According to Cessationists, is it possible to make a case for the doctrine of Cessationism through logical argumentation based on deductive reasoning and Scripture alone (i.e. without appealing to history or other extra-biblical sources)?
In other words, I'm looking for examples of more or less "formal" deductive arguments, consisting of premises and conclusions that logically follow from the premises (and/or previous conclusions), in which the final conclusion is that the doctrine of Cessationism is true and the premises are defended by appealing to Scripture alone. Something like this:
- Premise 1 (based on passage X)
- Premise 2 (based on passage Y)
- Conclusion 1 (from Premises 1 and 2)
- Premise 3 (based on passage Z)
[...] - Final conclusion: Cessationism is true.
Note: the counterpart question about Continuationism can be found at Can the doctrine of Continuationism be logically deduced from Scripture via deductive reasoning?