No one can come to me UNLESS the Father who sent me draws him

[tonychanyt]

Disclaimer: In this thread, I am not arguing whether or not the Father draws everyone. I am arguing about the logical usage of the word "unless". For the former, see No one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me MAY NOT DRAW him.

John 6:

44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.

Let's try to translate the above to the first-order logic language. The trouble is that there is more than one way to express the English concept of unless. The word carries two senses.

1. the weak sense:

If the Father does not draw him, he cannot come to Jesus.​

⇒ If he comes to Jesus, then the Father draws him.​

The Father's drawing of a person is a necessary condition. At this point, I don't know whether the Father draws everyone.​

2. the strong sense:

The Father does not draw him if and only if he cannot come to Jesus.​

⇒ He can come to Jesus if and only if the Father draws him.​

The Father's drawing of a person is both necessary and sufficient.​

John 6:

44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

Jesus raises him up on the last day iff the Father draws him.

40 For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”

He has eternal life iff the Father draws him.

There exists a person who does not have eternal life.

Therefore, the Father does not draw him.

According to this interpretation of the word "unless", the Father does not draw everyone. In either case, John 12:

32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

By the Cross, Jesus does draw all people to himself.



===========================================================================

Sometimes the context tells us which sense is being used. Let's apply these two senses on 2 Timothy 2:

5 An athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.

1. If he does not compete according to the rules, he is not crowned.
Method 1 is a valid interpretation.

2. He does not compete according to the rules if and only if he is not crowned.
⇒ If he is not crowned, then he does not compete according to the rules.
⇒ If he competes according to the rules, then he is crowned.

Method 2 implies that competing according to the rules is a sufficient condition for crowning. This is not true. Method 2 is not a valid interpretation of 2 Timothy 2:5.

 

[Mark Quayle]

John 6:

Let's try to translate the above to the first-order logic language. The trouble is that there is more than one way to express the English concept of unless.

1. the orthodox method:
   If the Father does not draw him, he cannot come to Jesus.
   ⇒ If he comes to Jesus, then the Father draws him.

The Father's drawing of a person is a necessary condition. At this point, I don't know whether the Father draws everyone.

2. the unorthodox method:
The Father does not draw him if and only if he cannot come to Jesus.
⇒ He can come to Jesus if and only if the Father draws him.

The Father's drawing of a person is both necessary and sufficient.

John 6:

Jesus raises him up on the last day iff the Father draws him.


He has eternal life iff the Father draws him.

There exists a person who does not have eternal life.

Therefore, the Father does not draw him.

According to this interpretation of the word "unless", the Father does not draw everyone.

In any case, John 12:

By the Cross, Jesus does draw all people to himself.

===========================================================================

Appendix

How to translate the English word unless into first-order logic?

There are two interpretations:

1. The Orthodox View

“Q unless P” should be translated as “¬P → Q”.

Arnel's Everyday English gave a nice explanation of the unless at the 8-minute mark in this video.

2. An Unorthodox Alternative

“Q unless P” as “¬P ↔ Q”

Now let's apply these two methods on 2 Timothy 2:

1. If he does not compete according to the rules, he is not crowned.

Method 1 is a valid interpretation.

2. He does not compete according to the rules if and only if he is not crowned.
⇒ If he is not crowned, then he does not compete according to the rules.
⇒ If he competes according to the rules, then he is crowned.

Method 2 implies that competing according to the rules is a sufficient condition for crowning. This is not true. Method 2 is not a valid interpretation of 2 Timothy 2:5.

I don't know what your logical symbols mean, but: "Q unless P" = "If P then necessarily Q" (which is what I take 'method 2' to be) is illogical on its face; in fact, it is self-contradictory.

The absolute statements ignore certain logical possibilities:
1. The Father may draw in an un-salvific manner.
2. If somebody is not yet saved, he still may have been drawn salvifically, but there is more to come.

Now if I have gone afoul of what you have said, then, from my point of view, you haven't separated statement clearly. I don't know where you are positing vs. where you are representing someone else's posit.

 

[tonychanyt]

I don't know what your logical symbols mean, but: "Q unless P" = "If P then necessarily Q" (which is what I take 'method 2' to be) is illogical on its face; in fact, it is self-contradictory.

