Matt Slick: Catholic Church didn't give us the New Testament

At about the 3 minute mark he starts in with this.:rotfl:

He knows what is inspired because of John 10:27, not because of what the Church told him.

Calls the CC claim of giving him the scriptures, “lame”.

At 44 minutes starts explaining why Transubstantiation is “unbiblical”.

Thought you would like a nice laugh this morning. :smiley: Enjoy.


He should re-read, starting at the top:

10 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber; 2 but he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him the gatekeeper opens; the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. 5 A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.” 6 This figure Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.

7 So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who came before me are thieves and robbers; but the sheep did not heed them. 9 I am the door; if any one enters by me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly. 11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 He who is a hireling and not a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. 13 He flees because he is a hireling and cares nothing for the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd;[a] I know my own and my own know me, 15 as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd. 17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father.”**

19 There was again a division among the Jews because of these words. 20 Many of them said, “He has a demon, and he is mad; why listen to him?” 21 Others said, “These are not the sayings of one who has a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”

22 It was the feast of the Dedication at Jerusalem; 23 it was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the portico of Solomon. 24 So the Jews gathered round him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” 25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness to me; 26 but you do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; 28 and I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish, and no one shall snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me,[e] is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

31 The Jews took up stones again to stone him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many ** from the Father; for which of these do you stone me?” 33 The Jews answered him, “We stone you for no good work but for blasphemy; because you, being a man, make yourself God.” 34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 35 If he called them gods to whom the word of God came (and scripture cannot be broken), 36 do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? 37 If I am not doing the works** of my Father, then do not believe me; 38 but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” 39 Again they tried to arrest him, but he escaped from their hands.

40 He went away again across the Jordan to the place where John at first baptized, and there he remained. 41 And many came to him; and they said, “John did no sign, but everything that John said about this man was true.” 42 And many believed in him there.**

Sadly, a few may be mislead about the truth of the Church with videos like this.


He comes across as very proud.

He mumbles a lot and doesn’t appear very authoritative. His answers were lame and he doesn’t seem to answer with confidence. Appears very nervous and in a hurry.
I didn’t listen to the whole thing. Just a few minutes. He appears very uncomfortable.

Slick isn’t very good even on his best days and I have boycotted his forums for many years now because his so called “mods” won’t even allow an authoritative source for anything Catholic, so “dialog” there is impossible.

I didn’t bother to look at the video. To me it’s just SSDD and we’ve answered all that propaganda so many times it’s boring at best.:shrug:

I did this article on my blog a long while ago. Matt Slick wants to make us look bad.

Reminds me of Ernest Angley! :smiley:

Slick Matt’s income depends entirely upon him preaching division. But, from Matthew 28:19 and Mark 16:16, shouldn’t he know that baptism is necessary? He will answer for the souls he is leading astray.

Po18 brings up a good point. He must know the truth, and his own manipulation of it…how can he continue? Is he one of those ‘as long as you are sorry before you die…’ Sort of preachers?

Holy Scripture was declared inerrant by and as a result of the Decree of Pope St. Damasus 1 at the Council of Rome in 382 A.D.

The Decree of Pope St. Damasus I, Council of Rome. 382 A.D…


It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun.
The list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews. Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book. Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.
Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Please show me when the Canon authoritatively declared by the church that Slick attends.

I like how he says when discussing Transubstantiation that Jesus was in the Old Covenant at the time.

In 1 Cor 10:16 Paul states "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? ". Wonder if that’s New Covenant enough for him.

…Things that make you go hmmmmmmm:D


You should see him debate Dr. Sungensis. He was stumbling and bumbling so badly that I almost felt sorry for him.

Yeah, protestants there are allowed to really pile it on Catholicism, but if you respond back with some of their own medicine, they ban you. There’s no point in posting there…none whatsoever…

They point to Cornelius (Acts 10:44-48) and the good thief to argue that baptism is not necessary.

My thoughts as well. As Bishop Barron has stated and I can only paraphrase * “I am not smart enough to interpret scripture so I need an authoritative body to teach me…”*

How can any of us ever interpret scripture on our own? And how can any of us be so arrogant as to then teach others our opinion? This is a very simple concept but hard to understand for some.

John Martignoni annihilated him in an e-mail debate, one that Slick apparently refused to share with his own mailing list (Martignoni, of course, spread it far and wide). Slick’s grasp of biblical truth ranks somewhere around that of Martin Luther’s, only less reasoned.

It was my understanding that Slick didn’t respond to him at all - so there was no debate.

But yeah, he is not in John’s league.

As a matter of fact…

Apologetics for the Masses #212 - The Gospel According to Matt Slick

Matt Slick’s Anti-Catholic Gospel

Apologetics for the Masses #213 - The Slick Gospel (cont’d)

Response to Mr. Slick

Apologetics for the Masses #214 - The Slick Gospel (cont’d)

Matt Slick’s Gospel - Part 3

Apologetics for the Masses #215 - The Slick Gospel (cont’d)

Matt Slick’s Gospel - Part 4

Apologetics for the Masses #216 - The Slick Gospel (cont’d)

Matt Slick’s Gospel - Part 5

Apologetics for the Masses #217 - The Slick Gospel (cont’d)

Matt Slick’s Gospel - Part 6

Apologetics for the Masses #218 - Will Billy Graham Be Saved

Will Billy Graham be saved?

Apologetics for the Masses #251

Can’t get an answer…

is there a link to the email’s content


Had any of you considered participating in the Catholic forum at Slick’s web site? Reasoned responses from Catholics voices might cause a few of his minions to use reason instead of ridicule. The primary philosophy is fundamentalism and Calvinism; how will they know if you don’t tell them the error.

All I’m hearing is complaints hurt feelings and no solutions.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit