ḥesed in Greek
who comforts us in all our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves receive from God. 2 Corinthians 1:4 NIV
So that – It’s just a tiny word, eis, a little conjunctive. Note Oepke’s comment: “Originally spatial, this word takes on theological significance in the NT.”[1] This is important. It means we can’t just skip over these three letters as if all they do is connect other important thoughts. What a mistake it would be if we didn’t even bother to include eis in our translations, like the NIV does with gar (therefore) in most of Romans. Oepke continues:
In the NT eis expresses the living connection between divine and cosmic realities. In Greek thought the gods belong to the cosmos. Even dualism makes only a static distinction. Hades is another place; it is not God’s world. Even in circles which speak of an ascent of the soul, eis plays only a minor role. Formally the OT speaks in a similar way, as though, when God comes down, he were simply changing place within the same reality (cf. Gen. 18:21; Ex. 3:8). Yet his superiority over all creatures is strongly asserted, as in Ex. 33:18ff.; Is. 6, so that heaven cannot contain him (1 Kgs. 8:27) and his presence is the willed and gracious address of the covenant God (vv. 28ff.). Judaism thus develops an aversion to anthropomorphic statements and carries the divine transcendence almost to the point of straining the link between God and the world except for a firm belief in providence. Thus the LXX paraphrases Ex. 15:3 and Ex. 24:10, Jubilees omits God’s walking in the garden in its rendering of Gen. 3, Palestinian Judaism posits a series of heavens, and apocalyptic works begin to place greater weight on the preposition eis, e.g., in the coming of angels to the world, or in relation to apocalyptic vision. The NT inherits the distinction between the divine and human worlds but bridges the gulf with the concept of fulfilment in Christ.[2]
This is only the spatial sense of eis. There are other categories, one of which is a temporal sense, much like the way we use the word “until.” That’s what I think we find in this verse. Now let’s read it again: “who comforts us in all our troubles, until we can comfort . . .” Of course, we could read eis as a logical connector (like the NASB translation). Then it would mean that the first assertion is the grounds for the second, i.e., the reason we comfort others is because God comforts us. Perhaps this is the correct translation, but I suggest we also view eis as temporal. That means God comforts us until we comfort others. At first we’re helplessly stuck in our own agony. God comes to the rescue. We are lifted from our despair. We discover hope. But ḥesed applies. We aren’t delivered so that we can feel better. We are delivered until we pass on the relief. We are the transitional vehicles of God’s comfort. The purpose of divine well-being is distribution, not accumulation. Our consolation depends on consoling another, and in that process we learn what it means to be in God’s image. Once we have passed on His comfort, we no longer require the intense support we once needed. Our agony has been replaced by His tranquility. That’s the “until” part. Until I learned to pass on what God did for me, I really never knew what it was all about.
Comfort is a transitive property. Are you feeling depressed, distressed, disturbed? Do you want to experience the well-being of šālôm? Then put ḥesed to work. Do for someone else what you need God to do for you—and discover real divine comfort.
Topical Index: eis, so that, until, ḥesed, šālôm, comfort, 2 Corinthians 1:4
[1] Kittel, G., Friedrich, G., & Bromiley, G. W. (1985). Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Abridged in One Volume (p. 211). Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans.
[2] Ibid.