See Philosophy 202: 'Unless'

 

[GDL]

Thus, what have we learned in the context of John 6?

NKJ John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

Jesus raises him up on the last day iff the Father draws him.

• Is the Father's drawing him the only condition for Jesus raising him?

NKJ John 6:40 "And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

He has eternal life iff the Father draws him.

• Is the Father's drawing him the only condition for his having eternal life?
• Is there a reason the Father's will is stated as "may haveeternal life"?
  • Are there more conditions to having eternal life than "sees the Son and believes in Him"?

There exists a person who does not have eternal life.

Therefore, the Father does not draw him.

• "does not draw" or "has not drawn"?
• Is the Father's drawing him the only condition for his having eternal life?

According to this interpretation of the word "unless", the Father does not draw everyone.

In any case, John 12:32 (NKJ John 12:32 "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.")
By the Cross, Jesus does draw all people to himself.

John6:44 My more literal translation: "No one is able (possesses capability) to come (movement) toward (or "to") if the Father who sent Me does not draw him, and I will raise him in the last day."

Compare to YLT John 6:44 no one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me may not draw him, and I will raise him up in the last day;

• Question: Does "In any case" suggest any conflict between the statements in John6 and John12?

 

[tonychanyt]

Thus, what have we learned in the context of John 6?

NKJ John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

• Is the Father's drawing him the only condition for Jesus raising him?

That depends on how you interpret the word "unless" logically.

 

[GDL]

That depends on how you interpret the word "unless" logically.

In part. But that doesn't answer the rest of my questions, points of context, tenses in grammar. Nor does it answer @Mark Quayle's points.

 

[GDL]

1. the orthodox method:
If the Father does not draw him, he cannot come to Jesus.

Agreed

⇒ If he comes to Jesus, then the Father draws him.

Disagreed. If he comes to Jesus, then the Father is drawing or has drawn him to Jesus.

The Father's drawing of a person is a necessary condition.

Agreed.

At this point, I don't know whether the Father draws everyone.

Agreed.

2. the unorthodox method:
The Father does not draw him if and only if he cannot come to Jesus.

Disagreed.

⇒ He can come to Jesus if and only if the Father draws him.

Agreed.

The Father's drawing of a person is both necessary and sufficient.

Disagreed. You have eisegeted the concept of "sufficiency"

 

[tonychanyt]

In part. But that doesn't answer the rest of my questions, points of context, tenses in grammar. Nor does it answer @Mark Quayle's points.

Keep in mind that the word "unless" is ambiguous. Go ahead and ask the question.

 

[GDL]

Keep in mind that the word "unless" is ambiguous. Go ahead and ask the question.

I've already asked questions.

"Unless" is not ambiguous. And to be clearer about its meaning, "unless" is translating two Greek words that literally say, "if not," as I translated earlier. John6:44 says no man has the ability to come to[ward] Jesus if the Father does not draw him. It's a simple statement. It tells us part of what must take place for man's salvation and how reliant on God man is. More about this process is explained by Jesus in John6. Check the logic on all of His statements there and harmonize them. He tells us quite a bit in this chapter.

 

[tonychanyt]

I've already asked questions.

"Unless" is not ambiguous.

Logically, the word has two different senses.

1. the orthodox method:
If the Father does not draw him, he cannot come to Jesus.
⇒ If he comes to Jesus, then the Father draws him.
The Father's drawing of a person is a necessary condition. At this point, I don't know whether the Father draws everyone.

2. the unorthodox method:
The Father does not draw him if and only if he cannot come to Jesus.
⇒ He can come to Jesus if and only if the Father draws him.
The Father's drawing of a person is both necessary and sufficient.

Are you able to distinguish the above two senses of the word "unless"?

 

[GDL]

Man has no ability to come to Jesus.
God must draw a man to Jesus.
If God does not draw, then incapable man cannot come.

Why not shed the debate concerning the logic of "unless" and just deal with the actual language of the verse?

Why debate about logic concerning a debated English word that is only a potential translation of a Greek phrase that says, "if not." Maybe "unless" should not be used. I don't typically translate the Greek wording with "unless." It seems the Greek phrase clarifies the condition and the word "not able" adds more clarity to the intended lessons in the 2 clauses. The debates concerning "unless" seem to be as pronounced as any theological debate and your orthodox vs. unorthodox is presented pursuant to an article presenting a person's thoughts for comment from his readers.

