DESCRIPTIVE ≠ PRESCRIPTIVE

October 21 

…even David with his two wives… 1Sam. 27:3b

A common error of Biblical interpretation that has led to both heterodoxy (wrong belief) and heteropraxy (wrong behavior) deals with the error of uncritically reading a given Biblical narrative as though it were a prescriptive command, when in fact it may simply be descriptive, relating certain bare, historical facts. Not all historical narratives are to be regarded as emulative examples or inducements to continuing precedents. 

The Bible accurately records the actions of men—saved and unsaved, living in various dispensations and eras—as well as the activities of angels—both fallen and elect. It is not necessarily calling upon us to follow their examples, however, simply because it relates what they “did.” These narratives do not, in and of themselves, constitute commands. 

The Mormons are WRONG, for example, to assume that polygamy is theoretically “OK” just because the Bible relates the case histories of such worthies as Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon—all of whom had plural marriages. In fact, the commanded and universally prescribed pattern for marriage, according to Jesus, is monogamy (Matt. 19:4-6; Gen. 2:18-25). 

Likewise, we are not commanded to speak in tongues just because the historical narratives of the Book of Acts and the Pauline Epistles accurately relate that some people (1 Cor. 12:30) in the early church did so. In fact, this practice is definitely NOT normative for today (1 Cor. 13:8). We are not living in the foundational Apostolic Age (Eph. 2:20)! The foundations have already been laid—and there are no living Apostles (Acts 1:22), whose very ministries these miraculous signs were designed to endorse in the first place (2 Cor. 12:12)! 

Further, if a behavior was commanded, we must interpret dispensationally—i.e., is this command applicable for today? 

Terry L. Reese