Featured John 3:16 Which do you prefer?

"For God so loved the world ..."

 

Your second option is closer to the Greek. The first option can lead us to believe the text means God loved the world "so much"...

But the greek οὕτως is telling us the manner in which God showed his love for the world. God loved the world "in this manner" or God loved the world "in this way" is more accurate. The CSB and NET do a great job with this verse.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

"For God so loved the world ..."

 

Tough question. "For God so loved the world" is beautiful, poetic, and likely burned into most of our minds since we were children.

But "For God loved the world in this way" is more accurate.

 

Either way is fine by me!

 

Rob, I am wondering why you see "For God loved the world in this way" as more accurate than "For God so loved the world," since they both say the same thing?

Thanks.

 

They don't necessarily say the same thing. "For God so loved the word" is ambiguous and the Greek is not. Many of people read that verse as "For God loved the world so much". It seems to be drawing the emphasis to the quality/quantity of His love, when the verse is actually showing the result and purpose of His love.

*granted this is more of a reader issue than a translation isssue. If "so" is taken as an adverb, it would certainly imply "the greatness" of his love...the quantity/quality when οὕτως is speaking to the manner His love was manifested

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

What it seems to be doing and what it is doing are not the same thing. You are correct when you write "this is more of a reader issue than a translation isssue." (Except in the way you spell issue. )

οὕτω, in this manner, thus, so.
So, in the way described or demonstrated; thus.

 

That is the emphatic form of issue ....haha

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

Actually i dont believe we can know for sure because sometimes - perhaps - nuance or idioma can effect the meaning of a clause and be lost over the passage of time. it does mean - in this manner - but with so strong a nuance that perhaps it took on the KJB meaning.

It would be helpful if we could have heard and seen the body language of the reader when the original ms was read to the assembly..

Not that the KJB translators were inspired like the prophets or apostles but surely there was some overview of God in the translation.

 

I would say that the manner in which we use the word "so" had changed over the years. And I agree with McCree79's posts.

 

"So," it is a usage issue, not a translation issue. (Although I did not know that "so" has changed "so" that it no longer means "in that or this manner; thus." "So" says Dictionary.com.)

 

Is there a difference between a translation issue and a usage issue?

Common usage is king, no matter what the grammarians wish. A definition still being extant in dictionary doesn't necessarily mean that the average person comprehends it as such. I'm reading through a history of the English Civil Wars now, lots of quotes from the 1640s. One example stands out, their common use of divers (diverse) as a stand alone noun, where I can't recall ever seeing it used that way in today's speech.

 

Of course there is, in the context we are discussing -- which is "more accurate." "So" means "in this manner" and means the same thing as translating it "in this manner." One is not more accurate than the other, since they mean the same thing. Further, I would also add that "so" as "in this manner" has not somehow suddenly gone out of common usage. It is used in this way in our speech and in modern English translations as well. Even though the LEB (2012) uses "in this way" or such like often where the KJV has "so," nevertheless the LEB still uses "so" to mean "in this manner, in this way." Here are a few examples just from the gospel of Matthew.

Matthew 5:19 Therefore whoever abolishes one of the least of these commandments and teaches people to do so ... [in this manner, in this way]
Matthew 11:26 Yes, Father, for to do so [in this manner, in this way] was your gracious will.
Matthew 12:40 For just as Jonah was in the belly of the huge fish three days and three nights, so [in this manner, in this way] the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.
Matthew 12:45 Then it goes and brings along with itself seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they go in and live there. And the last state of that person becomes worse than the first. So [in this manner, in this way] it will be for this evil generation also!”
Matthew 13:40 Thus just as the darnel is gathered and burned with fire, so [in this manner, in this way] it will be at the end of the age.

 

They don't necessarily mean the same thing. If so is taken as an adverb, its meaning would be "so much" or "so great"

You are reading it as a conjunction.
The meaning is dependent upon the reader. The rendering "so" is to ambiguous for the modern reader and current language usage.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

Yes, it can have that meaning, and they can have a different range of meaning. However, "so" as an adverb certainly doesn't have only that meaning ("so much" or "so great").

Dictionary.com
adverb, in the way or manner indicated, described, or implied: in that or this manner or fashion; thus:
Lexico
adverb, In the way described or demonstrated; thus.
Merriam-Webster
adverb, in the way indicated, in the same way
Webster's Dictionary 1828
adverb, In like manner, in such a manner

It may be used as a conjunction in some of the examples, but I gave the examples to show that it still holds a meaning in common usage that you and Rob both seem to think it does not have (perhaps I have misunderstood you). Further, it does have that meaning when used as an adverb. I believe the two "to do so" examples will show it is an adverb modifying "to do" in such a manner.

What meaning the reader gets out of it is going to depend on the reader, but the actual meaning is based on the context.

 

Would you object to a rendering of "For God loved the word so," I'm wondering?

 

The point is it is ambiguous. Why go with an ambiguous reading when the Greek is clearer and we can make it clearer in English as well?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk