Exposé of Reg Kelly (Part 2) - More and Worse Examples of Kelly's Dangerous Errors and Heresy

Updated July 9, 2026 (additions made throughout report including section on "Kelly's Gospel Perversion," notes on sermon "Faith of Abraham," etc.)

At least two parts are required to sufficiently address the errors of Kelly. There is WAY to much error and heresies that has been left unexposed. The first part can be found here.

Ezekiel 33 warns the watchman the consequence of not warning the people of their errors sins, wickedness and unregeneracy; the blood of those people will be on his hands. His responsibility is to to warn the people but if they reject it, their blood is upon themselves. There is an urgency to warn about men like Reg Kelly. There is massive amounts of the leaven of error and false doctrine in his preaching, and Paul warned concerning doctrinal error, that “a little leaven leaventh the whole lump.” (Gal. 5:9). The Bible warns that corruptions of the gospel are not to be tolerated, “no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue” (Gal. 2:5; 1:8-9), and Scripture is very clear on the necessity of practicing separation from those who corrupt the gospel and other Biblical teachings, and to warn of them (Rom. 16:17; 1 Tim. 1:3; 2 Tim. 2:15-21; 2 Th. 3:6, 14; 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1; 1 Jn. 1:9-11; 2 Jn 1:7-11).

More on Kelly's Gospel Perversion

➡ Kelly's "gospel" is a mirror of Jack Hyles false gospel (who hated the doctrine of repentance and Christ's Lordship with a satanic rage) which is further substantiated by his yoke with David Gibbs (IFB Lawyer and close friend and confidante of corrupt IFB wolves such as Jack Hyles, Jack Schaap, etc) and Larry Brown (exposed in the previous report), both of which embrace the same diluted and perverted gospel of Hyles the easy-believism/quick-prayerism 1-2-3 pray after me, no/false repentance, erroneous teaching on evidence of salvation with no-fruit and no-change necessary, silly carnival atmosphere, turning evangelism into a type of salesmanship, false and perverted gospel warned of in Gal 1:6-9. These men are "accursed" (Gal 1:6-9), but Kelly has no issues associating with them and funding their ministries, which is tell-tale (cf. Am 3:3).

➡ Kelly's simple "gospel" and rejection of evidence of salvation. In his sermon "Another Jesus, Another Spirit, Another Gospel" (Apr 5, 2020), he goes on about those who corrupt the simplicity of the gospel, that we must use the "kiss method" or it’s not the true gospel. His "kiss method" is based upon 2 Cor 11:3-4, which he horribly corrupts and twists out of its meaning, promoting a false gospel of easy-believism (see our report, Does “Simplicity in Christ” (2 Cor 11:3) Refer to a Simple, As In Easy, Gospel?), which is why he surrounds himself with heretics that preach the same corrupted gospel (e.g., Mike Hoggard, Larry Brown, David Gibbs, Jack Trieber, Bill Gothard, etc), naturally fulfilling Am 3:3. The first ten mins or so he goes on and on about how the gospel is corrupted from its simplicity in America. What he fails to see is that it’s himself that is guilty of doing this very thing, “carving out a Jesus in [his] mind” that doesn’t have to be Lord to be saved and what that that entails including repentance, which he denies and corrupts the rare time it is mentioned. That is "another Jesus" and "another gospel," by the one ironically preaching a sermon with that very title. Expecting evidence of Salvation is also allegedly another gospel according to Kelly, which makes him doubly a heretic and false teacher. The incredibly important subject of evidence of salvation cannot be overemphasized, and its intimate connection to salvation itself. See Evidence of Salvation in John's Epistle’s and A Biblical Survey on the Evidence of Justification — Conveying Assurance of Salvation, and Judging a False Profession (part 1) and Part 2.

➡ Promoting a false gospel in "Hebrews" sermon (Sept 21, 2025, evening service). In this sermon that took place the day of Charlie Kirks memorial, Kelly asks the congregation (time 13:00) to take the time to indulge in six hours of worldly filth and false worship of Charlie Kirk's online memorial, proclaiming the gospel presentations that occured at this memorial to be good. Were they good? The most obvious example is "Charlie's pastor" Rob McCoy, who presented a massage with an invitation to salvation, but it wasn't the true gospel, it was "another gospel" (Gal 1:6-9; 2 Cor 11:4), a false gospel of easy believism and quick prayerism void of genuine Biblical repentance and true faith, while presenting "another Jesus" (2 Cor 11:4). While McCoy was given his false "salvation" invitation (stand if you want to recieve "Jesus"), the easy going, emotion-appealing elevator music was playing in the background, manipulating the masses further. Adding to the emotional manipulation was the recurrent allusion to "Charlie Kirks" name, a further reflection of the massive man-centredness of this new false harlot religion of spiritul adultery.

Though McCoy didn't go to the quick prayer language of '1-2-3 pray with me'--he said "stand"--the motive of the methodology remains the same. McCoy attempted to correlate "profess me before man, I’ll profess you before my father in heaven" with the action of "standing," the sinner apparently demonstrating his profession of Jesus before men by standing. So the act of standing is in essence saying "you confess Jesus" which then correlates to being saved, since the Apostle Paul stated, confess Jesus as Lord and you’re saved. That is certainly not what Paul meant! Neither the Lord Jesus nor the Apostles ever dealt with anyone like this anywhere in the entire cannon of scripture. After he finished with his false gospel of easy believism and quick prayerism, he provided a QR code on the big screen so those who "stood" and got "saved" could talk to counsellors to help them now with their Christian living, how to conform into the mould. 100% man-centred from start to finish, a hideous and most deceptive perversion of the gospel, which from hereon we should refer to as, "The Man-Centred Gospel of Lasciviousness," after Ju 1:4. McCoy then goes on to give a false assurance of salvation to whosoever "stood" and thus was not ashamed of Jesus. I would venture to say that nobody was actually saved that "stood." They weren't actually confessing Jesus Christ as Lord from a truly repentant and surrendered heart to Jesus Christ as Lord, because they do not know what repentance is, or their awful sinful and wicked nature before God, or their eternal condemnation to hell, or why they actually even need to be saved, or who Jesus is. There is not even close enough gospel for someone to get saved. Very few in that audience likely had a clue about these things, and probably none that stood. Their "standing" was a false, emotional and fleshly charade to the event before them, their offence and grief towards the unjust assassination of Charlie Kirk, and now seeking to identify with him in any shape or form, and NOT the true Lord Jesus Christ from the Bible, while willingly having the wool pulled before their eyes, and marched down the broad path to destruction and damnation.

This, along with all the ungodly worldly music, spiritual adultery, paganism, and more, is what Kelly was promoting when he encourged his congregation to indulge in the memorial. Though we appreciate various elements of Kirks work, there were many issues and unscriptural teachings and practice, categorically spiritual adultery, which we have exposed here: Charlie Kirk and Turning Point USA: Morally Good but Biblically Dangerous and Destructive, with an Inevitable Paradoxical Effect.

➡ Corruption of the Gospel and no clue about Abraham's salvation in "Faith of Abraham" sermon (Feb 8, 2026). In a sermon on Abraham's faith, another sermon with lots of screaming and long winded preaching, a sermon where he gives a live example with a member of the congregation where he is Satan and then pretends to punch the member, we hear antaganostic and scorn on Abraham and his faith. Statements made such as, "How could God possibly talk about this man that way in the NT?" (that is, in a positive and godly manner) and "This is funny. I mean you got this ‘great hero’ of the faith right? I mean God’s been in his life?" and "I want to show you how 'super spiritual' this guy is.” The ignorance and scorn is mind boggling and frightful. He proceeded to reveal a serious absence of understanding on what salvation entails and when Abraham was actually saved. This is really the cherry on the top for proof of Kelly's likely unregenerate nature and thus inability to understand Scripture. He rejects salvation scripture and twists them into something post-salvation, appearing as one that does not seem to understand salvation.

It gets worse. Kelly proceeds to mock Abram and his faith (time 59:00). In the context of the issues with Abraham after he left Ur, specifically Gen 12, Kelly mocks and scorns Abraham (and what God says of him in Heb 11) with that type of voice, stating “This is funny. I mean you got this ‘great hero’ of the faith right? I mean God’s been in his life? Lets look at Genesis chapter 12 verse number 10” and then immediately after once again claims Abram to be saved at this point, where he called his wife his sister, mockingly screaming “A SAVED MAN, A CALLED MAN.”

Abraham was UNSAVED at this point, COMPLETELY missed by Kelly. Abram was not saved in Gen 12 or 13 or 14, but in Gen 15:1-6, as Rom 4 and Gal 3 make abundantly clear, as Gen 15 does itself. We have written a report on The Salvation of Abraham, which illustrates it very clearly that he was unsaved at this point in his life. As Kelly was briefly summarizing Genesis chapters 14, 15 and 16, he made no mention whatsoever of Abrahams conversion in the first six verses of Gen 15.

Kelly consistently takes terrible liberty with Gods Word. He claims Abraham had it pretty good at Ur before he obeyed God and left Ur of the Chaldees, but how does he know that? We know nothing about Abrams life in Ur of the Chaldees, a God-less, wicked and pagan city. This also implies that following and obeying God is bad, will bring nothing but trouble and problems, when the very opposite is true. It appears as an attack on the character of God.

In the sermon he compares his call to peach to Abraham’s call to leave Ur (time 57:40). This is a good example what happens when a man corrupts Gods Word and twists it to his own liking, while not understanding simple but critical Biblical truths like salvation— the when, how and why it occurs. Abram was unsaved when God called him out of Ur. Was Kelly also unsaved when God "called" him to preach? And where in Scripture does God call men today to preach, a zealously parrotted cliche? In our report The Enigmatic “Call” to Office of Pastor or Missionary we expose this man-made man-centred doctrine that opposes the Biblical teaching of who is a preacher and who can pastor.

Towards the end of this sermon he refers to the majority of false Christian sects in their area who “prove they’re saved by what they don’t do,” but the only thing that matters and will matter eternally, according to Kelly, is whether they believe the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. Majority of the people that we witness to with some kind of Biblical background or basis believe these things about Christ but are blatantly unregenerate. The same goes for majority of those in the false Christian sects in their area, ones he himself is labelling as false. In Scripture many, many, many believed these things but were in fact unsaved and remained unsaved (e.g., Jn 2:23-25; 6:60-66; Matt 7:13-14; Lk 13:23-24ff., Pr 1:20-32; etc). Salvation requires more than simply believing the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. True repentance. Surrender. Submission. Denying self. Losing ones life. Counting the cost and forsaking all for Christ. These are all critically involved in conversion, as Scriptures makes abundantly clear, especially noted in the preaching of the Lord Jesus Christ. See our report In Mark 8:34-38, Is Jesus Teaching How to be Saved or How to be A Better Christian? and The Call to Discipleship is a Call to Salvation, and our gospel tract: Are You Saved? 

➡ Kelly claims saved people can be either fruitful or fruitless. This is stated and repreated in almost every sermon that deals with the gospel or salvation, which is majority. Illustrations are given by Kelly of individuals who are clearly not saved, yet treated as though they are. The Bible teaches that every truly regenerate saved person is fruitful, from the moment of their salvation (Ezk. 36:25-27; Jer. 23:3; Ps. 1:1-3; 92:12-15; Pr. 11:30; 12:12b; Matt. 3:1-12; 7:15-20; 13:8-23; 21:28-32, 41-44; Mk. 4:20-29; Lk. 8:15-16; Jn. 4:35-38; 15:1-16; Rom. 11:16; 2 Cor. 5:18-20; 9:10; Col. 1:4-6; Jam. 1:18; 2:14-26; 3:17). We are born again by the will of God (cf. Jn. 1:12-13) through the word of truth (1 Pet. 1:23-25), for “Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.” (Jam. 1:18). The truly converted,

“Shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper. The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. . . . For the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.” (Ps. 1:3, 6)

“The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life;” (Pr. 11:30a), “The root of the righteous yieldeth fruit” (Pr. 12:12), “and if the root be holy, so are the branches.” (Rom. 11:16). Jesus Christ is that Root (Rom. 15:12; Rev. 22) and the Gentile believer being a branch of the “wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;” (Rom. 11:17); so it shall be an absolute guarantee that every born again believer will be holy and fruitful from the moment of salvation (e.g. Col. 1:4-6; Matt. 13:23), for the Holy Spirit indwells all born again believers (Gal. 2:20; Eph. 1:13-14; 1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19-20). The Lord of the harvest saves those who “shall render him the fruits in their season . . . bringing forth fruits thereof.” (Matt. 21:41-43). The truly saved, the fruitful good tree, their light shines before men (Matt. 5),

“And he said unto them, Is a candle brought to be put under a bushel, or under a bed? and not to be set on a candlestick? For there is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad.” (Mk 4:21-22)

The false pretender on the other hand professes to be Christian but doesn’t bear “good fruit” (Matt. 3:10) because he is not a “good tree” (Matt. 7:15-20) since his soul is not “good ground” where the seed could grow into a good tree (Matt. 13:13, 23), being without the life-giving Root (Matt. 15:13).

“But [Jesus] answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.” (Matt. 15:13)

“And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.” (Matt. 3:10)

All of that, and so much more (see also our reports: A Profession of Faith that Doesn't Produce Immediate and Perpetual Biblical Fruit is False and Does John 15 Teach that Saved People May Not Abide in the Vine, in the Lord Jesus Christ?), is missed, or neglected or simply not known by Reg Kelly.

➡ Salvation requires surrendering to Jesus Christ as Lord, not after as Kelly teaches. In his heretical sermon "Faith of Abraham," he puts surrender and following Christ some point after salvation (since that is allegedly what occured with Abraham, but its not true, Kelly does not understand when Abraham was saved), and not even necessarily together (though both are required for salvation, see here and here):

“Surrender first, follow Him later.”

This is two (or three) tiered "Christianity" which isn't Christianity at all. No man can be saved without surrendering to Jesus Christ as Lord, God and King, as the boss of their life. The call to follow Christ in the Bible is 100% of the time a call to salvation. Surrender and folliowing Christ are inseparable, and both are inseparable from the act of salvation. We are very concerned over people who do not believe in Christ’s Lordship while professing to be Christians. Very. Kelly denies true salvation and what occurs at the new birth, by denying His Lordship. He thinks that one can be saved by just receiving Jesus Christ as Saviour but not as Lord, surrendering sometime after and then following him after that, though this is nonsensical in the very idea. You cannot surrender without following Him. Both Kelly's Jesus and gospel are "another" (2 Cor 11:4). This heresy of Kelly's is a damnable heresy, that damns a soul to hell because we cannot believe and receive a Jesus that isn’t the Jesus of the Bible and be saved. This are the things Paul was warning of in 2 Cor 11:4, “another Jesus” and "another gospel." There is NOT one example anywhere in Scripture of that type of “salvation.” Everyone that was genuinely born again was surrendered to Christ and following Him, which in the day of Christ's earthly ministry meant following Him physically. It is not a noble or virtuous deed to reject who Jesus Christ is. There is only one salvation in the Bible and that is Lordship, which involves true Biblical repentance and surrender. There is no other, regardless how man corrupts and twists scripture and then ignores a mass of other scripture. Repentance, turning from all our sins, self and stuff to God and surrendering to Christ’s Lordship is the only salvation presented anywhere in Scripture. Lordship salvation is what all Bible believing churches for the last nearly two thousand years have believed, which is obvious from their writings and confessions of faith. This perverted gospel that Reg Kelly preaches damns souls to hell, and inoculates false professors from seeing their lost estate, making them two-fold children of hell. He, like many many others, is cause of it.

