then why does God ask man to believe? See John 3.16,18. And why capitalize man as "Man"? Idolatry! That seems odd don't you you think? God's election is based on God's saving grace upon those who choose Him. This is His redemptive design. That is what He loves and adores to see, man making the choice in His image. When God saves it is deserved in man, since that is how God set up the redemptive design, saving those who choose God, having the ability to do so being made in His image, and having that right that God gave in the creation of man. God created all men by grace in His image. That is where grace the gift begins. Through that grace of being made in God's image, we all have a right to the cross, but not all accept God's gift, effectively resisting saving grace.
Jesus atoned for the sins of the world - the whole world. This means all have a right to come to Christ. All things sum up in Christ. Christ is all in all. This is the centrality and universality of Christ. This is the meaning of Jesus atoning for the sins of the world, for when Christ died, he became sin, dying for us all in taking all sin upon Himself. Sin was judged. We were judged with Him, we whom believe and have died on the cross, but all died in Him because He sums up all things. His death and resurrection are complete and account for all things. We must refuse the idea that He only died for his predesigned select group He premade to choose Christ. Doesn't that seem evil to you? To not allow for a redemption of all, even though we do know not all accept His redemption, is not of God. Many resist God's grace, and that is why they do not get saved. M. Slick is unregenerated for he believes he was saved another way which we may call his false fruit. God says we shall know them by their fruit. So experimentally we can see, that God's grace is resistible if that is the choice one wants to make. God never forces Himself on anyone, nor prefabricates one for salvation or others for hell only. That is demented. That is Slick's old man rearing its ugly head in his stony heart.
Arminian osas believes in preservation of the saints. However, it is not the same kind as the CARM belief. Under the CARM calvinism belief, you are persevering because you are like a zombie. But this reeks of an evil god to not open salvation for all who would so accept His Only Begotten Son.
Slick is no so concerned with rewards, accountability, and regeneration of the world (Matt. 19.28). Therefore, Slick, has not the hope of Christ returning to reign for 1000 years in Person on earth, nor does he accept the matter of overcoming in Christ since he is not regenerated. Imagine assuming you were premade for salvation, claiming you accept justification by faith, but then not seeking to overcome in Christ in that new birth, by just living your life in your preselectionism pride.
"Stacking the deck" - this a term to describe calvinism. Like an illegal card game with the cheater's extra cards hidden in the deck, this is what Slick is proposing is his fate. This is man's attempt to replicate justification by faith when deep down inside that person does not really believe, though they will lie straight to your face in saying they do, but they are just being sly, slick and inveterate. If he did believe in Christ as the Son of God, His atonement, and God in the flesh, he would accept the Bible's word plainly that salvation is according to predestination by foreknowledge, not predestination by premaking. And he would read the Word with rewards of the millennial kingdom (Rev. 20.4) in mind, even God's mind. Such rewards are not afforded to all Christians. This 1000 years has yet to begin since the lamb and lion laying down together has not yet occurred. Praise the Lord for this discernment.
Summary
Slick, says he is unique. Unsurprisingly, there are lots of corporate church structures that believe just as Slick does:
Amillennialism as taught by the Roman Catholic Church, Presbyterians (and all so-called Reformers) and Puritans (not so pure eh?);
False tongues Third Wave Movement babble of mediums and psychics;
Confusing the spirit, soul and body;
Calvinism pride of believing in being premade for salvation like a robot;
Pastoral system of most denominations with Episcopal-type structures even though God had no denominations in the Bible (not very unique!)
Few church systems accept Biblical locality which is the lost love of the Ephesus church period. We need to get back to Biblical locality. So which church should you join? I protest of the historicalism taught by Slick and the RCC, gibberish babble of Slick and the Montanists, bipartite view of Slick and the fallen man, pride of being premade for salvation of Slick and so-called Reformers. In this way, you may call me a protestant, but don't call me protestant in the sense of dividing the body of Christ falsely in denominations (demonations or dominations) since God's Word is clear on the body life plan for Christians which is according to Biblical locality.
Slick's closing statement sums up his pride, like the pride Satan engorged himself in: "It's tough finding a church that has the same nuances of theological flavor that I have". Vanity of vanities and the pride of life! Cults try to create for you a beautiful cover on the surface, but underneath they are gross. God speaks of the swine, with cloven hooves, having the appearance of being clean on the outside, but inside they are dirty, not chewing their cud. They are unregenerate. They may be in the kingdom of heaven, even as the tares, but they have not received a new life to enter into the new creation by the grace of God.
"As a dog returns to his own vomit, So a fool repeats his folly" (Prov. 26.11). This verse speaks of the unregenerate outside the sphere of the kingdom of heaven or outward appearance. This description would not refer to M. Slick or M. Paulson (pawn of Slick). "Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard its spots? Then may you also do good who are accustomed to do evil" (Jer. 13.23). "And whoever will not receive you, when you go out of that city, shake off the very dust from your feet as a testimony against them" (Luke 9.5). Step away from the calvinist after you speak to them a short while. They can't change their spots because the pride of calvinism is a false salvation that replicates God's salvation. It feeds their emotion without regenerating their spirit. The irony is they act as though they were premade for hell. Not every last calvinist is unsaved, but the vast majority are not our brothers and sisters in Christ.
Love, in Christ,
Troy Brooks