I recently joined a private Facebook group that claimed the following purpose:

“Promoting the Reformation that Luther started and supported by the reformers Calvin, Vermigli, Hooker, Bucer and connection to the fathers, creeds, councils which is ultimately supported by the infallible Scriptures.”

I read the purpose statement several times. Something seemed a bit off. Then I cut out much of the middle portion to leave “Promoting the Reformation that Luther started . . . which is ultimately supported by the infallible Scriptures.”, which helped me get to the questions bouncing around in my old brain. “Would this FB group focus on examining the reformers (particularly Martin Luther) and comparing what they taught with the text of scripture?” Since that seemed like a worthy endeavor, having been at one period of my life a worthy endeavor, I joined the group.

I spent a few days primarily discussing two topics before I left the group for reasons that will hopefully become clear. Those two topics were 1) infant baptism and 2) salvation by faith alone (sola fide).

Infant baptism was significant because the group’s creator and main admin came to the conclusion that infant baptism was the correct method of performing the rite. At the same time, I read a lengthy post talking about how one of the group members had also come to believe that infant baptism was the correct method. Reasoning was based on what was taught during the Reformation, which is, according to group members, clearly taught in scripture, even though the Bible nowhere commands it, but neither is it prohibited.

Salvation by faith alone, specifically Martin Luther’s views was the other topic I discussed, mostly with one of the other group members, a Lutheran, who told me that “Luther’s sola fide requires extra nos outward means of grace, or it isn’t sola fide.” The outward means of grace is of course, baptism (infant or adult). Although my Lutheran friend understood faith as an inward gift, baptism as an outward means of grace, while maintaining that they were completely compatible. The multitude of passages telling us that “faith alone” is the sole requirement for salvation do not matter. Perhaps he meant that since they don’t specifically omit baptism, baptism can be added to faith in order to be saved.

I politely left the group when it became apparent that he wouldn’t respond to questions I asked or to specific passages of scripture I offered. Other specific details of our lengthy discussion aren’t relevant to this article, although they were valid points of debate/argument.

What did I learn from my experience? I’m glad you asked.

1. Well, I added significantly to my digital library concerning the beliefs of Martin Luther concerning baptism and salvation by faith alone. At best, I can say that the great Reformer believed different things at different times, partly because of his Roman Catholic background. I found differing opinions from various resources.

2. My own views did not change concerning either topic. The Bible does not clearly teach infant baptism, nor does it prohibit the practice. Examples of Christian baptism in the New Testament include repentance from sin and trusting in Christ for salvation. “Faith alone” means “faith alone”.

3. We should follow the same advice the Apostle Paul gave to young Timothy:

“Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels.” (2 Timothy 2:23)

4. While it’s certainly interesting to find out what certain Reformers thought about various points of doctrine, scripture must be the final authority in all doctrinal matters. If scripture isn’t crystal clear about a particular issue (modes of baptism) we should let that which is clear interpret what is unclear or less clear.

5. Sometimes it’s necessary to politely disengage and move along down the road.