Good and necessary consequence in the context of Formal fallacies


Good and necessary consequence in the context of Formal fallacies

Good and necessary consequence Study page number 1 of 1

Play TriviaQuestions Online!

or

Skip to study material about Good and necessary consequence in the context of "Formal fallacies"


⭐ Core Definition: Good and necessary consequence

Deductive reasoning is the process of drawing valid inferences. An inference is valid if its conclusion follows logically from its premises, meaning that it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false. For example, the inference from the premises "all men are mortal" and "Socrates is a man" to the conclusion "Socrates is mortal" is deductively valid. An argument is sound if it is valid and all its premises are true. One approach defines deduction in terms of the intentions of the author: they have to intend for the premises to offer deductive support to the conclusion. With the help of this modification, it is possible to distinguish valid from invalid deductive reasoning: it is invalid if the author's belief about the deductive support is false, but even invalid deductive reasoning is a form of deductive reasoning.

Deductive logic studies under what conditions an argument is valid. According to the semantic approach, an argument is valid if there is no possible interpretation of the argument whereby its premises are true and its conclusion is false. The syntactic approach, by contrast, focuses on rules of inference, that is, schemas of drawing a conclusion from a set of premises based only on their logical form. There are various rules of inference, such as modus ponens and modus tollens. Invalid deductive arguments, which do not follow a rule of inference, are called formal fallacies. Rules of inference are definitory rules and contrast with strategic rules, which specify what inferences one needs to draw in order to arrive at an intended conclusion.

↓ Menu
HINT:

In this Dossier

Good and necessary consequence in the context of Covenant theology

Covenant theology (also known as covenantalism, federal theology, or federalism) is a biblical theology, a conceptual overview and interpretive framework for understanding the overall structure of the Bible. It is often distinguished from dispensational theology, a competing form of biblical theology. It uses the theological concept of a covenant as an organizing principle for Christian theology. The standard form of covenant theology views the history of God's dealings with mankind, from Creation to Fall to Redemption to Consummation, under the framework of three overarching theological covenants: those of redemption, of works, and of grace.

Covenentalists call these three covenants "theological" because, though not explicitly presented as such in the Bible, they are thought of as theologically implicit, describing and summarizing a wealth of scriptural data. Historical Reformed systems of thought treat classical covenant theology not merely as a point of doctrine or as a central dogma, but as the structure by which the biblical text organizes itself. Covenant theology is upheld by Christians of the Reformed tradition, including the Continental Reformed, Presbyterian, Congregationalist, Reformed Baptist, and Reformed Anglican traditions. The most well-known form of Covenant Theology is associated with Presbyterians and comes from the Westminster Confession of Faith. A variant of this traditional Presbyterian form is sometimes called Baptist Covenant Theology or 1689 Federalism, to distinguish it from the standard covenant theology of Presbyterian Westminster Federalism. It is usually associated with the Particular Baptist strand and comes from the Second London Confession of Faith of 1689. Methodist hermeneutics traditionally use a variation of this, known as Wesleyan covenant theology, which is consistent with Arminian soteriology.

View the full Wikipedia page for Covenant theology
↑ Return to Menu

Good and necessary consequence in the context of Baptist covenant theology

Baptist covenant theology, also known as 1689 Federalism or Baptist federalism, is a Baptist conceptual overview and interpretive framework for understanding the overall structure of the Bible. It sees the theological concept of a covenant as an organizing principle for Christian theology. The standard form of covenant theology views the history of God's dealings with mankind, from Creation to Fall to Redemption to Consummation, under the framework of three overarching theological covenants: those of redemption, of works, and of grace.

Covenentalists call these three covenants "theological" because, though not explicitly presented as such in the Bible, they are thought of as theologically implicit, describing and summarizing a wealth of scriptural data. Historical Reformed systems of thought treat classical covenant theology not merely as a point of doctrine or as a central dogma, but as the structure by which the biblical text organizes itself. The most well known form of covenant theology is associated with Presbyterians (paedobaptists) and comes from the Westminster Confession of Faith. Baptist covenant theology (credobaptist) is distinct from Westminsterian covenant theology, and finds its most influential expression in the Second London Confession of Faith of 1689.

View the full Wikipedia page for Baptist covenant theology
↑ Return to Menu

Good and necessary consequence in the context of Regulative principle

The regulative principle of worship is a Reformed Christian doctrine held by Continental Reformed, Anabaptist, Presbyterian, Congregationalist and Baptist Christians that God commands churches to conduct public services of worship using certain distinct elements affirmatively found in the Bible, and conversely, that God prohibits any and all other practices in public worship. The doctrine further determines these affirmed elements to be those set forth in scripture by express commands or examples or, if not expressed, those implied logically by good and necessary consequence. The regulative principle thus provides a governing concept of worship as obedience to God, identifies the set of specific practical elements constituting obedient worship, and identifies and excludes disobedient practices.

View the full Wikipedia page for Regulative principle
↑ Return to Menu