When I was a chaplain, the Army sent me to study at an Evangelical seminary for a year. Later, some of the school faculty wrote a book in which they discussed “final salvation.” Other theologians promoted the book. I use the word salvation here to mean salvation from the lake of fire.

Some heavy-hitting theologians support the concept of final salvation. This gives it an air of scholarly gravitas. If intelligent Evangelical teachers promote it, it must be worthy of our attention.

No, it isn’t.

If you are not aware of this teaching, allow me to give a quick summary. It is an attempt to defend two contrasting positions. On the one hand, it says that salvation is by grace through faith. This is called initial salvation. Works play no part in it whatsoever.

However, initial salvation is not the end. There is a final salvation. That is the end of our salvation process. Final salvation requires good works. So, salvation is without works, and it requires works.

If you ever want to sit down and read the words of scholars who promote this teaching, let me give you some advice: Don’t. It will be a waste of your time. Unless you are much smarter than I am (and that is a distinct possibility!), your adventure in reading will leave you very confused.

After insisting that salvation (initial) is by grace, apart from works, you will be told that to obtain final salvation, “obedience and love are necessary.” Salvation is a process. (When they say that, I assume they mean “final salvation.”) Our glorification begins at conversion by grace through faith, but includes our sanctification through works. Initial salvation does not involve works, but we must thereafter strive for holiness.

After being told of the glorious grace of God, which gives initial salvation apart from works, you will be directed to Jas 2:17. That glorious grace, received by faith, must also have works. These works are necessary.

Of course, this will all be dressed up in philosophical language. The works required for final salvation are accomplished by God. But we must strive to do them. But God will give us the desire and strength to do them. They are the necessary fruits of our justification, even though our justification does not require these works. If we don’t strive to accomplish these works, our initial salvation is a mirage.

Maybe it’s because I’m getting older, but I find that I have no patience with this kind of double–talk. Is there a clearer example of trying to talk out of both sides of one’s mouth? Teaching final salvation requires one to first say that salvation is by grace and to then say that it is not by grace.

If we could simply watch people trying to defend it, we might find it entertaining. The contortions are a sight to behold (or read).

But it is not entertaining. There is nothing funny about it.

A good friend recently emailed me that her new pastor was teaching final salvation. She said she knew she had eternal life, but she was really confused (and depressed) about what he had said. She said he preached that initial salvation was by grace, but final salvation was by works. The preacher told her that she wouldn’t find out until she saw the Lord whether her necessary works had been sufficient to verify her initial, by grace, salvation.

Anybody who buys into that teaching will not have assurance of salvation. It causes them to look around and compare themselves to others in a vain attempt to find some level of comfort that their initial salvation was a reality. They can only hope to continue doing enough work to obtain their final salvation and enter the kingdom of God. Of course, they will all the while be shouting that it is all by the grace of God, apart from works!

There is no way the average layperson can explain, much less defend, this teaching. Its fine points can only be discussed in the academic halls of prestigious theological seminaries. I am confused just by writing this blog.

For me, that is the death knell of this doctrine. God provided salvation to the world in a way that fishermen and children could understand. To explain the concept of “final salvation,” one needs an advanced degree in theology.

We have a choice. We can accept the concept of “final salvation”—even though it is self-contradictory—because of the scholarly weight behind it. We can trust those scholars, even though we don’t have a clue as to what they’re saying.

The other option is to put it to bed. In light of the harm it has done, it should never have gotten up in the first place.