Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. (1 Peter 2.24, KJV)
1 Peter 2.24 is usually quoted by Full Gospel folks as a basis for healing. At a recent meeting, the preacher quoted this verse saying, “Jesus took those stripes upon his back so that you could be healed.” While I don’t have any qualm at all that we can stand on this verse for healing purchased in redemption, I do try to be accurate. The preacher’s statement has a couple of bumps in it (this particular preacher is a friend of mine and a good one at that).
First, the context of the verse is all about redemption. Peter speaks of Jesus presenting his body upon the “tree” so that sin could be laid upon him. If the physical lashes that Jesus endured by the Roman soldiers were enough to “heal” us, then there would be no reason for him to step forward to the cross.
Second, the preacher’s quote of King James is based upon a theological gloss of the Greek word for “stripes.” The King James translators are not alone with this translation:
He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed. (ESV)
and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. (NRSV)
who his own self bare our sins in his body upon the tree, that we, having died unto sins, might live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed. (ASV)
The burden of our sins He Himself carried in His own body to the Cross and bore it there, so that we, having died so far as our sins are concerned, may live righteous lives. By His wounds yours have been healed. (Weymouth)
If you look up the verse in the Greek, you see it this way:
ου τω μωλωπι ιαθητε
of [by] whose bruise y’all were healed
In the Greek, “stripes” (μωλωπι) is singular, not plural (“bruise” is the better word). This is demonstrated in the Greek interlinears:
who the sins of us himself bore in the body of him on the tree, that to the (our) sins having died we might live to righteousness by whose - wound you were healed. (Greek Interlinear - Brown and Comfort, editors)
Peter’s Greek also tracks Isaiah 53.5 from which he is presumably referring:
τω μωλωπι αυτου ἡμεις ιἀθημεν
by the bruise of him we are healed
The question becomes: if the Greek is singular, what does that mean and why is it translated in the plural?
While it is difficult to pin down the exact origins of the plural “stripes,” it apparently is derived from the physical-only view of the crucifixion. The argument/preaching goes this way: Jesus was so beaten by the Roman guards that the various bruises eventually formed into one huge welt on his body and that is why Peter refers to it in the singular.
As stated earlier, the problem with that kind of thinking is that Peter says that this “bruise” [or stripe] was the basis for our healing. “Stripes,” therefore, cannot mean the beatings from the Roman guards because Jesus had to go to the cross in order to bear our sins. He couldn’t have stopped in the middle of the beatings and say, “Whoa, that’s it. You met the sin threshold and now everyone can be redeemed. Catcha later.”
The better way to render 1 Peter 2.24 is to keep it in the same context as Isaiah, the original author (seer) of the phrase. In Isaiah 53, Isaiah writes of the suffering servant and his context is plainly in the realm of the spirit. In other words, when Isaiah penned chapter 53, he saw the spiritual background of the crucifixion. That is how he could write such things as “he was bruised for our iniquities” and “the chastisement of our peace was upon him.” Peter, writing centuries later, also keeps it in the spiritual realm by referring to Jesus taking our sins into his body on the cross. Consequently, we should read “bruise” as the spiritual bruise that Jesus bore, dying apart from the Father (see our articles on Hebrews 2.9) in order to redeem us.
Of course, there are those who will read this and say, “Aha! See 1 Peter 2.24 was never about healing at all. It is all about sin.” To that I’d say, not so fast. Matthew 8.17 also quotes Isaiah 53.5 and puts it squarely in the realm of physical healing. If you see that sickness and disease derive from spiritual roots, it is not difficult to see that 1 Peter 2.24 includes physical healing.
[Note: For those interested in the Greeksters’ definition of “stripe,” here are some lexicon definitions:
BDAG: welt, wale, bruise, wound caused by blows
Louw & Nida: the condition resulting from being severely hurt or wounded
As you can see from the Louw & Nida definition, “stripe” is better thought of a passive condition as a result of some violence rather than the act of violence itself.
{ 0 comments… add one now }