In general, ambiguity is uncomfortable.
If you asked me how to get to Grand Rapids from Hastings and I told you to get on M-37 and travel anywhere from 15 to 40 miles, you’d be annoyed—you might get there—but, you’d be annoyed. You’d be annoyed because 1) I didn’t tell you which direction to travel and, 2) 15 to 40 miles is nowhere near exact enough. Those directions are far too ambiguous.
We like things to be black or white; grey isn’t helpful. That is, unless we’re talking about some particular places within the Greek New Testament.
One of the things that make good English translations of the New Testament (and the Old Testament) so helpful is that they often clear up ambiguity within the text. Teams of translators have given hours in looking at particular phrases, and even individual words, in order to come up with a good English equivalent that helps us understand the meaning of the text we’re reading.
I’m extremely thankful for that type of work, as I think we all (who read the Bible) are.
That being said, there are situations in the New Testament where ambiguity exists in the Greek, and that ambiguity has sometimes been removed through the translation process. This, then, leaves a question for us: If there’s ambiguity in the original text, is it helpful to remove it when we translate it into another language.
What I’d like to briefly do here, is to look at one example where removing that ambiguity might not actually be the most helpful thing.
John 3:16 is probably still one of the most well-known verses in all the Bible. Even those who have little to no relationship with church or the Bible know what John 3:16 says. Or, it might be better to say: they know what their translation of John 3:16 says. The reason for that is because there’s some ambiguity with the first word (in Greek) of that verse.
Here’s how the Greek looks: οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον (John 3:16a). That first word in question is: οὕτως.
There are a number of ways to translate that word—not all of which are correct in every situation—but, briefly several of them are: in this manner, thus, and so. It’s ambiguous with this statement on what John meant to communication with the word οὕτως. What’s really interesting is that by surveying a number of different English translations, we can see how faithful translators have made decisions based on their research.
For God so loved the world (NIV, ESV, NASB, KJV)
For this is how God loved the world (NLT)
For God loved the world in this way (CSB)
God loved the people of this world so much (CEV)
For this is the way God loved the world (NET)
As you can see different translations have made different decisions. And, with these translations above, all of the options for the Greek word οὕτως have been put into play. In making their particular decisions, the translators have removed the ambiguity of the Greek under the English. No longer, if we’re just reading the English text, do we feel any greyness when we come to John 3:16. God either so loved the world, loved the world in this way, or loved the world so much. The English is pretty black and white.
The question for us though, if we are going to deal with the Greek of the New Testament, is might it be better to allow the ambiguity to stand? Could it possibly be that John, himself, wanted the ambiguity there? Wouldn’t it be amazing if John really wanted to hold different—albeit complementary ideas—with the one word: οὕτως?
I think that might be exactly what was going on with the text.
If you’re interested in learning Biblical Greek and you’d like some help along the way, please email me at kevindavis1986@gmail.com. I’d be happy to discuss with you some different teaching options that will help you get into the Greek of the New Testament!