Logical analysis of John 3:36

[TonyChanYT]

John 3:

36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life;

In terms of First-Order Logic, if a person believes in the Son, he has eternal life.

whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

If he does not obey the Son, he does not have eternal life.

By contrapositive, If he has eternal life, he obeys the Son.

A person believes in the Son → he has eternal life →he obeys the Son.

By transitivity, therefore, if he believes in the Son, he obeys Him.

Also, if he does not obey the Son, he does not believe in Him.

And, if he does not obey the Son, he does not have eternal life.

 

[Josheb]

Also, if he does not obey the Son, he does not believe in Him.

And, if he does not obey the Son, he does not have eternal life.

How then do you explain Peter's post-conversion hypocrisy and double standards?

Galatians 2:11-14
But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision. The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, "If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?

Jesus taught love, and integrity, and the exact opposite of hypocrisy and favoritism. According to your "first order logic," Peter did not believe in Jesus or have eternal life.



How then do you explain Peter's post-conversion hypocrisy and double standards?