Conditional logic

A conditional statement states a condition and then has a true or then part and an else or false part.

One must follow the arrows. In programming this idea is called a SESE (Single Entry Single Exit) block and makes it much easier to reason about programs.

[Antoine Lavoisier and conservation of mass]
Thus, the conditional construct has the following properties [excluded middle].

Mutually exclusive: no overlap
Collectively exhaustive: includes all alternatives

The ancient Greek word "ἐάν" ≈ "if, when".

More: Sets: Mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive

In English natural language:

"if" has the idea of "it may not happen".
"when" has the idea of "it will eventually happen".
Saying; Not if but when.

However, the semantic meaning of "if" and "when" in logic are the same as in the following (pseudo-code) programming statements that express the same computation.

if statement:

if B1 then S1 elseif B2 then S2 ... else S3 endif

select statement:

select when B1 do S1 when B2 do S2 else do S3 end select

In program language correctness terms:

1. Partial correctness: When (if) the program stops, the correct result is achieved.

2. Total correctness: Partial correctness and a proof that the program stops.

In general, showing that a program stops is harder than showing partial correctness.

More: Alan Turing: halting problem

Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. [kjv]

αμην γαρ λεγω υμιν εως αν παρελθη ο ουρανος και η γη ιωτα εν η μια κεραια ου μη παρελθη απο του νομου εως αν παντα γενηται [gnt]

The Greek combination of «εως αν» means "until if" or "until when".

"εως" ≈ "until" and "αν" ≈ "if, when".
"εως αν" ≈ "until if/when".

The KJV (King James Version) translates «εως αν» as "till" but appears to leave the conditional "if" or "when" untranslated.

What is the difference between "if" and "when"? Is there a difference? Just say "when".

More: Matthew 5:18 The true reality of jots and tittles

Programming distinctions (ignored here):

conditional expression (formula for value)
conditional statement (command for effect)

[Wirth, black boxes, functions]

If [condition] Then [then-part] Else [else-part] End If

If [condition] Then [then-part] End If If Not [condition] Then [else-part] End If

If Not [condition] Then [else-part] End If If [condition] Then [then-part] End If

A conditional statement states a condition and then has a true part and a false part. The programming constructs (on the left) are equivalent (assuming no side-effects in evaluation of the condition, for programming purposes).

The reordering in the last (bottom) part is to match the logic of the verse being examined.

[programming as algebraic transformations]

Note: These transformations assume no side-effects in the condition and the first then or else part does not change the condition. This is true for the verses under consideration.

John 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. [kjv]

12:25 He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal. [kjv]

Is the parallelism between these two verses more evident now? Do you see the pattern?

The words "love" and "hate" are used as opposites.
The words "lose" and "keep" or "guard" are used as opposites.

More: John 12:20-30 Conditionally fallen grain of wheat

What is needed to "keep life into eternity" ? Check the next verse. It continues with "if ...".

verse	seed	then part ‑ true/yes	else part ‑ false/no
12:24	the‑J	(yes) fallen against sand	(no) not fallen against sand
12:24	the‑J	dies (having fallen)	dies (not having fallen)
12:24	the‑J	bears much fruit (later)	remains alone in this world
12:25	a‑you	(yes) hates life ‑ this world	(no) loves life ‑ this world
12:25	a‑you	keep life into eternity if ...	loses life (in prison)

The use of negation is difficult for students of programming to learn and use. It appears to have been especially difficult for translators, theologians, etc.

More: John 12:20-30 Conditionally fallen grain of wheat

John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. [kjv]

εγω ειμι η αμπελος υμεις τα κληματα ο μενων εν εμοι καγω εν αυτω ουτος φερει καρπον πολυν οτι χωρις εμου ου δυνασθε ποιειν ουδεν [gnt]

This verse goes with the next verse.
Some people cite John 15:5 as their favorite Bible verse. How nice. The "abide" or "remain" appears, in context, to be related to the Meno Paradox.

English changes the double negative for emphasis to a single negative. The "can do" is, in the Greek, "potentially do". The next verse completes the thought.

