LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY
Article Critique: The Believers’ Church
Submitted to Dr. David Gorza
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of
CHHI 665-B01
History of Baptists
by
James D. Johnson
May 30, 2019
Introduction
Some within the body of Christ believe the only way to reach the unchurched world is by
offering the newest techniques and fads to lure in the masses. While this may have an initial
effect in the modern era, in reality, the church must do more than offer the newest fad. One of the
greatest commands in the Bible came from Jesus Christ. Matthew 28:19 (ESV) notes, “Go
therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the
Son and of the Holy Spirit.” This command was not just meant for the disciples, but for everyone
that has chosen to follow Christ as their personal Savior.
In an article entitled “The Believers’ Church: A Natural Resource Worth Preserving,”
Jason Duesing argues that the believers church should be fulfilling the Great Commission.
Duesing writes, “The believers’ church is the resource the Bible gives for serving as a vehicle to
protect and deliver the Gospel to future generations.”1 This paper will offer the reader a summary
of Duesing’s article, a critique of the strengths and weakness, and concluding remarks on how
the information can be applied for the modern day church.
Summary
The intent of Duesing’s article, is that the believers’ church must preserve and protect the
doctrines of the church. Duesing begins his article by explaining how President Theodore
Roosevelt worked with members of Congress to protect the natural resources that were being
depleted. Duesing writes, “Roosevelt was not concerned with any immediate threat to the
existence of the growing nation, but rather the present population’s reckless indifference toward
a vital problem that threatened its future existence.”2
1Jason G. Duesing, “The Believers’ Church: A Natural Resource Worth Conserving,” The Center for
Theological Research, March 2006, 1–5.
2Duesing, 1.
Duesing argues that the true culprit of the church is indifference. Duesing states,
“Indifference abounds toward doctrines that many claim are biblically ambiguous.”3 Duesing
argues that just as President Roosevelt needed to act to save the natural resources, the believers’
church must also act to save the doctrines of the church. Duesing notes, “The people of God need
to take action to preserve and protect the doctrine of the church.”4
Duesing first argues that the church must move to protect ecclesiology. Duesing argues
that church lost its emphasis, and the result is “impure churches that more often self-destruct
from internal disputes and doctrinal deterioration than they are compromised from an outside
attack.”5 Because of the indifference of those inside the church, the message of the Gospel is left
to be carried by those independent of the local church.6
Duesing then points the reader to the Anabaptists, as the “greatest champions of the
believers’ church since the days prior to the Constantinian Synthesis of the Sixteenth Century.”7
The Anabaptists chose to defend the doctrines of the church, and often paid the highest price for
doing so. Moreover, the Anabaptists stood by their convictions to preserve the Gospel essentials.8
Duesing concludes his article by pointing the reader back to the Anabaptist movement, and the
need for the modern reader to preserve and defend the doctrines of the believers’ church.
Critique
Duesing offers the reader a rather strong argument in favor of protecting the doctrines of
the believers’ church. First, the writer connects the need to protect the ecclesiological doctrine of
the believers’ church. Duesing writes, “By recovering or conserving ecclesiology, and especially
the believers’ church, now as Gospel essentials, but rather as the vehicle to protect Gospel
3Ibid., 1.
4Ibid.,
5Ibid., 2.
6Ibid.,
7Ibid., 3.
8Ibid., 4.
essentials, contemporary believers can have a sure foundation through their local church not only
to proclaim their faith to their neighbors but also to deliver to their children’s generation the faith
they received…”9
The author also does an excellent job in showing how the Anabaptists moved to protect
the doctrines of the believers’ church. Duesing noted how the Anabaptists moved to protect the
doctrines in a hostile environment, because they understood the believers’ church functioned “as
a vehicle to protect Gospel essentials.”10 The way the Anabaptist achieved their task, was they
chose to separate themselves from others and establish the believers’ church.11
While Duesing does a great job showing the importance of preserving the doctrines of the
believers’ church, there are some weakness to writer’s argument. First, Duesing noted how
indifference is one of the main issues within the modern church. However, Duesing offers the
reader no evidence to support such a claim. Secondly, Duesing noted how various ministers (i.e.
“John Knox, Jonathan Edwards, John Wesley, and George Whitefield”), started various
denominations but their churches failed to use deliver a pure Gospel message.12 Again, Duesing
does not offer the reader any examples to back his claim. Finally, Duesing noted how the church
must move to protect the doctrines of the believers’ church. However, Duesing offers no ideas to
achieve is overall goal of protecting the doctrines of the believers’ church.
Conclusion
Duesing has done a great job of highlighting the importance of preserving the Gospel
message for future generations. The article shows the reader how indifference will truly have a
9Ibid., 2.
10Ibid., 4.
11Ibid.,
12Ibid., 5.
lasting effect on the Gospel message, and the need for the church to get back to their true calling
(i.e. the Great Commission). The body of Christ must stop the bickering and divisions, and move
as one body to reach the next generation. Moreover, the church must realize the salvation of the
lost, is more important than the present attitude of being indifferent. Truly loving others, putting
aside doctrinal differences, and moving in a unified manner is the only way to truly protect the
doctrine of the believers’ church.
Bibliography
Duesing, Jason G. “The Believers’ Church: A Natural Resource Worth Conserving.” The Center
for Theological Research, March 2006, 1–5.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
