From the foreword by William Woodson:
The oft heard statement that the Bible teaches by command, by approved example, and by implication, while well known in our heritage, has been under considerable fire by some among us in recent years - especially the binding nature of implication. George Beals thoroughly sustains the fact that implication in Scripture binds the will of God. Several contemporary denials of the binding nature of biblical implications are noted and critiqued, Bible passages which teach implicit binding truth are discussed in some detail.
"Where the Scriptures are silent, we are silent" is well known among us, but it is explained in two ways: Silence forbids what is not taught; silence gives permission to do what is not taught. How can on be sure which explanatoin of this summary statement is right? Beals distinguishes between Bible "silence" and Bible "implication" very carefully, discusses numerous verses concerning this theme, and concludes, "So where there is silence, there is no affirmation. Therefore, Bible silence is also a subset of the Bible-unauthorized."
