Some excerpts from Perryman’s book, which is a critique on the interpretive method of Command, Example, Necessary Inference, the “law of silence” and patternism (regarding an alleged “pattern” of ritualistic worship and church activities). I would recommend reading the whole book… it’s a short read.
“The pattern is something allegedly handed down by God… It places our salvation as dependent upon our being shrewd lawyers and clever detectives, picking and choosing from the faint scriptural clues, with the blanks filled in with our own logic. This takes the focus off of Christ, His grace, and our personal relationship with Him.” (p.7-8)
“We cannot infer that God commanded Christians to participate in the Lord’s supper exclusively on Sunday when the only purported evidence is one verse (Acts 20:7) of narrative identifying when a discussion took place between Paul, Luke, and their respective traveling companions. They could not assemble on the second day of the week to break bread because Paul was intending to depart at that time. The reason for meeting on Sunday could just as easily have been because of Paul’s departure plans instead of a directive from God. We cannot infer precisely. Inductive inference with respect to commands always leaves us with the possibility of getting it wrong.” (p. 21-22)
Regarding Acts 2:44 (on p. 19-20)… “Inductivism insists that since these early saints were engaged in learning what the apostles were teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread, and prayer, these activities must have originated with God. Since this verse and its contextual passages do not mention the command ethic, it has to be inferred. But is the inference true? In the absence of scriptural evidence, it cannot be determined with certainty whether or not (A) God commanded these activities or (B) if they were voluntary expressions arising from a genuine commitment to honor God. Additional data is required to support the inference that these things were commanded by God. We can assume they were commanded to do these things, but that is all that it can be: an assumption….
Acts 2:42 in no way indicates that these activities were to be performed in communal or corporate worship worship on a specific day (Sunday) either in Jerusalem or in any other locality.”
Regarding “Examples”… “If God wants us to proceed in a certain way or behavior, why would He not command it? Why would He leave it for man to rely totally and solely on a cryptic, reasoned out, potentially erroneous example of what early Christians did in a given situation? It also leaves us to wonder if a particular example of some behavior or activity is an example or the exclusive example. How can we ascertain which? And should the principle behind the activity serve as the example, or is it the specific sequence of the action?”