Not that I've ever heard.Josh wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:59 am The square brackets were to give the context which was in the context of him explaining his early church views in baptism regeneration. I cannot remember enough of the context to type it out word for word.
It is entirely possible those views have changed.
So, let’s ask the question outright:
Does FotW believe that full immersion baptism is required for salvation?
I'd describe the founders' approach to establishing practice as generally restorationist. So in addition to parsing Scripture, they like to mine other early church writings for insights on potentially ambiguous passages, and to learn more about how the church practiced the apostles' teaching in the early years.
Most serious historians agree that during the first couple of centuries of Christian history, mode of baptism was not a source of much controversy. Full immersion seems to have been practiced by default, with occasional departures from that mode for special circumstances. I'm not aware of any evidence that people's salvation was being called into question during that era due to their mode of baptism.
To my knowledge that's is the current FOTW position as well, although you should ask them if you want to know for sure.
In my own experience in independent "Kingdom" circles, there has often been conflict between people who practice immersion by default based on historic precedent, and Church of Christ-influenced hardliners who insist on delegitimizing all baptisms done in another mode. I have never heard anything from anyone at FOTW to suggest that they fall into the second camp.
*Edit: I see we finally have some input from a FOTW representative, so I could have saved my keystrokes. Thanks, @brothereicher.