Jesus taught that saving faith involves commitment or surrender (as seen in a number of Scripture such as Matt. 10:32-39; 16:24-26; Mk. 8:34-38; Lk. 9:23-26, 57-62; 13:23-30; 14:15–15:32; 17:7-33; 18:9-32; 19:1-10, 12-27; Jn. 12:24-25) as did Paul (Ac. 14:15-16; Phil. 2:10-11), and also described by Jesus in the necessity for sinners to humble themselves before God as little children (Lk. 18:17) which connotes submission, as seen for example with Paul himself (Ac. 9:4-8; Phil. 3:3-10) and the publican (Lk. 18:10-14) and the Ninevites who surrendered to God and humbled themselves before Him in sackcloth and ashes (Jon. 3:5-10; Matt. 12:41) at Jonahs preaching of Gods impending judgment, and Zacchaeus (Lk. 19:1-10) and the list goes on (more examples further below). It’s repentance and submission to God, what the rich young ruler wasn’t willing to do (Matt. 19; Mk. 10; Lk. 18). All this reflects Lordship salvation.

We know that salvation requires surrendering to Jesus Christ as Lord by the Biblical evidence clearly identified throughout the Bible: Because of the word believe and faith; Because of who Jesus is; Because surrender requires submission and salvation requires submission (Ps. 2:11-12; Phil. 2:10-11; Is. 45:22-23; Lk. 14:15–15:32); Because what repentance means and entails; Because surrender is seen in the believer's relationship to Jesus as a “slave,” —a servant, same word (“doulos”) and we become slaves to Christ at conversion (Lk. 16:13; Matt. 6:24; 1 Cor. 7:22-23), Because surrender involves discipleship and we become disciples of Christ (followers and students of Christ) at conversion NOT after; Because surrender is noted in all the examples of true salvation in the N.T., Because this is the historical belief of true Bible believing churches over the last millennia at least (in the years we have record of).

In many of the cases in Scripture where Christ is called upon and received as Lord, we have almost no sense of their doctrinal belief. But we know they received Jesus as Lord and we know they surrendered and submitted themselves to God the Son in repentance. The emphasis is consistently and intentionally on receiving Him as Lord. Theologically speaking, in order for Jesus to be someones true Saviour, He must be received as Lord. No Lord, no Saviour. So for most who only “accept Jesus as their Saviour” have likely received “another Jesus” (2 Cor. 11:4). Its no coincidence that these same people will also reject Biblical repentance and true immediate and consistent fruit (such as holiness, godliness, righteousness) at salvation, not years down the road, not even months or weeks or days. Immediately! And that brings us to the other side of the spectrum; why are men apostates? 2 Pet. 2:1 tells us that they deny “the Lord that bought them.” They don't like lordship, they don't want a boss. "Lord" translates the Greek word “despotes,” from which we get the English, "despot." In the English, a “despotes" is a boss. The apostates, false teachers, of 2 Pet. 2 don't want a boss. They deny Jesus Christ because they don't want someone ordering them what to do. Thats what we see likewise with the false teachers in Rom. 16:17-18 & Phil. 3:18-19. People want to do what they want to do. They're glad to have a Jesus Who will save them and yet not require any subordination. And thats precisely what Jesus says of those who reject His Authority, even though they profess to work for Him in Lk. 19:11-27, “But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.” (vv. 14, 27). They don’t want Jesus to reign over their lives. The word “reign” means “to rule either literally or figuratively, as king.” This is exactly what these people reject, the Lordship of Jesus Christ. He is the King preaching the kingdom of God. This is referring to salvation, that is the spiritual lesson here (“He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return.” — v. 12). They reject Christ’s rule and authority over them, and will not receive Him and surrender to Him as King (and Lord). They profess to believe, but are actually lost, like the false teachers in 2 Pet 2:1-22, illustrating the stony or thorny soils in the parable of the sower and seed. I'm not saying that we shouldn't recognize Him as Saviour, but for Him to become your Saviour, you must receive Him for Who He is, and He is Lord. That means surrender and submission. And thats where Biblical repentance dovetails. When Jesus preached the gospel, He preached, "Repent for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand." They needed to receive Jesus as the Messiah, the fulfilment of the OT prophecies, while turning with godly compunction from their sins, self, stuff, people to Jesus as Lord. Jesus talked about this at the end of His ministry, when He told the story of the Master who sent His Son to the wicked tenant farmers (Lk. 20:9-18). Their lack of acknowledgement of His authority and power was what had them in trouble. “I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.” (v. 13). How does Jesus end this parable? “Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.” (v. 18). That is speaking of salvation and the Authority of Christ: of repentance and of submitting in humility and brokenness and contrite heart to Jesus Christ as Lord, to His Authority. If you won’t, He will clobber you into powder, like braying a fool in a mortar among wheat with a pestle. You’ll just be grounded pepper by the time He is done. That was the last public message to the lost recorded that He preached before His death. There is so much of this, all over. Especially in Luke. “Accepting” or “Asking Jesus Christ to be our Saviour” is unBiblical language. Denial of the Lordship of Christ is a false gospel directly actually related to Roman Catholicism false doctrine. 

People today are more messed up about the true gospel than ever. The Bible reveals a faith that cannot and will not save (Ac. 8, 1 Jn. 2, Jam. 2), “another gospel” and “another Jesus” that cannot and will not save (2 Cor. 11:4), in large part due to men like Kelly. The two biggest ways that both "believe" and "Jesus Christ" are perverted or corrupted today are related to one other. The gospel is corrupted when "believe" does not include true repentance and "Jesus Christ" does not include Him as Lord. Jesus is the way to the Father (Jn. 14:6). You can't get there going your way, and your way happens to be idolatrous until then (see Rom. 1:19-32). Jesus said that if you did not repent, you would perish (Lk 13:1-9). He said if you believe, you won't perish (Jn. 3:15-16). Both true repentance and faith are required and true repentance is the catalyst to true faith (e.g. Matt 21:28-32; Ac. 3:19 & 4:4). They are two entirely separated doctrines, but they dovetail in salvation. Very often the incomplete and, therefore false message exempt of Lordship perverts the teaching of Scripture even more so by also twisting the doctrine of sanctification, as noted throughout practically all sermons of Kelly. Professors of faith go on serving themselves, thinking they are saved, understanding that their disobedience is somehow justified by reality of some future date of dedication and “discipleship” or "surrender" or commitment to "following Him." They're saved, just not “dedicated” or “discipled” or "serious." Jesus is Saviour to them, but not quite Lord. They want the job but not the boss. At some later date, they might bump themselves up to that higher plateau of spiritual existence, perhaps when they get "revival" or "surrender to preach" (such as the case with Kelly, detailed in "Love Makes a Way" time 1:24:25). "Lordship" is just one of the steps of Christian growth. 'Surrender and follow Jesus some time after your profession.' This also is evil.

➡ Corruption of the gospel through allegoricalism in "Love Makes a Way" (Feb 15, 2026) sermon. He loves to allegoricalize the book of Ruth. He says Ruth is a picture of gentile believers, Boaz is a picture of Jesus Christ, Boaz’s servant is picture of the Holy Ghost (says never saw it before), “servant in the Bible is always the unnamed unseen unspoken of person, won’t speak of himself, he’ll speak of Christ.”  Naomi is a picture of Israel. Where does he get this from? Nowhere is anything even remotely hinted at allegories in Ruth. Its made up fables. His explanation of the process of how Ruth came to salvation is backwards and contrary to what Ruth teaches. Ruth is saved in the first chapter, NOT when she is “bought” by Boaz in chapter 4. He claims that first she came to repentance and faith and then Christ sought her after in chapter 2, and then in chapter 4 she was bought. This is serious corruption of the gospel, of salvation and of Ruth itself.

“Chapter 2 shows Ruth being sought. Oh He came to seek and to save the lost amen. She was being sought.”

“Chapter 3. You see God is wroughting a work of repentance and faith in you. Then He seeks you ought, He sought her out, out there in that pagan world, brings her in, seeking her and bringing her to Himself and then He teaches her and that’s in chapter 3, Naomi starts teaching her about the ways of God and the Word of God, and then in chapter 4 Ruth is bought [laughs strangely when he said this]. You and I are purchased possessions of Jesus Christ, you are not your own you are bought with a price."

And then in chapter 4 he says Ruth was bought and redeemed.

What occured in Ruth 3 and 4 had nothing to do with salvation. One has to eisegetically and allegorically read this into the verses to derive this teaching out of it. Nothing hints at such an interpretation. Ruth is a story about Ruth and Boaz, not a doctrinal illustration on salvation.

We agree that Ruth was genuinely saved in Ruth chapter 1, but everything he says afterwards is a perversion of the gospel and what occurs at the new birth. We don’t seek for the Lord after we are saved, nor are we bought at some point after. Seeking and drawing occurs prior to salvation, NOT after. We are bought at salvation, NOT after (1 Cor 6:20; 7:23). Ruth was absolutely saved in Ru 1:16-17, a confession of faith in the true and living God of Israel, a testimony that matches Rahabs testimony of salvation (Jos 2:1-3; 6:17, 23-25; Heb 11:31; Jam 2:25). But he is a man of great confusion who has difficulty believing the literal words of God, and must bend and twist and spiritualize His words in order to support his own false teachings and gain some fulfillment from them, and of course to appeal emotionally to the crowd. Only a few short minutes later, as he is speaking about Ruth sitting at the feet of Boaz (spiritualized) he says, “Theres a question there, okay was she saved.” Wow, talk about confusion. Was she saved or was she not, Reggie?? You say she was but then she wasn’t, because suddenly it doesn’t fit your allegorical gymnastics anymore? What a circus and reproach to Christ, twisting, bending and corrupting God's words, treating them worse than tomatoes falling off the back of a produce truck.

➡ More false gospel in the sermon "Love Makes a Way." What he says at time 1:23:30 is very very problematic, describing salvation (according to Scripture) but teaching it as post-salvation. Everything he describes here is what happens at salvation, the expected requirements for conversion as clearly laid out in scripture, and self-implication of a false salvation:

"I pretty well don't have a problem with going to the feet of Jesus. I know He is God, He is God Almighty, I am nothing apart from Him. But I've always had a problem with this: Laying my life down at the feet of Jesus [which he demonstrates by laying down physically on the floor in the right recumbent position]. If we try to save our lives, what happens to us? We lose them. But if we lose our life for his purposes, we save it. Do you know why America is going to hell? Its because God's people are not laying their life down for the cause of Christ. We just don't want to do that."

He then goes on to describe what occured when he "surrendered to the call to preach," which once again is describing salvation yet taught as post-salvation surrender to preach:

"Now I have a little taste of it, because as I remember surrendering to preach, remembering literally come to grips to the fact that my whole could now be changed. And every dream, and every hope, and every aspiration that I had ever had could be coming to an end tonight. But brother Michael, often times between then and now, I've wanted to get up and live my own life. And heres the difference between Biblical Christianity and just church life. I am asking this morning is there anybody in this building, that the Holy Spirit of God has spoken to you or is wooing you to lay your life down and all of your dreams and apsirations and what you might could have done and  lay your life down at the feet of Jesus." (time 1:24:25)

He would go on to allegoricalize Ruth laying down at the feet of Boaz, claiming this (above) is what was being taught. "It is never said that Boaz would tell her what to do until she had laid her life before him."

Dying to self, laying down ones life, surrendering to Christ, forsaking ones dreams and ambitions and aspirations, ALL occur in repentance for true salvation. They do not occur at some point after one is saved, when maybe one wants to "surrender" to be a preacher. These are all presented as soteriological passages in Scripture (e.g., Matt 10:32-39; 16:24-26; Mk 8:34-38; Lk 9:23-26, 57-62; 14:25-15:32; 17:Jn 12:24-25; etc). Without surrendering to Jesus Christ as Lord, without giving up ones life for a new life, without exchanging masters (Matt 6:24), without giving up ones rights and will for God’s right and will, one cannot be saved. Allegoricalizing Ruth lying before Boaz does not help Kelly's doctrine; it just brings more confusion and condemnation. Everything Kelly is describing above is what is required for a sinner to be saved, NOT for the man-centered teaching of surrendering to preach. EVERY born again believer is commanded to preach from the moment of their conversion (in the proper context, men and women), as 2 Cor 5:17-20 makes abundantly clear (vv. 17-18a is salvation and vv. 18b-20 is the great commission—equally applicable to all), among many other passages including those commonly referred to as the great commission (Matt 28:19-20; Mk 16:15; Lk 24:46-48).

When someone corrupts salvation and salvation passages in the Bible, the leaven quickly spreads to many other doctrines and scripture passages. Twisting, wresting, misusing and abusing Scripture becomes second hand, and its continual. Everything Kelly is teaching in this excerpt reflects the false gospel and corruption of salvation rampant in his preaching, in a nutshell.

There is lots in the Bible on this, which we have explored here: In Mark 8:34-38, Is Jesus Teaching How to be Saved or How to be A Better Christian? and a number of other reports. To have life, we must lose our life. In other words, we can't hang on to our life, if we are to have eternal life. We fully surrender our lives to Him. Salvation is about Lordship. There is no such thing as non-Lordship salvation. People need to stop rejecting the Lordship of Christ like its some kind of virtue, and in so doing, confuse people in such a way as to make their converts twice the children of hell they once were. That’s what statistics such as: 66% very likely lost over 30 years of preaching, produce (never mind the ones still lost in the current group). I get that some are ignorant, but by pushing people away from the Lordship of Christ, they still ravage lost souls. I do not believe Kelly is ignorant. The things he says are very intentional, and he intentionally teaches a false repentant-less and Lord-less “gospel” which has a form of easy-believism, which he more than likely has deceived himself in thinking is true.

➡ 1 Pet 3:1 teaches salvation without scripture?? In the sermon "Women in Culture" (Feb 8, 2026 evening), Kelly claims 1 Pet 3:1 is the only place in scripture proclaiming salvation without the Word of God (time 39:00)! He says the text is teaching that a person (husband) is won without the word of God. The passage reads, "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;" He runs with the word "won" but the passage doesn't tell us what his nature is, and thus what he is won to (whether fellowship the Lord, a saved man, or a new relationship with the Lord, an unsaved man). It infers back to "obeying not the word" so that now he obeys. For a guy who habitually corrupts salvation passages into something post-salvation, its pretty rich when he takes a passage where we don't really know whether the husband is saved or not, and in all liklihood refers to post-salvation husband not obeying the Word of God (based upon the context), which is Abraham and Sarah (vv. 2-6), and then turns it into salvation claiming that a husband is won to Christ without ever using Scripture. This of course would completely contradict the Word of God, which is very, very clear that no man is born again without faith in the truth of Scripture (Rom 10:13-17; 1 Pet 1:23-24) being preached (Rom 10:13-17; 1 Cor 1:21; 1 Pet 1:25). Kelly is promoting a damnable heresy (2 Pet 2:1), that someone can be saved outside of Scripture. Reg Kelly is a liar who does not know or understand the gospel, or the words in Scripture, and cannot even interpert the actual meaning in context. These serious issues of course are all marks of a false teacher (2 Pet 2:1).