Given the facts of the Greek wording, how would you state the premises & logic of the verse?

 

[Mark Quayle]

See Philosophy 202: 'Unless'

I still don't understand the symbols. Does ¬A mean, "not A," or "if A," or what? What is the arrow — "thus", or "then", or what? What is the double-ended arrow?

 

[GDL]

I still don't understand the symbols. Does ¬A mean, "not A," or "if A," or what? What is the arrow — "thus", or "then", or what? What is the double-ended arrow?

We need to ask for the link to Philosophy 101, Mark.

 

[tonychanyt]

Given the facts of the Greek wording, how would you state the premises & logic of the verse?

Good question. See No one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me MAY NOT DRAW him and follow up there.

 

[tonychanyt]

I still don't understand the symbols. Does ¬A mean, "not A," or "if A," or what? What is the arrow — "thus", or "then", or what? What is the double-ended arrow?

See List of logic symbols - Wikipedia.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Disclaimer: In this thread, I am not arguing whether or not the Father draws everyone. I am arguing about the logical usage of the word "unless". For the former, see No one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me MAY NOT DRAW him.

John 6:

Let's try to translate the above to the first-order logic language. The trouble is that there is more than one way to express the English concept of unless. The word carries two senses.

1. the weak sense:

If the Father does not draw him, he cannot come to Jesus.​

⇒ If he comes to Jesus, then the Father draws him.​

The Father's drawing of a person is a necessary condition. At this point, I don't know whether the Father draws everyone.​

2. the strong sense:

The Father does not draw him if and only if he cannot come to Jesus.​

⇒ He can come to Jesus if and only if the Father draws him.​

The Father's drawing of a person is both necessary and sufficient.​

John 6:

Jesus raises him up on the last day iff the Father draws him.


He has eternal life iff the Father draws him.

There exists a person who does not have eternal life.

Therefore, the Father does not draw him.

According to this interpretation of the word "unless", the Father does not draw everyone. In either case, John 12:

By the Cross, Jesus does draw all people to himself.

===========================================================================

Sometimes the context tells us which sense is being used. Let's apply these two senses on 2 Timothy 2:


1. If he does not compete according to the rules, he is not crowned.
Method 1 is a valid interpretation.

2. He does not compete according to the rules if and only if he is not crowned.
⇒ If he is not crowned, then he does not compete according to the rules.
⇒ If he competes according to the rules, then he is crowned.

Method 2 implies that competing according to the rules is a sufficient condition for crowning. This is not true. Method 2 is not a valid interpretation of 2 Timothy 2:5.

“For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will (desire) of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.””
‭‭John‬ ‭6‬:‭38‬-‭40‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

This is what Jesus said right before that statement and according to this statement it is by the free choice and free will of each individual that they are granted to come to Christ by humbling themselves to God. And to strengthen this position we could add Jesus’ explanation for speaking in parables which actually provides more evidence to support this interpretation.

“And the disciples came and said to Him, “Why do You speak to them in parables?” Jesus answered them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says, ‘You will keep on hearing, but will not understand; You will keep on seeing, but will not perceive; For the heart of this people has become dull, With their ears they scarcely hear, And they have closed their eyes, Otherwise they would see with their eyes, Hear with their ears, And understand with their heart and return, And I would heal them.’ But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it. “Hear then the parable of the sower. When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is the one on whom seed was sown beside the road. The one on whom seed was sown on the rocky places, this is the man who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; yet he has no firm root in himself, but is only temporary, and when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he falls away. And the one on whom seed was sown among the thorns, this is the man who hears the word, and the worry of the world and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful. And the one on whom seed was sown on the good soil, this is the man who hears the word and understands it; who indeed bears fruit and brings forth, some a hundredfold, some sixty, and some thirty.” Jesus presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went away. But when the wheat sprouted and bore grain, then the tares became evident also. The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’ And he said to them, ‘An enemy has done this!’ The slaves *said to him, ‘Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?’ But he *said, ‘No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them. Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ””
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭13‬:‭10‬-‭30‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Notice in the highlighted portion the reason some people cannot see or hear is because their heart has become dull, they have hardened their own hearts and they have closed their own eyes otherwise they would hear. So because of this they are not permitted to hear and understand. In both John 6:40 and Matthew 13:12-15 the cause of not being allowed or permitted to come to Christ is their own desire to reject the gospel. In neither of these cases are they prohibited by The Father to accept the gospel.

