I am a pastor and not a Greek scholar, but I had an interesting conversation with a Bible translator friend over this verse yesterday. The curiosity lies in the fact that basically all translations tie the οὕτως of John 316 to the subsequent ὥστε clause: ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν. It is interesting because it’s almost never how that construction works. Also, we have the classic καθὼς/οὕτως construction in verses 14 and 15, with an initial clause: καθὼς Μωϋσῆς ὕψωσεν τὸν ὄφιν ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ being followed by two parallel clauses:
οὕτως ὑψωθῆναι δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ἐν αὐτῷ2 ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.
Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλʼ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον.
If this is indeed the intended construction, then the train of thought is some thing like:
- Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness
- In the same manner (as the serpent), the son of man must be lifted up
- In the same manner (as Moses), God loved the world by doing the lifting
It seems to be pretty straightforward, but I have never heard anybody connect the activity of God in v16 with the activity of Moses in v14, at least not so directly. And the translations certainly don’t do us any favors