➡ Corrupted gospel for an alter call in his popular "Hell of Hell" sermon. In Kelly's sermon "The Hell of Hell" (preached multiple times, 2004, 2020)—his most popular sermon on sermonaudio boasting >17,000 listens—he gives an alter call at the end of the sermon. Considering the subject at hand, the importance of preaching a true gospel becomes critical. We don't want any one to go to hell, including those who have been fed an anemic, corrupted and perverted gospel. Here is his alter call:

“If you’re listening to me online, I’m telling you turn around, get on your knees, bow your head before God, and say ‘God be merciful a sinner’ and place your faith and trust in Jesus Christ as your Saviour. If you don’t you will die and go to hell. Its not a joke its not a fear tactic but a fact of the Bible. Alright here is what I’m going to to do. I’m going to pray as I told you I would, while I am praying I’m going to ask those of you who raised their hands if you’ll step up and find yourself a place to pray in the front and say God be merciful me a sinner, I want to receive Christ as my Saviour today and ask God to save you and let me say something to ya, all that come to Him He will in no wise cast out, He will turn nobody away and will receive you as His son today, we’re going to pray…”

He then went on to pray for their salvation. Kelly says people don’t want to weep and come before the alter; they will in hell. Thus, according to Kelly, if you do not come before his alter, you will end up in hell. We would like to know where in God's Word it demands an alter call? Did he curse in the beginning of the sermon? It appears so: “Why in hell did God create hell?” 

There is so much wrong with all this. (1) At the foundational level, its an emotional fabrication of the real thing. The alter call with the emotional elevator music playing in the background, meant to produce an emotional response. Emotional responses by lifting up of hands built upon an emotional screeching sermon preached at 100 mph without taking a breath. Not good! Reminds us of Matt 6:7, and though it speaks of praying it could also be applied to preaching as well, “But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.” (2) There was threatening of hell to people not making the alter call, as if the alter call is part of conversion. This is the emotional and threatening environment that Kelly creates, to force a response, even if its fake and fabricated. At the aforementioned revival conference attended where he was the guest preacher, three people wanted to pray with him after his emotional appeal, but all three remained unsaved, while Kelly claimed them as "saved." (3) He is also praying other people into heaven. This presents a false finish line. (4) Absolutely nothing about repentance. Not a word, nor by principle. (5) Salvation is not about saying ‘God be merciful to me a sinner.’ Salvation doesn’t require a prayer, but it does in Kelly’s world. (6) Absolutely nothing about Christ’s Lordship (surrendering to Him, submission to Him, understanding what it is to have Jesus as our Lord, etc). Christ only need to be received as Saviour according to Kelly but not as Lord. The Jesus that is Saviour but not Lord is “another Jesus.” This is the major cause for the multitudes of false professing believers in churches today, rebels hating a boss over them.

What this will mostly produce is false professions, innoculating people to the truth and their true condition, making them two-fold children of hell. No wonder he does not believe that every true conversion is super dramatic, immediately life changing, and always frutiful right from the get-go. He has to account for the mostly false professions in his midst. The 2/3 of people that have darkened the doors of LFC according to Kelly in his time as pastor there who in his estimation were unsaved, stayed unsaved for a very important reason. This right here, this anemic, watered-down and corrupted gospel alter call. The tack taken by Kelly here is not what Jesus or the Apostles did, not how they operated. It's taking a very selective reading of passages mostly out of context and then extrapolating a tactic from it. Even if he is convinced now that what he's saying is true, it is deception of the worst possible kind. Anyone who believes this, and then later goes to hell, I'm pretty sure will be thinking it was a false gospel while he's serving his eternal sentence there. He will think that the method he was taught in the Hell of Hell was not Biblically true.

➡ Summary of Kelly's false gospel. The gospel of Reg Kelly could be best summarized as an emotional false repentant-less gospel of easy believism. This is what he preaches week after week, including in his written material. We have never heard or read a solid, true gospel presentation by him. A repentant-less and Lord-less gospel is “pervert[ing] the gospel of Christ.” (Gal. 1:6). Paul warns that men who corrupt the gospel by eliminating critical elements are “accursed” (Gal 1:6-9), “false brethren” (Gal 2:4-5) and “enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil 3:18-19) and we are to flee from them (Eph 5:11; 2 Jn 1:9-11).

It doesn't take faith and obedience to present what Kelly is doing, it requires no godly wisdom, and yet it is given credit as being faithful. It really is a bait and switch. Someone is offered something said to be salvation, but it's actually a placebo. The whole system glorifies man, is man-centred and makes false professors two-fold children of hell. For someone to be truly saved, he must truly believe which requires repentance (actual true repentance, which is three-fold: intellectual, volitional and emotional) and then believe in the true Jesus, which requires receiving Jesus Christ Who is Lord, Saviour and God. You aren't receiving one or two selective attributes of Jesus and still receiving Him. If He isn't Lord, then He isn't Jesus. Leaving out Lordship is turning the grace of God into lasciviousness. Leaving out repentance results in a false faith, a dead faith, an imposter faith that is of the intellect only. Yes this is a false gospel. It’s a grace and a faith that doesn’t save.

For a man to have preached over 40 years and still not see the importance of true Biblical repentance and Christ's Lordship and preaching the one true and pure gospel of Christ, along with the evidence of salvation, reflects something terribly wrong. These errors and confusion are certainly not found in the KJV that he apparently exalts.

More on Kelly's Heretical Sermon "How a Sinner Gets Saved"

(Also titled "Prepare ye the way of the Lord" on Sermon Audio, preached Feb 23, 2014).

➡ There is some good preaching here in the last half (first half is a destructive tsunami), preaching on sin, which is good, and God working on the soul of the lost to bring them to repentance, also good. The word repent or repentance is mentioned around 10x but never explained as to what he actually means besides once he speaks of repentance as turning from sin. I’m happy he said that. But what or who was referring to? Was he only referring to saved people turning from their sin? It appears as such, as almost every single mention of repentance was specifically post-salvation (while the very opposite is found in scripture), directed to the congregation whom he would call Christian’s, imploring them to “get right with God” with little to no explanation as to what he actually means. The sermon is loaded with this confusion as to who he is preaching to, saved or lost people. This is continual uncertainty as to who he is really referring to (due to his continual bouncing back and forth between saved and unsaved), and there is a massive difference in scripture and practicality between saved and unsaved. These kind of sermons are so unbiblical with their utter confusion and error.

➡ Essentially every mention of repentance in this sermon is referring to the saved person. The one somewhat decent Biblical mention of repentance, is kiboshed by what he says shorty after (confusing whether its salvation or post-salvation) and the rest of the sermon where majority of the references to repentance are post-salvation and without any explanation of what he means by it. That combined with statements about salvation being easy and not hard, and allegedly just having to admit you’re a sinner and at that very second you’re saved, and then to add to all that unscriptural teachings and confusion was the constant, confusing, unscriptural and contradictory bouncing back and forth between saved and lost (the interaction between Jospeh and his brethren), and not even once in the entire sermon quoted any passages on repentance (which is a massive red flag as well, especially considering that he mentioned the word a number of times) reflects serious problematic issues with his repentance and the “gospel” of this sermon. Very. I put “gospel” in quotes because the “gospel” he presents here is apparently the same for either saved or lost people, hence the dozens of contradictory bouncing back and forth between them being saved and then lost, saved and then lost, etc, to ad nauseam, like a yo-yo, and as it fit his agenda, which is very convenient. What all that represented was the heretical eisegesis of scripture, which is putting in what you want it to mean, reading into scripture what you want it to say. The Holy Spirit does not teach like this, at all. The true gospel in God’s Word is for lost people and has no inclines towards any confusion, unlike Reggies. He speaks sometimes of people not being “corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ” (2 Cor 11:3), even an entire sermon preached on it, but if there ever was any corruption to God’s gospel and Christ’s simplicity, this would surely be it. And such corruption is brought about by “another gospel” and “another Jesus” and “another spirit,” (2 Cor. 11:4), and he is certainly guilty of the first two. So with that said, and based upon the evidence that now follows, nothing in this sermon convinces me to any degree that he believes in Biblical repentance. There are a lot of false definitions out there on repentance, especially among the IFB’s, so it could really mean anything or nothing.

➡ The massive confusion and contradictions in the sermon, around being saved and not being saved, is on a whole new level. In the very same context, practically the same breath, where he speaks of Josephs brethren bowing before him being a picture of salvation, “of coming to Christ,” (time 19:00), he declares “they come to get corn, spiritual substance from the Lord Jesus, they bow before Him, but what does Jesus do? Makes themselves strange to them [speaking about Gen 42:7] . . . He makes himself strange to them. Jesus does not reveal, Joseph does not reveal himself to those men, as a Saviour or a forgiver of sin.” (time 20:25). He then bounces back to salvation at time 21:45 (after floating between the two natures a number of times in a period of mere minutes, some occasions so convoluted you don’t know for sure where he’s at), when Joseph “spake roughly unto them. . . . until they are saved everything he says is rough to them. Preaching is rough to people that are not saved,” and then shortly after he states “preaching is rough to Christians that are not right. And they’re always suspicious that you’re after them.” This bouncing back and forth like a teeter totter seesaw continues on throughout the entire sermon, dozens of times. For example, at time 24:10 he calls them “saved” brothers and then at 24:30 they are once again unsaved because saved doesn’t really fit Gen. 42:11, because they were speaking hypocritically. Prior in the sermon hypocrites were saved, but now hypocrites are unsaved. Oh the confusion and heresy! For the record, hypocrites are always unsaved in the Bible: Job 8:13; 13:16; 15:34; 17:8; 20:5; 27:8; 36:13; Ps. 35:16; Pr. 11:19; Is. 9:17; 10:6; 33:14; Matt. 6:1-5, 16; 7:1-5; 15:7; 16:3; 22:18; 23:13, 14, 15, 18, 23, 27, 29; 24:51; Lk. 11:38-52; 13:15. Nowhere in Scripture is a hypocrite ever a saved person. “He also shall be my salvation: for an hypocrite shall not come before him.” (Job 13:16). The sermon started foundationally with this horrible confusion: “So we have this picture of Joseph being Christ, Joseph’s brethren being lost persons or being in a backslidden condition of a Christian and how God fixes that.” (time 08:45). The text is teaching either salvation or practical sancitfication, NOT both. They were either saved or unsaved, NOT both.

So let’s try to unravel this ambiguous puzzle. That same instance of their bowing before Joseph, is illustrated as both a picture of salvation and not-salvation. They were saved by Christ (time 19:00) but then they weren’t saved by Him after all (time 20:25), He “makes himself strange to them” and “does not reveal himself to those men, as a Saviour or a forgiver of sin” (time 20:25), but then He wants them to be saved so He “speaks roughly unto them. . . . until they are saved everything he says is rough to them.” (time 21:45). So they bowed before him to come to Christ (19:00), but they also bowed before him to get spiritual substance but then Christ makes Himself strange to them after allegedly saving them, but then did not reveal himself to them after all as a Saviour or forgiver of sin because they weren’t ready to be saved, but rather spoke roughly to them because they were unsaved, but then preaching is also rough to Christians that are not right?!? What on the earth is going on?! 😂 😂 Wow, what incredibly and horribly convoluted disorder. Pure madness. A master of disaster. A train that has completely derailed. He doesn’t know if he's coming or going. We say, “God forbid: yea, let God be true, but [Reg Kelly] a liar;” (Rom 3:4). This is all the end product of eisegetical wresting of scripture and forcing allegorical meanings into passages that contain none, but also denying what true salvation is and does to the threefold nature of man: body, soul and spirit. The bowing before Joseph means either salvation or sanctification BUT not both, and his trying to reconcile both results in massive toxic doses of confusion, contradiction and heresy, for which he can find no antidote. No wonder the congregation was so quiet through all this.

God is not the author of confusion. Scripture interprets Scripture. The Bible is God’s Word and so it is consistent with itself. The Bible does not contradict itself. This is the logic of the laws of the excluded middle and of contradiction. If someone teaches opposing messages out of one text, he is contradicting scripture. He is not preaching truth. He is misunderstanding and lying at least with one of the messages of conflicting positions, and then creating massive confusion that is not of God.

His conformity of Scriptural passages into salvic and sanctification is patently false and plainly heretical. The life of the saved and the life of the believer are as different as heaven and hell, as light and darkness. It is entirely impossible to conclude with two opposing conditions out of one text. Nowhere does the text from Gen 42 to 44 even hint at this sort of “exegesis.” He is forcing a proposition into the text that doesn’t exist. None of the 10 brethren are converted until Gen 44. It is a blatant lie that this is “a picture of broken fellowship between a saved person and their Lord.” There is absolutely NO evidence anywhere that they were ever saved before this but rather tons of evidence that reflects how wicked they really were. Here he denies salvation again and propagates further serious confusion that this sermon is already known for. Kelly even lists off a number of their sins in this sermon, such as lying, deceiving, murder, envy, false accusers, haters, etc, unrepentant sins they were living with, but he doesn't get it because in his world a "saved" person and unsaved person are extactly the same. And if this was really the case of restoration of a saved person, why does he then also teach that they were unsaved, even concluding the sermon with their alleged salvation (time 62:55—their easy believism, Kellt's version of the gospel)? Again, nothing but confusion. It appears as if only one of them truly repented at this point, which is likely the reason why Christ’s lineage came through Judah. Yes they were backslidden indeed, because they were unsaved, which only refers to lost people in Scripture, but once again twisted and corrupted here by Kelly as well. The word itself means to apostatize, describing an apostate, and NO apostate is or has ever been saved. Backsliding, like carnal and lukewarm and unbelief, is Keswick currency used to describe allegedly saved people, when they’re actually unconverted.

He also claimed in this context that “a saved person” will go to great lengths “to keep from getting right with God.” Really? A truly saved person will do that? One who has been forgiven of all their sin, has an actual relationship with God the Father, is justified, sanctified, reconciled, adopted, atoned, redeemed, forgiven and cleansed of all sins forever, quickened, given eternal life, partaker of the divine nature, entered into God’s rest, etc, that very one who has God the Spirit dwelling in Him who always leads and teaches and convicts and chastises the saint He indwells? NO he won’t go to a great “extent to keep from getting right with God.” That is a fable of pure fiction. It’s all made up and doesn’t exist anywhere in scripture. No true believer would rather be in the mud and vomit of the pig and dog, as Kelly illustrated, then “get right with God.” Does 2 Peter 2 not make it abundandtly clear that the dog and pig have always been a dog and pig?? When King David was confronted with his sin in 2 Samual by the prophet Nathan, did he go to great lengths to keep from getting right with God? Ps 51 says exactly the opposite. How about the Apostle Peter, although saved but yet without the indwelling Spirit (just like King David), when he denied Christ thrice? When Jesus “turned, and looked upon [him],” his heart was overwhelmed and smitten with grief and repentance for what he had just done to His Great Saviour, the very One whom he only days earlier had vowed to defend with his life, and “Peter went out, and wept bitterly” (Lk. 22:61-62). Does that sound like someone who goes to great “extent to keep from getting right with God” and rather be in the mud and vomit of the pig and dog?

Reggie is describing people that are lost, but giving them credibly as being saved. And that is heretical if we have ever heard anything. Peter didn’t do that with Simon the sorcerer, but very pointedly and sharply told him he had a wicked heart and had never been given forgiven (Ac. 8:13-23). People that turn back to their sinful living and don’t “get right with God” are just lost. Plain and simply lost (2 Pet. 2:15-22; Jn. 6:60-66, among hundreds of scripture). It is unsaved people who go to great lengths to “keep from getting right with God,” as exemplified many times in scripture, including Martha (Lk. 10:38-42). And where is the chastening of God in all this teaching of his (De. 8:5-6; Job 5:17; Pr. 3:11-12; I Cor. 11:27-32; Heb. 11:5-11; Rev. 3:19)? Why is it so absent? These scripture references reveal that God chastens His beloved saints today in no different manner than under the OT. Kelly denies what salvation is, denies what salvation does at the very moment of regeneration, and denies what the Triune God does in everyone He indwells, whom He NEVER leaves to themselves: read Jn. 10:1-5, 26-27; Rom. 8:28-39; 1 Cor. 1:6-9; Eph. 1:11, 13; 3:20; Phil. 1:6; 2:12-13; 1 Th. 2:13; 5:23-24; 2 Th. 2:12-17; 3:2-3; 2 Tim. 1:12; 4:18; 1 Pet. 1:5; Heb. 13:20-21. Reg Kelly's gospel and scripture interpretation is a train wreck!