Here’s another example. The gospel is the power of salvation to everyone who believes it. What this means is the gospel has the power to elicit a response in those who hear it. These people who have hardened their hearts and closed their eyes have no excuse for their unbelief because God has made His righteousness evident to them and as a result God has given them over to a reprobate mind.

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “But the righteous man shall live by faith.” For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭1‬:‭16‬-‭24‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

 

[tonychanyt]

“For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will (desire) of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.””
‭‭John‬ ‭6‬:‭38‬-‭40‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

This is what Jesus said right before that statement and according to this statement it is by the free choice and free will of each individual that they are granted to come to Christ by humbling themselves to God. And to strengthen this position we could add Jesus’ explanation for speaking in parables which actually provides more evidence to support this interpretation.

“And the disciples came and said to Him, “Why do You speak to them in parables?” Jesus answered them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says, ‘You will keep on hearing, but will not understand; You will keep on seeing, but will not perceive; For the heart of this people has become dull, With their ears they scarcely hear, And they have closed their eyes, Otherwise they would see with their eyes, Hear with their ears, And understand with their heart and return, And I would heal them.’ But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear. For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it. “Hear then the parable of the sower. When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is the one on whom seed was sown beside the road. The one on whom seed was sown on the rocky places, this is the man who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; yet he has no firm root in himself, but is only temporary, and when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he falls away. And the one on whom seed was sown among the thorns, this is the man who hears the word, and the worry of the world and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful. And the one on whom seed was sown on the good soil, this is the man who hears the word and understands it; who indeed bears fruit and brings forth, some a hundredfold, some sixty, and some thirty.” Jesus presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went away. But when the wheat sprouted and bore grain, then the tares became evident also. The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’ And he said to them, ‘An enemy has done this!’ The slaves *said to him, ‘Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?’ But he *said, ‘No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them. Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ””
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭13‬:‭10‬-‭30‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

Notice in the highlighted portion the reason some people cannot see or hear is because their heart has become dull, they have hardened their own hearts and they have closed their own eyes otherwise they would hear. So because of this they are not permitted to hear and understand. In both John 6:40 and Matthew 13:12-15 the cause of not being allowed or permitted to come to Christ is their own desire to reject the gospel. In neither of these cases are they prohibited by The Father to accept the gospel.

Here’s another example. The gospel is the power of salvation to everyone who believes it. What this means is the gospel has the power to elicit a response in those who hear it. These people who have hardened their hearts and closed their eyes have no excuse for their unbelief because God has made His righteousness evident to them and as a result God has given them over to a reprobate mind.

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “But the righteous man shall live by faith.” For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭1‬:‭16‬-‭24‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

I am having trouble understanding your point. Can you quote my words and contradict them?

 

[BNR32FAN]

I am having trouble understanding your point. Can you quote my words and contradict them?

My point was to show the cause of being drawn to Christ and the cause for not being permitted to come to Him.

 

[tonychanyt]

My point was to show the cause of being drawn to Christ and the cause for not being permitted to come to Him.

Good valid point but that's not the point of my OP here.

 

[GDL]

Good question. See No one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me MAY NOT DRAW him and follow up there.

Responded there. Thank you.

Re: this thread, I stated something in your new thread I'd like to reiterate & elaborate here. Your work presenting the logic of "unless" has given me more reason to avoid using "unless" in my translating. I was avoiding it to a high degree already and now more. So, thank you for this thread.

It seems pointless to insert more translational, logical ambiguity into an ancient text that we are already struggling to fully understand, especially when we have more literal alternative translation to use.

Also, when I disagreed with you re: "unless" being ambiguous, I was not as clear as I could have been. The way I read logical analysis; linguistics must play a part. When I loaded the word "unless" as used to represent the actual Greek wording in John6:44, I was seeing "unless" in that light, which removed ambiguity for me. I should have said something like, "unless is not ambiguous here." Maybe that would have helped???

As you know, the Greek is quite a precise language that is difficult to express simply in English at times apart from extensive elaboration. Anything that assists in clarifying the Text from all angles is a benefit to us all.