A popular modern approach to Biblical practice seems to advise "if the Bible doesn't command us to not anoint a candidate with chocolate syrup before baptism, then we can't say its unbiblical."
Is this the best approach? Are we to conclude that the apostles failed in their commission to teach the baptized disciples all things that Jesus had commanded them? And even if apostolic practice were not normative for the entire church age, on what basis would we surmise that their instituted practices are inferior to those devised later by other men?
Whatever we need to inform us on faith and practice is found in the New Testament. The Bible is our all-sufficient rule for doctrine, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete. Those who accept New Testament practice as normative will find proof in guiding principles and the consistent New Testament application of those principles through apostolic practice. “For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church."