But then Kelly would say, 'I don't believe in interpretation.' Really? Yes:

“Rightly divide the word of truth. You don’t interpret it, you don’t try to interpret it, let it interpret itself.” ("To All the King James Bible Correctors Out There BY Reg Kelly")

Whatever that means. Do we get to understand the Bible through some process of osmosis? Here is the link to that excerpted sermon, but beware tons of SCREAMING!

A person doesn’t just get to corrupt and twist salvation passages into something post-salvation without damaging and mangling the meaning of the text But it does more than that, though that is evil in of itself; it also corrupts and perverts salvation, which is the gospel. You also do not get to do this without bringing condemnation to yourself. This is precisely what 2 Cor 2:17 and 2 Pet 3:16-17 are warning about, of men like Kelly, who is one of “many, which corrupt the word of God:” (2 Cor 2:17), who are "unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction,” which is an "error of the wicked" (2 Pet. 3:16-17).

➡ At time 53:05 he said:

“God puts away sin and He does it through one thing: repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.” 

That sounds petty good, right, like he is referring to salvation, right, like he is talking about lost people being forgiven through conversion, right? That would be the obvious and logical conclusion since language like this is ONLY ever speaking about and to lost people (which correlates to passages such as Acts 20:21 although he never quoted any repentance passages in this entire sermon). But then in convoluted Reggie style, he brings in a passage to tie to what he had just said, a passage that is referring only to saved people and had absolutely nothing to do with “repentance and faith,” and that was Lk 17:4 which is all about forgiving a brother who trespasses against you 7x in day which, again, has zero reference to a lost person and only concerns sin between two professing brethren. What?? So from that sentence on repentance and faith he said, “Thats why the Bible says in Luke…[and then quotes the passage in Lk 17:4 in part]” which obviously ties to what he had just said, and then says, “You never hear preachers quote that verse when they preach on forgiveness anymore.” He then continues giving examples about Christians forgiving one another, based upon Lk 17:4 and the statement on repentance and faith (which makes absolutely no sense in the context) finally finishing this part on the forgiveness between professing Christians (we say "professing" because most are not) with an example of himself getting right with another man he had been rude to on the phone, and with that he claims, concerning Christians and specifically himself:

“Things weren’t right. God’s Word is truth. God wants us to die to self-righteousness, He wants sin brought out of the dungeon and brought into the light and dealt with. He wants repentance and faith.” (time stamp 56:20)

Again, we see him tying all these statements about brethren dealing with issues into his initial statement about God putting away sin by repentance and faith, and then finishing it off with a very similar statement. Yikes. He literally has no clue what salvation is and does or the incredible difference between saved and unsaved, especially concerning Scripture that confuses this not. We note that at time 53:05 (beginning of this context) he spoke of salvation (seemingly, but clearly not what he meant by it) for a second, and then spent 3 mins and 15 seconds tying forgiveness between brethren to that salvation phrase, and then concludes with a similar phrase of salvation but one directed to himself and other so-called Christians. Okay. Just. Wow. This is so bad and contradictory to scripture. Massive confusion!

Forgiveness of sins through repentance and faith in scripture is only ever referring to the new birth. Only. We only repentant and believe once for conversion (Ps. 2:12; Pr 1:20-31; Is. 55:1-7; Matt. 21:28-32; Mk 1:15; Ac 20:21) and our sins are only put away once forever (Ps. 103:2-3b, 10-12; Is. 1:18; 44:22; Ac. 13:37-39; Rom. 4:7; I Cor. 6:11; Eph. 1:7; 4:32; Col. 1:12-14; 2:13-14; Heb. 1:2-3; 10:14-18; 1 Jn. 2:12; Rev. 1:5); its at conversion we die to self-righteousness (Rom. 10:1-3; Lk. 5:31-32; Ezk. 3:21-22; 18:24-32—if you did not, then you’re yet unsaved); its only at conversion that sin is brought into the light from out of darkness (e.g. Jn 3:19-21; Eph. 5:11-13) for saved people do NOT walk in darkness but in the light (read these references: Matt 6:22-23; Jn 8:12; 11:9-10; 12:35-36, 46; 2 Cor 6:14; 1 Th. 5:4-8) — yet he uses all this salvation language towards professing Christians. How bad can salvation be confused? God is not the author of this confusion. Serious convoluted confusion and admixture of scripture and doctrine that doesn’t jive even one bit. Constant contradictions that don’t exist in scripture, and illogical statements. His repentance means absolutely nothing and its very evident why he speaks so freely about repentance in this sermon (versus any other sermon), because he applies it to saved people only, while using salvation lingual. It’s just a disaster, earthquake style hiting 8.0 on the richter scale.

➡ Kelly almost confesses to his own false gospel and fruit thereof, while lamenting over “the church in America” and the need for revival. He laments over the pitiful state of “the church” (the unscriptural heresy of the universal church, another heresy he believes in and promotes) in America and all the false believers in the churches, including his own, but he has no one to blame except himself. It’s because of the very anemic and corrupted gospel that he propagates. In fact, he even gives staggering frightful statistics of the false professors from under his ministries, but still doesn’t see the cause of it. And thats the saddest part.

“Let me tell you something, if 1/3 of the people in this church in the last 30 years who made professions of faith had stayed with it, we’d be in the gymnasium instead of this building right here. Ultimately you find out there was nothing to make them stay. There is a doctrine of perseverance and the reason we are not seeing perseverance is because we are not letting the Holy Ghost do a through work of repentance in the life of that person, we are making it humanistically easily for them to get inside, get in the church and then we wonder why they blow up and blow out.”  (time stamp 20:40)

Wow, talk about self-condemnation, but he is blind as to who and what the cause is. According to what he says here, according to the horses mouth, thats about 66% of professions over 30 years were false. Hmmmmm, I wonder why. Could it have anything to do with the false repentant-less and Lord-less corrupted gospel He’s been pounding from the pulpit for those 30 years?? This really isn’t rocket science. At all. What he preaches and what the apostles and Christ preached are a night and day difference. He denies and rejects what God the Son Himself calls the gospel, over and over. It is unfortunate that he doesn’t recognize that it could have to do with his preaching and not lining what he believes and teaches with what Scripture says. Of course these sort of statistics will happen when he only preaches a repentant-less and Lord-less “gospel,” as noted in other sermons on the gospel (e.g. "Simplicity in Christ," "Crucified with Christ," "Being Born Again") and the false gospel tract, etc. What else would you or could you expect? Even in the very sermon where he acknowledges this, he does not teach repentance as Scripture does but massively confuses this critical doctrine along with what post-salvation occurs and the difference between the saved and the lost, and how Scripture always differentiates these entirely different natures. His views on evidence of salvation is also corrupt, which adds to the corruption. He speaks about “repentance," but he doesn’t actually teach it because he actually denies. And places where he should have taught it, he twists it into something post-salvation. Reg Kelly is the man completely guilty of making it “humanistically easily for them to get inside, get in the church,” and he is just one of thousands like him among fundamentalists today.

More on Kelly's Sanctification Perversion and Inability to Understand Difference Between Saved and Unsaved

➡ "Faith of Abraham" (Feb 8, 2026) Sermon

1. At time stamp 40:00 he begins talking about how he gets worse as he gets older:

“I wish I could tell you the older I get the cleaner I live. It’s not true. The older I get, the worse I am. My mom told me that about 25 years ago and I just couldn’t believe it. . . . I found it to be true. I feel like I had this meant well, as I get older it’ll get better and I’ll be able to live closer to God and I’ll be a better Christian blah blah blah blah, well it’s not true. And I believe there is a reason for that, so we don’t rest in any performance that we may do and our only rest in the fact that He died for us.”

There is so much perversion here it’s difficult to know where to start. Kelly self-admittingly is not growing in God's grace and knowledge and wisdom and grace, and rather always going backwards. He is always “backslidden” (I.e. apostate, since that is what the word means, and thus unsaved) and he is getting worse as he ages and not growing onwards from the foundational doctrines of Christ and going onto perfection as all saved people do (Heb 6:1-2), not being perfected as the man of God is commanded to, and able (2 Tim 3:16-17). He is not growing as a believer, which means he is an unbeliever. All that are sanctified keep getting further sanctified, repeatedly stated in Scripture, but not Kelly. His "Christianity" is the very opposite of the Christianity described in God's Word, including God's grace, for "the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory by Christ Jesus, after that ye have suffered a while, make you perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle you." (1 Pet 5:10). "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and isprofitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Tim 3:16-17). There are many more passages just like these. The truly saved saint after having suffered persecution is perfected, established, strengthened and settled in this life and in his fellowship with God the Son, but not Kelly. He refers to this as "blah blah blah blah" and untrue. The same for the perfection of the man of God that occurs with the inspired Scriptures in doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness. But Kelly is not being perfected, and that can only mean one thing. Reg Kelly is a liar and a false teacher, repeatedly demonstrated in his preaching and positions. He speaks as a fool and as a scoffer, who "walk after their own lusts," (2 Pet 3:3). No saved person goes back or even remains stagnant. This is not what the new birth conveys, not what the indwelling Spirit of God wroughts, and runs in complete contradiction to the greatest miracle and transformation the world has ever seen concerning mankind. He has not been perfected, hence why he is not sanctified, quite the opposite of Heb 10:14, "For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified."

This heresy by Kelly fits into his perversion of Pauls statement in Gal 1 "chief of sinners," (addressed in part 1, and mentioned in many sermons including "Offence of the Cross," Aug 30, 2020, time 24:00) and also in his sermon "Are You Enjoying Your Faith?" (Oct 11, 2020) where he exercises the same egregious and unBiblical philosophy with false humility, even indirectly corrupting salvation. He declares,

“Our pastor is a wicked sinner, I am worse than you even know or think. We’re just saved by the grace of God.”

This type of speak and faux humility is illustrated frequently by Kelly in his sermons. Very, very frequently. But he is wrong, and unScriptural. If you are a wicked sinner, then you are still unsaved (cf. Jer 17:9; Rom 3:10-26). Doesn’t “saved by the grace of God” turn a wicked sinner into a saint, like the Bible says? Of course it does, but he denies true salvation with these unscriptural comments. In Kelly's world, saved by grace, and faith, means next to nothing practically. Its merely an abstract idea confined to the intellect (demonstrated continually in his sermons), hence his false repentance and gospel. This is seriously false humility because when a sinner gets saved, he is not a sinner no more, never mind a wicked sinner! God doesn’t see or call His children, His saints, sinners or wicked sinners anywhere in the Bible! Nowhere. Salvation changes people! Period! Permanently: 2 Cor 5:17; Ti 2:11-14; Eph 2:1-9; Ti 2:11-14; etc. Maybe this is why it is so easy for him to belittle and mock men of the Bible, such as Abraham, Peter and in this sermon, king David (time 42:10). He says, “David had more trouble than this church house put together.” David didn't have the indwelling Holy Spirit like saints do today. I wonder if that ever occured to Reg Kelly. He calls David a dog. God doesn’t however do that, ever, even after he sinned with Bathsheba. Its actually nigh blasphemous, because only Gentiles and false teachers are called dogs in the Bible (cf. Matt 7:6; 15:26-27; Phil 3:2; 2 Pet 2:22; etc), which then means Kelly is the actual dog, doubly.

2. He blames his lack of growth on his proclamation that the christian life has nothing to do with performance but only faith. What a load of hocus pocus antinomian heresy!

This is what he proclaims starting timestamp 1:06:40. He says concerning Abram,

“I lied on my wife, tried to save my own hide, sorry as dirt, have trouble with my relatives, but I still believe in the Messiah. [Laughing] I’m telling you it’s the sweetest thing you’ll ever get a hold of. IT IS NOT YOUR PERFORMANCE, IT IS THE FAITH THAT GOD HONOURS! GET IT! BUNCH OF YOU STILL THINK ITS YOUR PERFORMANCE!" [CAPS for Emphasis--He SCREAMED this]

No performance needed or honoured by God? This is a diabolical lie. Jam 2:14-19 makes it abundantly clear that “faith if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” What saith 1 Cor 15:58?

"Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord."

This is performance and its honoured by the Lord. In fact its the only way you can please God and show your love towards Him, as passages below will show.

What about Jam 2:21 and 26?

"Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? . . . For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.”

That was performance by Abraham and it proved his justification.

True Biblical salvation always produces obedience to Gods Word, and this is what it means when the Scriptures explicitly declare that the "just shall live by faith." (e.g., Hab 2:4; Rom 1:18). Those that don’t demonstrate their professed love for Christ by keeping His Word (I.e. performance), do not actually love Him and thus are unsaved. That is the final word of Scripture and its written everywhere (e.g., Num. 15:39-41; De. 12:32; 13:3-4; 26:16-19; 1 Sam. 15:22-23; 1 Ki. 8:23, 57-58, 61; Ps. 103:17-22; Eccl 12:13-14; Matt. 7:20-21, 24-27; 12:47-50; Mk. 3:31-35; 4:21; Lk. 17:10; Jn. 7:16-18; 8:31-32, 51; 10:25-27; 14:15, 21-24; 15:10-14; 17:6; 2 Cor. 2:9; Eph. 2:10; Heb. 10:36; Jam. 1:22-25; 2:14-26; Jam. 5:7-11; I Jn. 2:3-6, 15-17; 3:22-24; 5:1-3; 2 Jn. 1:5-6; Rev. 22:14-15), but rejected by false teachers such as Kelly. Let's consider a few of the many:

"Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil." (Ec 12:13-14)

"If ye love me, keep my commandments. . . . He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. . . . Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me." (Jn 14:15, 21, 23-24)

"And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him." (1 Jn 2:3-5)

We show love to the Lord by obeying, keeping, following His words. Those that don't obey, such as Reg Kelly (who also promotes disobedience), do not love the Lord Jesus Christ, and here is what Paul the Apostle had to say about that:

“If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha [cursed to hell at Christ's coming].” (1 Cor 16:22)

Repeatedly this teaching is found throughout scripture, OT and NT, and words couldn’t be clearer, maybe no doctrine more evident. But it doesn't fit Kelly's cheap grace, false gospel, and corrupted sanctification that keeps the pews full of warm-bodied unregenerate hypocrites.

3. Continuing on,

“How could God possibly talk about this man that way in the NT? Because what he was in the OT, how could God possibly say these things about this man in the NT having read his story in the OT?”

If Kelly understood salvation and when it is that Abraham was saved, he wouldn't be preaching this confusion, nor attacking God's character.

4. This sermon had a bit of everything, even containing elements of Calvinism. How does God choose to save? The Scriptures are crystal clear on it, but Kelly doesn't seem to have a clue, and his answer parallels striking similarities with Calvinism. Kelly's confusion about something as simple as "chosen" in Scripture is much more inline with Calvinism than anything (which he allegedly rejects):

“This will help you if you are serious about your walk with God. First of all God chose him, you like it or lump it. Don’t ask me to explain it, God just does it . . .” (time stamp 50:00)

What is this but Calvinism, where Calvinism's "God" arbritarily chooses some to eternal life and some to eternal damnation. This is also total heresy since God details how He saves people, all of which is wrapped up in His gospel, which Kelly can't wrap his head around, he can't explain it. It is excessively concerning that this so-called preacher does not know how God calls sinners! The horrible perversion and corruption of scripture practiced habitually and consistently is a major cause of it, including the diabolical allegoricalism. He doesn’t know if he is coming or going. 2 Th 2:13, "...God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:"  Through being set apart by the Spirit of God and believing the truth, man is regenerated and converted. Unsaved people that end up in eternal hell fire, "received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Th 2:10). They did not embrace the light of the truth shining into the darkness of their souls (Jn 3:19-21), they did not like how the Sword of the Spirit wounded the soul so the Great Physician may heal it (Lk 5:31-32; Heb 4:12), for a "bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory." (Matt 12:20). God the Spirit convicts, reproves, draws and grants the truth-seeking and truth-believing and God-fearing sinner repentance unto life (Pr 1:20-32; Jn 12:32; 16:7-11; Is 55:6-7; Rom 2:1-5; Ac 11:18; 13:26; etc). This is how, Mr. Kelly, God chooses sinners and saves them. Why do you not know this?! Does he not know this because he cannot know it (cf. Mk 4:13; 1 Cor 2:14)?

