Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Well, again, you are blurring the distinction between historical record and direct teaching to try to hold your point together.
An example of historical record that does not constitute teaching is when in Acts 1:26 the disciples cast lots (dice) to choose the successor to Judas. Does the fact that is part of the inspired record imply that their lot casting was inspired? Not necessarily. In fact, most believe that practice was improper, but regardless that's how Matthias was selected. (This is an example of why pattern theology (the basis of the local ground) is a little dicey (pun intended).)
|
I also like the maxim that here in Acts 1.26 the biblical record is
descriptive, but not prescriptive.
Such was the case of Nee's "
local ground" teachings. Yes, Revelations 2-3 are
descriptive concerning "one church / one city," but the Bible is completely silent concerning this in a
prescriptive way. One makes this teaching even more onerous is the obvious contradictions which exist in the plain text of the New Testament.