More: Meno Paradox: Seeking to learn what you do not know

More: John 15:1-19 Friendship evangelism deception

John 15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. [kjv]

εαν μη τις μενη εν εμοι εβληθη εξω ως το κλημα και εξηρανθη και συναγουσιν αυτα και εις το πυρ βαλλουσιν και καιεται [gnt]

This verse goes with the previous verse.
The first "cast" is a play on words with "into oblivion/forgetfulness". Many churches who might use the previous verse would not want to talk about the "fire" and being "burned". The ancient Greek word "καίω" ≈ "light, kindle, burn".

More: John 15:1-19 Friendship evangelism deception

John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. [kjv]

15:6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. [kjv]

The pattern used here by John is that of conditional logic.

At one church, someone on the staff claimed John 15:5 as their favorite verse. That church would prefer to omit any mention of John 15:6.

More: John 15:1-19 Friendship evangelism deception

Matthew 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. [kjv]

παντα ουν οσα εαν ειπωσιν υμιν ποιησατε και τηρειτε κατα δε τα εργα αυτων μη ποιειτε λεγεουσιν γαρ και ου ποιουσιν [gnt]

Here are the first four Greek words in the verse.

"πάντα" ≈ "always, all, whole". A usage of plural means "all" as "everything" is taken as a whole and there may be exceptions within that whole.
"οὔν" ≈ "therefore". This statement is predicated on previous statements. In this case, the religious elite sit in the seat of Moses (previous verse).
"ὅσα" ≈ "as far as" which is a synonym of "ὡς" ≈ "like, as, according to". This word indicates that there may be exceptions to what follows.
"ἐάν" ≈ "if, when". This is a conditional that is dependent on the following precondition for the following postcondition to apply (bottom-up reasoning).

Paraphrase: All (with exceptions) therefore as far as (with exceptions) if/when (requirement to apply) they say to you ...

The KJV use of all ... whatsoever in the English of today does not capture the meaning of the Greek.

More: Everything and all things: But wait, there's more

More: Matthew 23:1-4 Jesus fingers the talk about works

Matthew 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. [kjv]

*	Masc. Sing.	Masc. Plural	Fem. Sing.	Fem. Plural	Neuter Sing.	Neuter Plural
Nom.	πᾶς	πᾰ́ντες	πᾶσᾰ	πᾶσαι	πᾶν	πᾰ́ντᾰ
Gen.	πᾰντός	πᾰ́ντων	πᾱ́σης	πᾱσῶν	πᾰντός	πᾰ́ντων
Dat.	́πᾰντῐ́	πᾶσῐ(ν)	πᾱ́σῃ	πᾱ́σαις	́πᾰντῐ́	πᾶσῐ(ν)
Acc.	πᾰ́ντᾰ	πᾰ́ντᾰς	πᾶν	πᾱ́σᾱς	πᾶσᾰν	πᾰ́ντᾰ

The ancient Greek word "πάντα" ≈ "always, all, whole".
A usage of plural means "all" as "everything" is taken as a whole and there may be exceptions within that whole. A usage of singular would mean that there are no exceptions.

In this case, the Greek word used in the accusative could be masculine singular or neuter plural.

More: Matthew 23:1-4 Jesus fingers the talk about works

Matthew 18:5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. [kjv]

και ος εαν δεξηται εν παιδιον τοιουτο επι τω ονοματι μου εμε δεχεται [gnt]

The ancient Greek word "δέχομαι" ≈ "receive, accept, take, believe". The use of "receive" or "accept" word twice ensures that this is a commutative relationship in that it goes both ways and sets up an equality of sorts. This becomes important at the end of the discourse.

Paraphrase: And if someone receives/accepts one little child such as this on the name of mine receives/accepts me.

Does this mean that one only has to "accept" a "child" that has "accepted" Jesus to have "accepted" Jesus? Does this make sense? Would false leaders or false teachers "accept" a "child" in order to use them for their own purposes?

Most translations omit the ancient Greek word "ἐάν" ≈ "if, when". This is a conditional that creates a dependency. Who is the "one" "little child"?

More: Matthew 18:2-11 Great children ensnared in the middle