5. In this context he compares his call to peach to Abraham’s call to leave Ur (time 57:40). This is in fact a good example what happens when a heretic corrupts Gods Word (which occurs so consistently and so much, its practically without end) and twists it to his own liking, and doesn’t understand simple Bible truths like salvation and when it occurs. Abraham was unsaved when God called him out of Ur. Was Kelly also unsaved?

6. More on his confusion:

“Three times Abraham is called a friend of God . . . I’d like to be a friend of God.”

Every single true born again Christian is a "friend of God." If you are not, as Kelly likely is, then you are not truly born again. When we embrace the same faith as Abraham, we are born again just like Abraham (Rom 4:2-25; Gal 3). The way this is presented by Kelly, it appears God is merely an abstract idea and not Someone known on a personal level. The truth is, God is not only a friend to His children, but much more than that. Kelly with his false humility is indicting himself to be unsaved in making such statements.

7. It gets worse. Kelly proceeds to mock Abraham and his faith (time 59:00). In the context of the issues with Abraham after he left Ur, specifically Gen 12, Kelly mocks and scorns Abraham (and what God says of him in Heb 11) with that type of voice, stating

“This is funny. I mean you got this great hero of the faith right? I mean God’s been in his life? Lets look at Genesis chapter 12 verse number 10.”

Shortly after, in the context of Abram coining his wife as his sister, he mockingly screams “A SAVED MAN, A CALLED MAN.”

Abraham was unsaved at this point, COMPLETELY missed by Kelly. Read here on The Salvation of Abraham.

➡ False teachings on sanctification with major confusion in “How A Sinner Gets Saved” Sermon.

Kelly preaches:

“Even as Christian people, if we think we are living good, our wearing my clothes right, and I got my haircut right and I don’t drink and I don’t do that, I’m a pretty good person, Lord that oughta count for something. Did you know that all don’t count for anything. You oughta do that because He said so, not to get you up somewhere with God. You know what God wants of you, stripped off all your self righteousness, stripped off all your supposed goodness, He wants all that junk out of your heart, soul and spirit, for now and forever.” (time 17:45)

Again, a massively loaded statement with so many errors and false arguments that it’s difficult to know where to start. Most of what he says here is the common parroting heard among IFB churches, but its plain heresy.

1. Firstly, he blatantly lies that our good works, godly living as Christians “all don’t count for anything,” which is obviously in complete opposition to what Scripture teaches. Good works are commanded and result in eternal reward: Ps. 1:1-3; 92:12-15; Pr. 11:30; 12:12; Jer. 17:7-8; Matt 6:19-20; 7:16-19; 13:23; Lk. 8:15-16; Jn. 4:35-38; 1 Cor. 15:58; 2 Cor. 9:10; Heb. 11:26; Jam. 1:18; 2:14-26; 3:17; etc.

“Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.” (1 Cor. 15:58)

Those that don’t have good works have a dead faith (Jam. 2:14-19) and the good works of Abraham and Rahab both were counted of such great value, the works proved their justification by faith (Jam. 2:20-26). And that is the case in every true born again believer. This heresy by Kelly throws the entire Bible into confusion.

2. Secondly, although it is true that we oughta do these things simply because He said so, that doesn’t mean that it don’t count for anything! He is twisting truth here by creating a logical fallacy, which is just another form of bearing false witness (the 9th commandment) — attributing to others (God in this case) something which they didn't say. It’s another form of lying.

3. Thirdly, we do gain favour with God the more we work for Him as believers. We gain favour with Him through conversion, becoming His children, for the purpose of servanthood, “His workmanship” (Eph. 2:10). The more we obey Him, the more He loves us. That truth is found throughout Scripture. "I love them that love me; and those that seek me early shall find me." (Pr 8:17). In Matt. 21:28-32 only one of the sons found favour in his fathers eyes, the one who did the will of the father. David “found favour before God” (Ac 7:46), as did Jospeh (Ac 7:10), and Mary the mother of Jesus (Lk 1:30), and Daniel (Dan 1:9), etc. Ac 11:24 calls Barnabas “a good man.” Jospeh of Arimathea is called “just” (justified, righteous, thus saved) and “a good man.” (Lk. 23:50). Jesus Christ says all saved people are called “a good man” e.g. “A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good;” (Lk 6:45a; Matt 12:35). Pr. 12:2, one of dozens of Proverbs that contrast the saved and the lost, declares: “A good man obtaineth favour of the LORD: but a man of wicked devices will he condemn.” Other passages that speak of “a good man” include Ps. 112:5 and Pr. 14:14b (a comparison also being made here, ironically, with the lost, “The backslider in heart”). There are many more examples of finding favour with God but my favourite is that of Mary, the sister of Martha, also one of my favourite characters in the Bible. What she did for Christ was so great in His eyes, that He proclaimed “Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.” (Mk.14:7). Think about that for a second. What is greater than God’s incredible and most amazing and powerful and everlasting gospel? Nothing. But Jesus says here, wherever my gospel is preached, this what Mary has done “shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.” That is incredible but hillbilly Kelly don't like it because it is good. But there is reason for Mary's favouritism by the Lord. While all the apostles and disciples were trying to prevent Him from going to His death, she prepared Him for it, by taking “an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head” to which Jesus said, “She hath done what she could: she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying.” (Mk. 4:3-9). Yes, Mary most certainly found favour in God’s eyes because of her faith, to such a degree that wheresoever the gospel is preached, this great memorial of Mary should be mentioned. What Kelly presents as we being nothing before God after conversion is absolute heresy. Its actually Keswick heresy, not surprising, and fits his ungodly teachings and perversion of Gal 2:20 of the “Christ-life,” exposed in our report on Kelly and his sermon "Crucifed with Christ." Of course someone that thinks the Christian doesn’t labour for the Lord, or do anything but passively abide while Christ and the Holy Spirit do all the work through him (referred to as the traditional possession doctrine), will teach this kind of heresy. He is being a false witness.

4. Fourthly, he corrupts salvation here again, by producing horrible confusion concerning salvation. It’s at salvation we “stripped off all your self righteousness, stripped off all your supposed goodness, He wants all that junk out of your heart, soul and spirit, for now and forever,” not after! Yes God wants that of people, of LOST people! The lost do this when they come to true repentance and faith, exercising “repentance from dead works” that Heb. 6:1 speaks of and “turn from these vanities” and walk in Gods ways Ac. 14:15-16 speaks of, and “turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God;” 1 Th. 1:9 speaks of and “repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance“ Ac. 26:20 speaks of, which those in Rev. 9:20-21 will not do, they “repent not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk: Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.” He is claiming that saved people have these characteristics but that is utter confusion and a heretical lie. Saved people are not self-righteous anymore. Period! They are righteous. Justified and imputed with Christ’s righteousness and never imputed with sin again (Rom 4:1-8). NOT one place in Scripture calls a saved person self-righteous. ONLY lost people are self-righteous, as Ezk. 3:21-22; 18:24-32; Lk. 5:31-32; and Rom. 10:1-3 make abundantly and plainly clear. It’s at salvation we are stripped of our “supposed goodness“ (Is 64:6), acknowledging that “there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not” (Ecc. 7:20), but then God makes us good and our works good and valuable upon regenerating us, as succinctly detailed above. If a man with an alleged testimony of justification doesn’t have good works, he is not saved. He has a “faith” but it’s dead (Jam. 2:14-26). All saved people have godly and righteous good works. This again denies what God does so dramatically and supernaturally at conversion, with ongoing results perpetually. Kelly denies this, he blatantly denies salvation and perverts very important truths of scripture.

He also denies Biblical sanctification which is by faith and works (Ac. 20:32; Rom 6:22; 1 Th 5:21-23; Gal 5:24: Heb 12:14; Eph 4:17-24). You've got to do something and keep doing things to be sanctified. When you don't do those things, that is not being sanctified. This is biblical and historical teaching. The justified mortify their members upon the earth: “If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory. Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth.“ (Col. 3:1-5). The first half of v. 1 describes the reality of justification or salvation, if you will: “ye then be risen with Christ." It is a first class condition, so it is a condition of reality. If someone is really justified, he will do things. He will do good works. That is how he is sanctified. And they are all commands:  seek (v. 1), set (v. 2), mortify (v. 5). People who are truly justified are commanded to do good works. Saved people have their affections set on things above, because they are risen with Christ and they are dead and their life is hid with Christ in God. The saved are entirely different people than those who Reggie is describing as allegedly “saved,” but haven’t turned from their “self righteousness” and haven’t gotten “all that junk out of your heart, soul and spirit.” He is very very confused, but I see the heretical keswick “theology” in all this. This is a denial of what happens at salvation where we “are washed . . . sanctified [and] . . . justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:11), and “though our sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” (Is. 1:18). The picture the Bible paints of the saved person is one entirely different than what Reggie does.

5. I wonder if the reason for his preaching of “wearing my clothes right . . . don’t count for anything” is there because his own family: daughters, daughters in laws, and their children, dress immodestly and with non-gender distinctive clothing (which is an abomination to God — De 22:5)?

Once again we see the horrendous confusion about the position and works of the regenerate and between the saved and the lost, of what occurs at salvation and is done, a line that the Bible draws very very clearly. Reg’s preaching is so unclear, it’s beyond foggy. Worse, it’s unscriptural and heretical.

➡ Backsliding heresy in “How A Sinner Gets Saved” Sermon. He claimed that the interaction between Joseph and his brothers refers to both the lost and “that of a saved person that is in a backslidden condition.” So both saved and unsaved, only the saved are in some "backsliding condition." That is a lie, they were unsaved people and backsliding is never referenced to saved saints. It is true however that they were backslidden, because backsliding refers to lost people, but thats NOT what Kelly meant. Nowhere does he apply backsliding to unsaved people, like the Bible always does.

Multiple times in this sermon he referred to the backslidden condition of these men, and others outside of the Bible, including, for example at time 47:15:

“The backslid person, the devil will remind him of how much they serve and how much they’ve given to escape getting right with God.”

At another time of the sermon in reference to the interaction between Joseph and his brothers in Gen 42:

“But there is a third layer here, and that is of a saved person that is in a backslidden condition, the extent they will go to keep from getting right with God. Its a picture of broken fellowship between a saved person and their Lord.”

Where does the bible say that the devil reminds the “backslid person” about these things “to escape getting right with God”? Does the Holy Spirit not work in this person? (see Heb. 12:5-11; Pr. 3:11-12; Rom. 8:14; Phil. 2:12-12). There is a reason why statements like this, which are made quite frequently by Kelly, are always stated without any Biblical support. Again, the backslidden person is only a lost person in the Bible, which we will conclusively prove below, you don't even need to click on another link. The backsliding heresy applied to saved people also fits with all the false professions in their church. People living in sin, but “saved” apparently. “Get right with God” is the call (and yes the mantra heard from majority IFB pulpits) rather than get saved. He even said it himself that over a period of 30 years, only about 33% of people have been truly saved. I doubt that its even that high. There is a reason for that, and this backsliding heresy plays a part in it.

Practically every single sermon has the heresy of backsliding in it. Out of the dozens we have heard, none have been exempt. Unbelievably, in his Esther Series of sermons he claims that all Christians are backslidden, and that he himself believes and practices backsliding and lives in a perpetual backslidden state. In the context of Christians losing their burden over the lost, he stated:

“Yeaaa, [laughing], that makes all of us backslidden. But that doesn’t make you lost. I have had guys tell me, you believe in eternal life so you don’t believe in backsliding. Backsliding? I live backslidden. I believe in it and practice it. Don’t want to but I do.” (Esther Series — Secrets to Soul-Winning, June 17, 2018)

Wow. That is so utterly ridiculous, it’s absolutely nuts. What a terribly ignorant and unscriptural statement to make. It does indeed make you lost, if you are backslidden. He is effectively condemning himself as a lost apostate. He lives backslidden. He believes in it and practices it. In essence what he is actually saying is that he is an apostate, and that we’re all apostates, and that he believes in and practices apostasy. Of course that is not what he meant, but that is what is meant affording to the truth of God's Word. Temporarily losing our burden over lost people wouldn’t necessarily mean we are lost, Scripturally, but if you’re backslidden, that would.

Even if backsliding actually meant what he wrongfully believes it means (that is, a true born again Christian that lives in and after sin, living in rebellion against God, as a liar, a murderer, a hater, envious, jealous, a false accuser, a deceiver—like the “saved” brothers of Jospeh as he described them, etc), this would still be an utterly gross, unscriptural and heretical statement for an alleged saved person and only, I mean ONLY, aligns with that of the lost. NO saved person lives in a backward state and no person lives in sin or after sin, or is a liar, a murderer, a hater, envious, jealous, a false accuser, a deceiver, etc (the following passages make that clear: 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Gal. 5:19-21; Ti. 3:3-7; Col. 3:1-10; Eph. 5:6-11. Only lost people live like that or do that and there are so many passages that support this, I could practically quote from any chapter of any book of the Bible and refute this absolute heresy exploding from the lips of Kelly. Here is a few to rest my case:

“And you hath he quickened, who WERE dead in trespasses and sins; WHEREIN TIME PAST YE WALKED according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: AMONG WHOM ALSO WE ALL HAD OUR CONVERSATION in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and WERE by nature the children of wrath, EVEN AS OTHERS. BUT GOD, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even WHEN WE WERE DEAD IN SINS, HATH quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)” (Eph. 2:1-5)

“For we ourselves also WERE sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. BUT AFTER THAT the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.” (Ti. 3:3-7)

“KNOW YE NOT THAT THE UNRIGHTEOUS SHALL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD? BE NOT DECEIVED neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. AND SUCH WERE SOME OF YOU, BUT YE ARE washed, BUT YE ARE sanctified, BUT YE ARE justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” (1 Cor. 6:9-11)

“Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: OF THE WHICH I TELL YOU BEFORE, AS I HAVE ALSO TOLD YOU IN TIME PAST, THAT THEY WHICH DO SUCH THINGS SHALL NOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD.” (Gal. 5:19-21)

“If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. . . . Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.” (Jn. 8:34-36)

These passages are entirely opposed to what Kelly is preaching. Himself actually fits into the verses that speak of the lost, according to his very own words. Saved people are going forward. NO saved person lives, believes and practices sin (although they can still sin on occasion—Rom 13:14; 1 Jn. 2:1), besides Reg apparently. The truly saved are “dead to sin” (Rom. 6:1-2) and permanently and eternally freed from the dominion and power of sin (Rom 6:14). The truly saved live characteristically and faithfully in righteousness and holiness and godliness, not in sin and unrighteousness, like the heretics that Kelly is describing. They live and walk in the light, not in darkness (e.g. 1 Jn. 1:5-10; 2:3-6, 29; 3:1-10; Jn. 8:12, 31-36; Ps. 11:7; 23:3; 97:10; Pr. 4:14-18; 8:20-21; 14:2; 16:17; Is. 26:7; Eph. 2:1-10; Col. 3:1-10; Eph. 5:6-13; etc

This backsliding heresy surely plays a part as to why he so terribly wrests and corrupts passages like Gal 5:19-21 (as he did in Crucified with Christ), applying those who live after the “works of the flesh,” which are them who do “not inherit the kingdom of God” to Christians. What does Rom 6:1-2 say? “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” Same chapter: “For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.” (vv. 14-15). Saved people are dead to sin. They no longer live in it. Period.

“Backsliding” or even his principles behind it, applied to Christians is propagating a false teaching that goes against Gods Word in more than one way. It lends support to a subtle form of false religion rampant today that associates easy believism and quick prayerism, with its subsequent Christian imitation and deception, with true conversion. They’re just pretenders and imitators (like Judas, Balaam, Simon the sorcerer, Demas, Jewish believers and disciples in Jn. 2 and 6, majority Jews in the wilderness and their entire history, etc), just like “worldly and nominal Christians” who are merely “Christian” by name. Men like Kelly never speak of this and its for a reason, and does do an eternally tragic disservice and disfavour to these people in giving credence to their false profession, but then again, he is the cause of it with his repentant-less and Lord-less easy “salvation.” The lost keep staying lost, happily. The “pastors” keep claiming them saved, happily. One big “happy” (but mostly lost) family. They won't be happy in the eternal and unquenchable fires of hell.

Backsliding is NOT characteristic of true believers and is NEVER ascribed to true believers in the Bible, not even saved people that sinned after the similitude of King David (no mention of the term or even the principle or concept behind it anywhere in 2 Sam. 11-12 or Ps. 51, or anywhere else in any Scripture reference to David). Backsliding is not a term ever used to describe a true born again believer. It is a Keswick currency (like lukewarm and carnal and unbelief) describing people that are unsaved.

Here is some sound Biblical proof that we know “backsliding” refers ONLY to unsaved people:

1) In Scripture, none of the sixteen occasions the word or its derivates show up does it ever refer to saved people but rather always to lost people and almost entirely (if not completely) to Israel as a lost nation: Pr. 14:14; Jer. 2:19; 3:6, 8, 11-12, 14, 22; 5:6; 8:5; 14:7; 31:22; 49:4; Hos. 4:16; 11:7; 14:1-4. The NT is completely silent on the term itself and the principles behind it. For such a “prominent” subject to be preached from the pulpit by Reggie (and majority of other IFB preachers today) so frequently, practically every sermon, you would think that the NT would have something to say about it. But nada. Not even one mention, including by the Lord Jesus. And of course there is a very important reason for that: it’s a teaching only applicable to the lost nation of Israel. Their backslidden state comes officially to an end in the Great Tribulation, the 70th week of Daniel.

2) As noted in its very definition, which means to apostatize, “An apostate; one who falls from the faith and practice of religion” (Webster’s 1828), and we know no apostate is ever saved (e.g. 2 Pet. 2:17-22; Heb. 3:7-4:11; 10:38-39; 1 Jn. 2:19; Jn. 6:66).

3) The term refers to lost Israel who did not believe what the prophets and priests preached and did not repent, just like those in the wilderness and historically after (2 Cor. 3:6-18; Ac. 7:51-53). They always had the Word of God close by, even in their mouth, God always working with them and very nigh to them, and they had great advantage and opportunity to always be converted, God sending them prophets and priests and kings, as noted by the fact that all things spiritual came through them (Rom. 3:1-2; 9:3-5) — but they wouldn’t (Matt. 23:33-39; Rom. 9:6-33; 10:1-8, 18-21; 11:1-25; etc). They, as a nation and as individual Jews (besides a remnant), backslid, apostatized from the truth that had been revealed to them and was being revealed to them, and the light that had been given, and the grace that was already present (read Rom. 10:1-8; De. 30:11-20), just like we see in the Bible in Heb. 6:4-6 and Heb. 3:7–4:11, and with false teachers: 2 Pet. 2:19-22.

4) Some use Pr. 14:14 as alleged support for saved backsliders, which reads that “the backslider in heart shall be filled with his own ways,” but that is also not referencing saved people. Note that it’s in his heart that he is filled with his own ways thus not the ways of God. This is the condition of his heart which is why he is filled with his own ways. The word “filled” refers to the fullness of the backslider, to be made full. He is full of himself, not God, which is why he is an apostate, turning from the truth, the precise definition of backslider. He denies the Lord who bought Him because he is a false prophet or false teacher (2 Pet. 2:1; Ju. 1:4). The person that is “filled with his own ways” does that “which [is] right in his own eyes” (Jdg. 17:6; 21:25) and that is always referring to lost people as well (read the passages and context, even the words itself give that away). Pr. 12:15 says that “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel [God’s Word] is wise.” The backslider is not filled with God’s ways but his own, and we know that those who don’t do the will of God aren’t saved (Matt. 7:21; Lk. 6:46; 1 Jn. 2:17; Matt. 12:50; Heb. 10:36; 1 Pet. 4:1-2).

5) “Backsliding” completely contradicts the actual Biblical pattern of true salvation and then practical sanctification, of true born again believers, who do not backslide, they do not go backwards, but always moving forward (e.g. Ac. 7:39-53; Jn. 6:60-69) and upward (e.g. Col. 3:1-17). The affections of the truly saved are in heaven, not in earth (Col. 3:1-3). Yes, sadly, they can lust after the flesh and sin (e.g. Rom. 13:14; Eph. 4:20-32), but they do not live after it; rather they live in the spirit which has been quickened (Eph. 2:1-5), they are spiritually minded and not carnally (fleshly) minded ever again (Rom. 8:1-14), for they “have the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2:16), and they live after the Spirit Who indwells them, and live not after their flesh or the world (1 Pet. 4:1-2; 1 Cor. 2:12; 6:19-20), for their flesh has been circumcised from the heart/spirit which has been quickened, “And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;” (Col. 2:13; cf. Rom. 2:28-29; De. 30:6) and therefore they characteristically walk in the Spirit, for their flesh, the carnal nature and mind, the old man, is crucified with Christ (Gal. 2:20; Rom. 6:6; 8:1-16) and dead (Rom. 6:6-11). Henceforth, sin has no power or dominion over the saint anymore (Rom. 6:1-23), nor is the desire for it there any longer (Rom. 6:1-2, 11-18, 22-23; Ti. 2:11-14). They are freed from the power and penalty of sin starting immediately at salvation (Rom. 5:21–8:39). The position and practice (which aren’t divorced from one another) of the true believer is always that of increasing holiness, godliness, and righteousness (e.g. Ti 2:11-14; 3:3-9)—unlike the heretic who wilfully chooses false doctrine “Knowing that he that is such is subverted [twisted, warped, corrupted], and sinneth, being condemned of himself” (Ti. 3:10-11)—and obedience to God’s Word (Jn. 14:15-24; 1 Jn. 2:3-5) since God dwells in the inner man of His saints, putting in them love for Him (De. 30:6; Rom. 5:5) and love for their brethren (1 Th. 4:9) and fear of Him (Jer. 32:40), since He has made “an everlasting covenant with them,” wherein God promises “that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall not depart from me.” (Jer. 32:40). They will not depart. They will not fall alway. They will not backslide. God never stops working in His children nor does He leave any of them to themselves 1 Cor. 1:6-9; Phil. 1:6; 2:12-13; 1 Th. 2:13; 5:23-24; 2 Th. 2:12-17; 3:2-3; 2 Tim. 1:12; 4:18; 1 Pet. 1:5; Heb. 13:20-21; Jer. 32:37-41). Since God dwells in the inner man of His saints, He consistently “worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” (Phil. 2:13b). “Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:” (Phil. 1:6). When the saint sins he is immediately chastened by God (Heb. 12:5-11; 1 Cor. 11:28-32). If he doesn’t respond to the chastisement, he may suffer and even die (1 Cor. 11:26-32; see 2 Sam. 12:13), but that doesn’t mean he is going backward/backsliding. That’s just God dealing with a child whom He loves (Pr. 3:11-12; Heb. 12:5-11).

6) The real backsliders are lost people, apostates, false teachers (2 Pet. 2:1-22; Rom. 16:17-18; 2 Jn. 1:9-11; 3 Jn. 1:9-11), heretics (Ti. 3:10-11; 1 Tim. 6:3-5), wolves in sheep clothing (Matt. 7:15-20; Ac. 20:28-31), false pretenders with feigned faith (Ac 8:13-24), hypocrites (Matt. 23; 7:1-5), professors but not possessors (Ti. 1:10-16), seed that fell on wayward or thorny or stony ground (Matt. 13:19-22) who are left to themselves like bastards (Heb. 12:6-8; cf. Jn. 2:23-25; 6:60-66; 1 Jn. 2:19), that go backwards as we see both in the NT and OT.

Here in the N.T.

“Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul” (Heb. 10:38-39)

And here in the O.T.

“But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you. But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward.” (Jer. 7:23-24)

7) The biggest issue with using the word “backsliding” is not even with the use of the term itself (although obviously it is a critical issue to misuse and abuse a Bible word when it means something entirely different in Scripture, a behaviour more in line with the wicked who wrest God’s Word—2 Pet. 3:16-17) but with the actual philosophy behind the word. The term is Keswick currency, just like “lukewarm” (Rev. 3:16-18) and “carnal,” (Rom. 8:5-9), terms used to describe people that are actually unsaved and may likely never be saved (cf. Pr. 1:20-31; Phil. 3:18-19; Rom. 16:17-18; Gal. 2:4-5; Heb. 12:16-17) but treated as saved. And thats where the greatest destruction and damnation comes in. Treating lost people like if they’re saved. It is derived from a reasoning that people can be saved while living in sin and after the flesh and after the world and after the devil or after error and following false teachers/teachings and still be considered saved people. That philosophy is found nowhere in Scripture but was concocted by Keswick “theologians” in the 1800’s and popularized by the heretic L.S. Chaffer, whom Kelly quotes at times.

➡ In the sermon "The Struggle of the Pride of Repentance" (May 24, 2020), we note serious confusion illustrated by Kelly between those saved and those lost (time 09:45). What is the moral character of a virgin founded upon? He leaves out a lot of very important info here in the example of the newly married virgin and newly married non-virgin, producing terrible confusion undoubtedly in the minds of his listeners. He is amalgamating the natures of the saved and the unsaved to confuse the clear and critical distinctions, which appeases many undoubtedly in his congregation.

➡ In his sermon "The Devils Favourite Verse" (Feb 7, 2021), he corrupts 1 Cor 2:15 claiming the “spiritual” man is a certain type of Christian, one that knows the Bible and thus can judge vs the Christian that doesn't know the Bible and thus cannot judge ("the carnal Christian"), but that is serious corruption because the passage doesn't even hint at such heresy. What it's teaching is plainly obvious when you read 1 Cor 2:9-16, in that every saved person is the “spiritual man” and thus "judges all things." Paul is contrasting saved people (spiritual man) and lost people (natural/carnal man) in this entire context from 1 Cor 2:12–3:3. The “spiritual man” is every saved person which then means every saved person is to judge, and not just a certain class of Christians what Kelly said. By saying this he is actually creating two-tiered Christianity which is really bad and perversion of salvation, giving credence to unregenerate people as saved.

In the sermon he also corrupted the meaning of the words “doubtful disputations” (Rom 14:1), a favourite go-to verse for advancing error, sin and heresies (as he did in his recent sermon, "Women in Culture"). It does not mean something not clearly put forth in scripture. It does not give liberty to “dip scoal amen” like he encouraged his audience because of his utterly ridiculous argument that “nowhere in the Bible does it say, Thou shalt not dip scoal.” It also doesn’t say anywhere we shouldn’t do drugs. Or look at porn. Or murder your unborn baby. This is either ridiculous ignorance to scripture and foolish reasoning or purposeful manipulation of scripture for the compromised reason that people are chewing in that church. He based this on not having “doubtful disputations” towards skoal out of Rom 14:1, but that is manipulating and corrupting that verse. Rom 14:1 like the other passages in that chapter on judging, is referring to something specifically not mentioned in scripture, like food and holidays, things that are innocent and we have liberty with but not erroneous or sinful. Skoal like smoking is a violation of Scripture, such as 1 Th 5:21-22. Again, he is encourging, even promoting sin, and that is ALWAYS the work of a wicked false teacher:

"While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage." (2 Pet 2:19)

Lots of screaming and hollering and emotional appeals, but none of it boostered his position or increased the power of the message. The power in a message is in passages exegetically interpreted, meaning they are carefully taught in detail by exactly and precisely what they mean, what the Bible says it means, not in misusing or misinterpreting the verse and not in screaming a sermon or formulation of a sermon that doesn't communicate what a passage says. Listening to preaching like this will destroy you and your understanding of the truth. It’s not exegesis, which is Biblical preaching. This is "preaching" warned of in 2 Pet 3:16-17.

Nor is it normal to fight with your spouse using a gun, as Kelly appeared to suggest. It’s wrong for Kelly to even mention this. This is just of control, unBiblical "preaching."

➡ Kelly does not understand salvation and what it produces. In his ironically titled sermon, "Another Jesus, Another Spirit, Another Gospel" (Apr 5, 2020), he claimed:

“You tell people, ‘oh ya you gotta get saved, but you gotta live it.’ Let me tell you whose living it. He’s living it, in us. That’s it. Without that you have no hope. You don’t live it. You do not live up, you’ll come short of the glory of God.” (time 35:45)

Besides the corruption and abuse of Rom 3:21 ("all have sinned and come short of the glory of God"), which applies ONLY to unsaved people, this is a serious perversion of the gospel. Christ does NOT live the Christian life for us. He teaches what is the traditional possession doctrine of Keswick in which you are fundamentally possessed and controlled by Jesus, supported by proof-texting passages such as Gal 2:20, Col 1:27, 3:4, and 2 Cor 4:10-11. This occurs allegedly by the restoration of the God life into human experience. This is the false teaching that the Christ-life is Christ Himself living the Christian life for the Christian. It’s deeply entrenched in Keswick theology and evangelicalism (and among revivalist-type Baptists and others such as Kelly) but it’s absolutely unscriptural and nonsense and its ALWAYS the corrupt fruit of a false believer, of a hypocrite, someone who is pretending to be a Christian while yet lost, such as Reg Kelly.

Imagine a Christian life you don't actually live or have to live. Jesus lives it for you. You can't please Him yourself. Rather, you just access the very life of Jesus and the life that Jesus lived by faith (or even do simply nothing, quietism, since Jesus is living the life) or by preaching the gospel fluently to yourself repeatedly (part of the lingo). This is the bread and butter of Keswick preachers such as the Van Gelderens at Baptist College of Ministry and Falls Baptist Church and the revivalist “evangelist” Rick Flanders, Larry Brown (Kelly's hero) and many, many more across the IFB world, in fact the majority of them are of the Revivalist flavour.

We cover this Keswick theological heresy referred to as the traditional possession doctrine, in detail here: Does Christ Live the Christians Life? Keswick Theology and Other Heresies of Charles Price.

➡ Tied to the previous point, Kelly places way too much emphasis on the flesh of the believer, in essentially every single sermon. Yes we are commanded to put off the old man and put on the new man (Eph 4), and there is a very real struggle occuring in the life of the believer (Rom 7) but its not the born again believers nature anymore. He has a brand new nature, not a new one added to an old one (cf. 2 Cor 5:17; 1 Cor 2:19-16). The new nature has freed the saint from the dominion of sin (Rom 6). The regenerated believer is not in the flesh but in the Spirit (Rom. 7:5; 8:1-14). His flesh is crucified (Rom. 6). The carnally (fleshly) minded/walking person is unsaved (Rom. 8:1-14) but such teaching has never escaped from Kelly’s lips, though the Bible is full of it. E.g., Galatians 5:19-21; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 15:50; Ephesians 5:5-8, and the Flesh. Why this unBiblical focus on the flesh for the believer? Kelly says he is getting worse as he is getting older. The reason for it is very likely an unregenerate nature, especially considering Kelly's gospel leaves the flesh unchanged in the born again believer, which denies the superdramatic nature of regeneration, denis the working power of the Holy Spirit (which is the "greatness of his power to us-ward who believe [i.e., born again], according to the working of his mighty power," Eph 1:19), denies the reality of Christ in us, etc. It is a literal denial of true conversion, of the new birth, of the indwelling Holy Spirit of God, the most superdramatic things known to man. Could it be because he is unsaved, along with many of the people under his care? Almost undoubedtly. He False teachers create three types of people, two of which are "Christians." Apparently there are two types of Christians in Kelly's world, a two-tiered "Christianity." Ah, no, there's not. There are Only Two Classes or Categories of People in God’s Word, Not Three and Misinterpretation of 1 Corinthians 3:1-3 to Produce the Erroneous Teaching of "Carnal Christianity." Kelly ought to take to heart his own words, “God have mercy on our silliness, on our pretending.” (“How a Sinner Gets Saved," Feb 23, 2014, time 31:40). We would say, why not just stop your silly corruption of scripture and promoting your false gospel, stop pretending that it’s real. That would be a good start.

In that same sermon “How a Sinner Gets Saved,” he purveys this philosophy on the back of heretical revivalism:

"God is not going to send revival to this nation until Christians get right with God over there sin and each other.” (timestamp 59:25)

This is revivalism error, which is Keswick “theology.” There is a lot of this in his preaching, and necessarily so (to keep the system breathing). If Christians haven’t got right with God over their sin, then they’re unsaved. God chastises His own (Heb 12:5-11; Pr. 3:11-12; etc). If the true believer doesn't judge himself and repent, God can judge him with sickness and death (1 Cor 11:28-32). With the Corinthians, He didn’t wait very long. Nor with Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5, only minutes from lying to the Holy Ghost and hours from the sin itself. The true revival that needs to happen is pointed preaching towards all the false “Christians” filling the pews, that need to repent and submit to Jesus Christ as Lord and King over them, not supposedly "saved" people “getting right with God,” unless of course that is referring to salvation (which he wasn't). True revival is that of lost people getting saved, and whom Kelly is describing here are not “Christians” but false professors. Kelly's “revival” is also heretical, and here is true revival: What is Revival According to Scripture?

➡ Kelly does not seem to understand God's love. In the sermon "The Worst Sin I Have ever Committed (2008)" he supposes the love of God delivers from rules (time 18:40), a very often repeated statement. He refers to the order in love, but never actually refers to the Biblical order in love. Gods Word actually tells us what that order is, but strangely never mentioned while speaking to the very subject. God's Word says you can’t love your brother unless you first love God (1 Jn. 5:2-3; 2 Jn. 1:5-6) and you can't love God without first obeying His Word. All of its mentioned in its proper order, 1 Jn 5:1-2:

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous."

Kelly claims that the only sin we will be held accountable to and judged for is not loving God (time 40:45). “The greatest sin comes from violating the greatest commandment and that’s why judgment is not going to be about all the stupid stuff you and I done. It’s going to be about not loving God and that is the greatest sin you’ll ever commit against God is to not love Him.” This is heresy. The bible says we will be judged for everything, not just whether we loved God or not. Eccl 12:13-14 alone rebuts his heresy: "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil." Its like he makes this stuff up out of thin air, or maybe he gets it from Joel Osteen motivational sermons. Nothing like putting pressure on people through manipulation, claiming those that love God the most will come forward in the invitation (time 58:00). They typical heresy of describing saved people with Biblical language only reserved for the unsaved, such as being dead in darkness, is replete throughout the sermon. True born again believers are "quickened" (Eph 2:1-3), that is alive forevermore, and never again in darkness (e.g., Ac 26:18; Jn 8:12; Lk 11:35-36).

The entire sermon, almost 1 hr and 20 mins, is preached on loving God but yet in all that time he actually never even once gives the Scriptural definition of how we love God. Multiple places in Scripture tell us how the only way God is and can be loved, but Kelly obviously does not know this or is hiding it from the people, the work of a false teacher and wolf in sheep's clothing:

“And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it.” (2 Jn. 1:6)

“For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.” (1 Jn. 5:3)

“If ye love me, keep my commandments. . . . He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. . . . If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.” (Jn. 14:15, 21, 23-24)

Strangely this entire point is missed in the sermon, which is actually the complete focal point of Gods commands to love Him. Truly saved people will and do love God while false pretenders do not, because it is God that brings about that love (De. 30:6; Rom. 5:5; 1 Th. 4:9) and it is love that dwells in them (Jn. 5:42; Rom. 5:5; 1 Cor. 6:19-20) which is what the above passages are teachings (Jn. 14:15-24; 1 Jn. 5:2-3; 2 Jn. 1:6), and this love is demonstrated only by obedience to Gods Word, Gods commandments. Those that say they know and love God but don’t obey Him are liars and they do not have the truth indwelling in them and they do not actually know or love Him (1 Jn. 2:3-5; 2 Jn. 1:2).

More on Kelly's Bible Presvervation and the KJB Perversion

➡ False teachings on the KJV and hatred towards the Greek and Hebrew. Kelly posted on social media (Aug 11, 2021) a descending list of things that are false, ending with:

"The AV-KJV is the preserved infallible Word of God. Read 1Peter 1:23,25; Psalms 12:6,7; Matthew 7:15,20,21-23.

And before you unbelieving false brethren start your Hebrew and Greek garbage, don’t be a hypocrite; use only Hebrew and Greek in your comments, no English. You won’t because you can’t, and no one would understand a word you type. Let God be true and every man a liar !-rgk. PS-All false information in comments from false “believers “ will be deleted. Not allowing you false teachers to lie on this platform. Use your own page so you get a lot of readers 🤣"

Laughing emoji original. He also laughs and mocks in his sermons on Bible inspiration and preservation, which he claims is the King James Bible, not the Greek Textus Receptus and the Hebrew Masoretic Text. He laughes at those who believe that God inspired and preserved His words in the very fashion He said He would, Hebrew OT and Greek NT. He calls them "garbage" and "false teachers." Calling someone a false teacher doesn't mean they are actually a false teacher. In true Gentile high-minded pompous fashion, he places his feeble "wisdom" above that of God in proceeding to laugh at and mock the clear Biblical doctrine of verbal plenary preservation of Scripture, which sermon he posted on social media. But we have a good feeling he won't be laughing before God one day when the Lord holds him accountable for his fanatical blaspheming of the very words that He inspired, that He breathed out. Kelly should believe what the Bible says instead of loony cuckoo frothing-at-the-mouth men like Peter Ruckman and Mike Hoggard, whom he imitates in his own preaching. What words was God referring to when He promised preservation of His inspired Word in “1Peter 1:23,25; Psalms 12:6,7”, verses he twists to favour his false position? God has promised to preserve every word He inspired (Ps 12:6-7; Matt 5:18; 24:35, etc), and keep each of them available to every generation of believers until the end of the world (Matt 4:4; 28:20; Is 59:21) and this promise was obviously in the language they were written, Hebrew and some Aramaic for he OT and Greek for the NT, but he does not appear to believe the Bible. If he believes that God has preserved His Word in the English language, then he does not believe the biblical or historical position of our forefathers, including the KJV translators. They would soundly and harshly reject his position. He doesn't even believe in divine, perfect preservation. There is no way that he could. He denies preservation. He denies the biblical doctrine. He takes a strange, new doctrine not even passed down by His people in true churches. Preservation entails preserving something. It entails preserving something that already existed. If it wasn't there, it isn't preservation. Translation itself is not preservation. What is preserved existed already. The English language didn't even exist in the first century. The reason we believe, rely on and love the King James Bible is because of the doctrine of divine, perfect preservation of the text of scripture in the language in which it was written. The Bible teaches its own perfect preservation, including how it was to be and is preserved by God. This is also the historical view, the only view of believers for centuries. The KJV is translated from that text of scripture, in a literal word for word manner. There is no other English translation from that text and majority utilize the evil dynamic equivalency, not formal equivelence as all literature does. 

The above truth was commented to Kelly's post, and then we stood by as to whether he would delete this obvious Biblical truth (like he said he would) or he will be like the evil loony lefty crowd who censor and delete and hide the truth, refusing to recieve any form of correction or reproof. We didn't have to standby long. Almost as fast as the comment was posted, it was deleted. In true man-centred fashion, in likeness to the evil leftist cancel culture crowd who hate the truth, Kelly censored and deleted the truth. Hirelings never like the truth. If it was true in Christ’s day, it certainly is true today. It’s not the absolute truth of Scripture that determines the beliefs of people like Reg but his own lusts and philosophies based upon other men’s lusts and philosophies. We see that here with his utter blasphemy of God’s Word, maligning and denigrating the very words that God inspired, calling it “garbage,” and all other sermons on the KJV and Preservation (e.g., The Devils Favourite Verse, Don't Sell Your Vineyard, etc).

Reg, you need to “listen up” — a favourite phrase of his (I didn't snap my fingers though;). The Bible likens individuals such as yourself to reprobates, “resist[ing] the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.” (2 Tim 3:8). You reject the truth because you are a spiritual reprobate of a corrupt mind. And what do we do with these reprobates? “But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.” (2 Tim 3:9). You exercise lordship like lost Gentiles and hate to be challenged on your misguided beliefs. You are simply a lord over the flock who needs to be marked and avoided (Rom 16:17).

More Samples (Which are Practically Endless) of Scripture Perversion and Unsound Doctrine by Kelly, Whose Sermons are Eisegetical Masterpieces

➡ Sexual Perversion and Corruption of Scripture in "Love Makes a Way." Disgusting sexual implications towards Ruth and Boaz in the sermon "Love Makes a Way" (Feb 15, 2026). You know its not going to be Biblical when he warns the women in the congregation,

“Now ladies there is a set of ear plugs behind your seats, going to preach to the men for a while" (while laughing, time 58:40)

He goes on for some time at 1:04:00 and then at 1:11:55 on Boaz and Ruth lying together, hinting of immorality, though he never indicated that this was the case (referring to what occured in Ruth chapter 3), but the passage is certainly not what he is implying, concerning this godly and chaste man who promised fidelity to her before the LORD, "as the LORD liveth" (Ru 3:13), nor would Ruth the "virtuous woman" (Ru 3:11), fall into this depravity. No, Boaz did not say, “whose chick is that, whose that chick,” nor did he say, “lay down at his feet, whewww” (time 1:04:00). Why would Kelly suggest this, without saying it in so many words? Is he an immoral man?

Shortly before going into this perversion of Boaz and Ruth, Kelly had appealed to the congregation about having some fun as a preacher in this sermon,

"We’re going to look at some things and have some fun okay, would you just mind if I just had some preacher fun today and I hope you get something out of it.” (followed by wierd laughing, again)

😳 Has he forgotten to take his meds?

At the same time of his entertaining the alleged sexual nature of Boaz and Ruth's meeting in the threshingfloor, he went to Boaz's father Salman and mother Rehab on how they met, implying potentially immoral beginnings:

"This is not in your bible, I'm just going to put you out bit of a deal. Boaz is seven years old and there's a wedding in town . . . he looks at Salman, his daddy, how did you and momma get to know each other [with a smirk on his face, and some laughter from the crowd]? How you and momma meet? how you wind up getten married? [smirk continues] Whats the story? Salman has to say, I was a spy for the nation of Israel and I was sent to spy in the city of Jericho, and to avoid getting captured we had to go into a harlots house..." (1:11:55)

He went on about Rehab being a harlot, really harping on that this is who she was, almost as if he was glorifying in it. Rehab was a harlot. WAS. There is no indication she was still a harlot but rather that she was a saved and transformed woman, hence giving refuge to the Israelite spies (while no one else would in Jericho), whom she would have loved since they are the chosen people of God. Rehab, the recipient of life and eternal life, “received the spies with peace” (Heb 11:31), which means she had peace with "the God of peace" (Heb 13:20), who only gives peace to those that He saves (Rom 5:1; Eph 2:14; 1 Pet 5:14; 2 Th 3:16; 2 Tim 2:1; etc) Rehab was no longer a harlot when the spies came through; she had been saved from that depraved lifestyle and was a born again woman. That is actually what the Bible teaches, versus this carnal fable that implies something of a sexual nature by Kelly to the congregation. When a wicked and unlearned false teacher wrests the Word of God (2 Pet 3:16-17), he will twist almost anything out of scripture, treating God's words like play-dough, often bringing sexual immorality into God's holy writ (just like Hyles and Schaap over at First Baptist Church of Hammond, IN). Jam 2:25 makes it clear that Rehab was a saved woman and that her hiding the spies proved her justified nature:

"Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?"

It gets worse. A young man and woman in the church are getting married. Here is Kelly's advice to them:

“Why won’t you have some fun and pretend you are Boaz and Ruth . . . I’m so happy back here for brother Leonard and sister Stanford getting married . . . I look at ya and think you’re a wonderful example. And I tell you if I was you guys I’d have a little fun in the book of Ruth and I’d pretend I was Boaz, she was Ruth.”

Women in the congregation laugh. Remember that this is stated immediately after perverting what happened between Boaz and Ruth in the barn.

This is perverse and digusting! And Kelly wonders why America is under God's judgment!

Sermons such as this give excuse to ungodly and sinful behaviour. They justify the sinful thoughts and actions of men and women in the congregation, since, after all, “we’re not perfect,” the consistently repeated cliche of Kelly (including in this context), excusing and giving way to ungodly and unregenerate behaviour.

Concerning other strange and diverse doctrine in this sermon, Kelly claims,

“I'm not a theologian. I hardly believe in theologians." (time 46:00)

Paul the Apostle was a theologian. Does he not believe in the Apostle Paul? Paul said to follow him, both in his teachings and ways (1 Cor 4:16-17; 11:1; Phil 3:17). Not following Paul would make sense for Kelly.

In this sermon he claimed that the entire Bible is about Christ getting His bride, the church, including the relationship between Adam and Eve. This is not true and forcing a belief upon Scripture, again, likely founded upon a high view of Gentiles. If anything, it would be about God and His bride Israel, His plan from the beginning. The church was the consequence of Israel denying Christ. Israel is the centrepiece in the Bible, not Gentiles. Everything about the heavenly city of God concerning man is in celebration of the Jewish people, the "twelve gates" in heaven, the New Jerusalem, are named after "the twelve tribes of the children of Israel" (Rev 21:12), "And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (Rev 21:14) all of which were Jews. Israel is the main subject of the Bible, not the Church or the Gentiles.

Towards the end of the sermon he claimed,

“You can go to every university and every library in America and go through all their educational programs and never get what God gave you this morning. Now what you do with it may be another matter.”

They might also not be slammed with heresy or false teachings or corruption of Scripture or disrespect of God's Word or sexual perversion of God's Word.

➡ Exchanging literal understanding of Scripture for allegorical eisegetical gymnastics. Kelly is a master of allegoricalism, misusing, abusing and corrupting Scripture throughout the Bible, and then creating false doctrine from it. Interpreting the Bible allegorically destroys the absolute sense of God’s Word. God gave the Scripture to reveal truth to man, not to hide it or confuse it (De. 29:29). He therefore used the normal rules of human language in giving and teaching His Word. God the Son made it clear that Scripture is to be interpreted literally (Pr. 8:8-9; 22:20-21; Lk. 10:25-26) and He always interpreted literally by example and likewise expected man to interpret in a literal fashion. The Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles used many passages of OT Scripture in quotes and in prophetic fulfillment (around 700x) and they always interpreted literally and in context, rightfully dividing the Word of truth. There was absolutely no spiritualizing of scripture anywhere. The apostle Peter likewise made it clear that Scripture must be interpreted literally (2 Pet. 1:16-21).

The literal method of Bible interpretation is the only godly and faithful method. It produces and is the product of faithfulness to diligent, studious, Bible learning and teaching (Pr. 9:9; 15:28; 16:21, 23; 2 Tim. 2:15) with the Holy Spirit as Teacher (1 Jn. 2:20-21, 27; Pr. 8:8-9; 22:20-21). The literal sense of Scripture must rule. Every word must be taken at its primary literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context clearly indicate otherwise. This is the basic rule for understanding any literature at all, but strangely for some reason when it comes to God’s Word, the allegorical often overrides common sense. Even among the secular, no sensible person would interpret correspondence the way many professing Christians do, in spiritualizing (allegoricalizing) Scripture. If the Bible does not mean exactly what it says, there is no way to discern exactly what it does mean. A literalist is very careful of every word and passage, because he believes that God preserved His inspired Word, and that each word matters. Careful attention must be given to the choice of words and grammar and syntax of the sentence and then context. God inspired every Word of Scripture, including the tittles and jots. The exact words are there on purpose because God chose them and spoke them. Hence the importance of also studying the underling inspired Scripture from which the KJV was translated, the Hebrew Masoretic Text and Greek Textus Receptus. The literalist makes God the centre; the allegoricalist makes man.

Another area of allegoricalism, turning God's Word into fantasy fables, is that of numerology, which Kelly champions. We won't go into any detail concerning this area which he is a huge proponent of, even preaching numerous sermons on the subject itself, but you can read more here: Literal Interpretation vs Allegorical Interpretation and False Typology, with Illustrations.

➡ Corrupting God's will and mercy to tolerate and approve of ongoing sin. In the sermon "Women in Culture" (Feb 8, 2026 evening) he claims that divorce and remarriage is not God's perfect will, but His permitted will. Because of this, he is okay with divorce and marriage and having a congregation of 70% divorced and remarried at one point (time 27:00). To account for the large number of people living in gross sin (adultery) in his church, he has to twist God's Word to fit the error. He approved of their church membership because they had some "profession of faith," but it didn't matter that they were living in gross sin and clearly unregenerate (1 Cor 6:9-11; Gal 5:21-23). And this approval he does by bringing in the claim that such people are living in God's permissive will, and not perfect will (time 30:00). They should be living in his perfect will, but they can't, so they must be happy with his permissive will. He goes on to claim that for many people this is their entire life. This permissive vs perfect will, along with “I will have mercy not sacrifice” is repeated to ad nauseum in this sermon, justifying his daughters unBiblical political position, justifying having 70% of congregants living in adulterous sin (divorced and remarried), justifying placing women into men's positions whether in the church school (i.e., principle) or in missionary endeavours, etc. By allowing for these sins, you are Biblically balanced according to Kelly. If you believe that divorce and remarriage (i.e., adultery) is wrong and sinful, you are biblically unbalanced. He is calling good evil and evil good, but woe to those who do such things (Is 5:20). Apparently God's mercy and grace allows sin to be permitted, but what does Paul the apostle declare about this wicked philosophy?

"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" (Rom 6:2)

If you were to ignore everything else written in this report and part 1, this alone right here tells us he is a ravening false teacher. He claimed that the scriptures support his fable but none of the Scripture he quoted actually supported it, thus he is guilty of wickedly twisting scripture and doctrine to support error and sin and heresy, which is "dishonesty, . . . craftiness . . .  [and] handling the word of God deceitfully;" (2 Cor 4:2). Twisting God's will to allow for sin, fallaciously dividing Gods will to booster his unBiblical positions, is blasphemy by very definition.

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!" (Is 5:20)

Divorce and remarriage is adultery, ongoing adultery, so all who live in such sin are unregenerate: Marriage, Divorce and Remarriage.

Women who usurp a man's role, and men who approve of this, are unregenerate: Should Women Ever Hold Authority Over Men?

Blasphemy is much more than using God's name in vain: Sayings and Behaviour that Blaspheme God's Name, But Common Amongst Professing Christians.

Other Errors and Dangers of Kelly, and More on His Hatred for Reproof

➡ Revival Meeting Preached by Kelly (2019)

1. Led three people in prayer for “salvation,” (easy believism and quick prayerism) but all three were false professions. No, its not just because of the unsaved people but because of the false teacher leading them in prayer and teaching them a false gospel. Never preached on repentance or included it in the gospel, and only mentioned the word once, never the principles.

2. Kelly claimed that curses can exist in the true born again Christians life. He taught the generational curses error. Lost people are under the curse of sin, NOT born again believers. Ever. Period. Pr. 3:33 is all the proof one needs, where Solomon contrasts the unsaved with the saved:

"The curse of the LORD is in the house of the wicked: but he blesseth the habitation of the just."

3. Kelly once again terribly undermined God’s inspired and preserved Word in Hebrew and Greek, mocking and denigrating these inspired Holy Texts of God, which is a very normal practice for him, due in part to his allegiance to Peter Ruckman and Mike Hoggard.

4. Kelly seriously misinterpreted and corrupted the phrase “born of water” in Jn. 3:5, a very simple to understand phrase stated by Christ, explained in the very context.

5. Bad mouthed the two and half tribes that desired land on the other side of the Jordan, which is blatantly false (see Jos. 22:1-6).

6. Kelly mocked and scoffed at a woman’s question during one sermon, answering extremely rudely and disprespectfully. Though she was out of place in asking a question during a sermon, or the fact that she was a woman asking the preacher when she should be asking her husband (1 Cor 14:33-35), his response was far removed from a godly man easy to be entreated (Jam 3:14-18).

➡ Hatred Towards Those who Expose Heretical and Ungodly IFB Preachers. Now who would dislike and reprove someone for doing a godly and important biblical work such as exposing wolves in sheep’s clothing, including those of the evil sexually-immoral kind that molest and rape children? Thats what Kelly does in his sermon "Are You Enjoying Your Faith?" (Oct 11, 2020), and he tells the congregation how bad that is. We understand some do this because of their malice towards Christianity and their hatred towards obeying God’s Word (in fact, I think many are guilty of this that are using youtube for this purpose), but everything he says about the IFB being reproved online is a straw man. Most of the people reproved online most certainly need to be reproved and exposed for the world to see and read just like the Bible demands for a lot less than what these ungodly men are doing (Rom 16:17; 1 Tim 5:20; 2 Tim 3:9; Matt 10). Of one that was exposed, “Oscar Cunningham,” Kelly says he allegedly “led thousands of people to the Lord.” Wow. Really eh?!? Where are they all today? Just like where are the 2/3 of people that once darkened the doors of Liberty Faith? He exalts bad IFB’s. “These people are light and salt to the country. I know a guy named Larry Brown, you know him?” Larry Brown is a wicked hypocrite, one that loves wolves in sheep’s clothing Jack Hyles and Jack Schaap and who knows who else, one who preachs heresy, a false gospel, embellishes numbers since he is a big-numbers guy, and a truck load of other issues, scripture perversions and strange things. (We expose Brown briefly in our first report.)

➡ Blatant compromise. In his sermon "Offence of the Cross" (Aug 30, 2020) he says he won’t say the names of denominations that teach false doctrine (time 5:30). Wow. Unbelievable. And his is a protector of the sheepfold?? Not even a minute later, he brashly declares, “someone’s gotta stand up for true doctrine” (time 6:15). How is not warning of false doctrine teaching denominations "stand[ing] up for true doctrine”?? He can’t even say the names of cults, who are loaded with false doctrine, so he is certainly not standing up for true doctrine at all. He is an imposter. In the very same sermon, he would exalt and praise Jack Trieber, claiming the “the singing, biblical, the preaching, biblical,” but that is a lie. Though the singing may be well, Trieber is a heretic who preaches false doctrine consistently and a very perverted gospel. Kelly claimed they were suffering persecution in Calfornia due to their defiance of Caesar (this is during the covid plandemic/scamdemic), “Because of the offence of the cross.” They preach a very corrupted and heretical cross. It’s all of the flesh we see there. Trieber is NOT a saved person, but a false teacher warned of in 2 Pet. 2:1 and their followers described in the two passages that follow, who follow Trieber for the same reason we note in Rom. 16:18. Trieber is covered in some more detail in part 1. In another example from this sermon where true doctrine is exchanged for heresy and peversion, he intentionally leaves out the evidence of salvation (time 23:00-23:30), which is a continual practice of his. And then he actually goes on to mock evidence of salvation, which is frightful, since that is the only way we know we are saved, and others are saved. The sermon was laden with the preaching of a false gospel of easy believism.

Conclusion to this Expose of Reg Kelly

Much more could be written, and maybe will be, but this will have to suffice for now. The errors, problems, sins, heresies and blasphemies of Reg Kelly are many, which is why he is being exposed (Rom 16:17-18). A commonly heard cliche in Kelly's preaching is, “I love ya,” but does he actually love the congregation if he corrupts the truth and the gospel, and doesn’t preach the entire truth, so they are getting less than required for Christian living and entrance into the kingdom of God? God's Word says we love our brethren by first loving God, and we can only love God by obeying His Word (1 Jn 5:1-3). The truth is, Reg Kelly is a liar and a false teacher, repeatedly demonstrated in his preaching and positions. 2 Pet 2:1-3 exposes him for who he really is, hence his railing on those that are of the truth:

"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not."

The preaching of Reg Kelly preaching is not good preaching. Its more an exercise of treating God’s Word like tomatoes falling off the back of a produce truck. What Reg Kelly “believes” about repentance is no different than the vast majority of heretical revivalist IFB churches today. He is not an anomaly among them. He just preaches louder and is smarter, more brave, less man-centred and more Biblical in some areas. His gospel is just as corrupted as vast majority of them and his scripture perversion as bad.

We know people proclaim sermons like Kelly's to be preaching, even good preaching, but what is preaching? If he delivers a false message or one that is of little to no value, but because it was communicated in the affected style, preaching allegedly occurred, and the message is accepted. This is the devastating effect of not exercising true spiritual discernment. Some of what we are portraying here at its best is bad preaching. Much of it isn't preaching and yet its hearers not only think it is, but that its good. Once you get past the snot slurping and the long winded screaming, what we are left with is not a lot of anything of substantial value, but rather, dangerous life altering teachings. The noun "preacher" (kerux) is a herald, that is, he speaks on behalf of someone in authority, a king. "Preaching" is heralding or proclaiming the king's message. That’s anyway what it’s supposed to be. “Preaching" relates to the content. It must be the king's message. If it isn't the king's message, no heralding, no preaching actually took place. Listening through sermons that Kelly “preaches,” are different messages than what God said. The message doesn’t represent God (according to His Word), but misrepresents Him. Lots of his preaching is counted as good preaching because of the style, even because of his non-politically correct position, but not because of the message. People like screaming, finger snapping, snorting snot. They call it passionate preaching. True preaching must be what God's Word says. It must come from the Bible and it must reveal, unfold, expose what God said in His Word. Preaching is the content, not the style. Using all sorts of emotionalism and other verbal techniques and instrumentation to sway the hearers and calling that preaching the Word with some kind of Holy Spirit unction (a very common but entirely unscriptural prayer of Kelly’s, asking for unction and anointing of the Holy Spirit), is not scriptural heralding. Screaming does not authenticate his message. It does not indicate that he is filled with the Holy Spirit, and now the Holy Spirit is working in some special way as signalled by the affected style of speech. A man can holler and pound all he wants, but if he corrupts the meaning of scripture and purveys false doctrine, it is in vain and meaningless. And most of his sermons are replete with wresting of Scripture. People think that the Holy Spirit is working and doing something through someone and that it is good preaching but it’s not true. It’s deception. The standard for whether his speech is preaching is Gods Word. A person must consider whether what the man is saying is in fact from the Word of God. He may open the Bible and he may even use words from the Bible, but that does not mean he has preached the Bible. What we heard in this sermon, is not preaching the Bible. Kelly is credited with having said something authoritative, as if it were from God without it having been said in the Bible or even in the text he used. It doesn't matter to many in his audience or listeners on sermonaudio, because the style transcends the substance of the speech. I would doubt if anyone in his church ever challenges him on the confusion, contradictions and error pounded from the pulpit. Maybe the odd person, but they wouldn't last long under him. People fear the man but not God. That is bad, very bad. Man becomes the authority, not God. None of this is noted anywhere in the Bible, where, rather, we are commanded to judge the preaching (1 Cor. 10:15; Lk. 12:57; 1 Cor. 2:15; 14:29) and prove all things (Ac. 17:11; 1 Th. 5:21) and to reprove and rebuke error (Rom. 15:14; 2 Tim. 4:2) and reject the man and his message in he doesn’t turn from the doctrinal error which is offensive and divisive (Rom. 16:17).

1 Cor. 7:35,

“And this I speak for your own profit; not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely, and that ye may attend upon the Lord without distraction.”

This is done for your profit. There are a lot of distractions here and issues, very very serious issues with this man. Nothing nit pickiness happening here or fault finding. No semantics either. Simply contending for the faith (Ju. 1:3) and spiritually judging as commanded (1 Cor. 2:15), comparing what he is teaching with what God’s Word teaches (1 Cor. 2:13; Ac 17:11; 1 Th. 5:21) and finding some very serious discrepancies. The horrible confusion and errors and contradictions, with the scripture manipulation, misinterpretation, misuse and abuse, and then the false repentant-less and Lord-less gospel and salvation he is presenting in his sermons is heresy. It’s not truth. He certainly does teach some truth, but its mixed together with a whole lot of error, and that means we’ve got error and a whole lot of it, and that makes him a false teacher. Extremely dangerous error, confusion, heresy and even blasphemy in his sermons. Utter, outright blasphemy. More than ever now I think he is doing exactly what we labelled him in our first report: peddling a false gospel and false Jesus and wresting scripture.

We need to be about Gods business and actually believe what the Bible says. Words have meanings. All the words of God have actual meaning and must be rightly divided. Scripture means something. The gospel means something. Their is truth and their is error. For someone to come along and twist those things out their meaning and teach false doctrine, that must not be tolerated even for an hour (Gal. 2:4-5). If someone preaches the Bible but preaches something other than what it says, it's not going to work in a powerful way in people's lives. What usually happens instead is leaven and destruction, as warned of in Gods Word. When it involves the gospel/salvation and Jesus, eternal damnation is the rippling effect. False teachers corrupt the pure gospel of Jesus Christ. They are "accursed" according to Gal 1:6-9, which would include Reg Kelly.

Do you love the truth? Truth by nature is antithetical. You can't love truth and error simultaneously. Loving health mandates hating disease. Loving truth requires hating error, which then requires rejecting and reproving error. Loving sound doctrine means hating false doctrine. You can't both love and hate false doctrine at the same time. To get rid of false doctrine and practice, you must treat them like they matter to someone, at least to God, and hopefully you. The opposition of truth with error, is noted through Scripture.

The Bible is not a Book to be trivialized. It is God’s inspired and inerrant Word. To misrepresent or change the meaning of the words inspired by the Holy Spirit in any way is a serious matter even if it is done with the best of intentions. It is not necessary to embellish Scripture with fiction to increase the impact of the message. The simple literal interpretation of God’s Word, when preached in the power of the Holy Spirit, will have more impact than any spiritualizing drama. It is the Holy Spirit’s work to convince of sin, righteousness and judgment, and lead and edify His people in the truth, and since He chose the words of Scripture we should expect that His words literally interpreted will be the most convicting and helpful.

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Tim 3:16-17).

Reg Kelly must be exposed and avoided:

"Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple."