1 PETER 2:21–25

“BY WHOSE STRIPES YE WERE HEALED”

21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:

22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:

24 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.

25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

— 1 Peter 2:21–25, KJV

Peter has been talking about Christians who suffer wrongfully.

Now he tells them to look at Jesus.

But Peter does something very important.

He describes Christ's suffering in two different ways.

First, Christ's suffering is an example:

“leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps.”

But then Peter goes much further:

“Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree…”

Christ did something we are supposed to imitate.

But Christ also did something we could never do.

He suffered as our example.

He also bore our sins.

Those two truths must not be confused.

“FOR EVEN HEREUNTO WERE YE CALLED”

Peter says:

“For even hereunto were ye called…”

What is the “hereunto”?

The previous verse tells us:

“when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently…”

Peter is not saying Christians are called to seek suffering.

He is saying that faithfulness to Christ may bring suffering even when we have done nothing wrong.

When that happens, Christians should not be surprised.

Their Lord walked that road before them.

CHRISTIANITY DOES NOT PROMISE A TROUBLE-FREE LIFE

This theme runs throughout 1 Peter.

Peter never tells these believers:

If your faith is strong enough, suffering will disappear.

Instead he prepares them for suffering.

That does not mean suffering is good in itself.

Remember, Peter has just called some suffering:

“wrongfully.”

The good thing is not the injustice.

The good thing is remaining faithful to God in spite of the injustice.

“CHRIST ALSO SUFFERED FOR US”

Peter immediately points to Jesus:

“because Christ also suffered for us…”

The phrase “for us” already suggests that Christ's suffering involved more than setting an example.

His suffering was for others.

Peter will explain that more fully in verse 24.

But first he emphasizes the example.

“LEAVING US AN EXAMPLE”

The Greek word translated “example” is hypogrammos.

It was used for something written or drawn as a pattern for another person to copy.

We might think of a child learning handwriting by tracing letters.

Christ has left a pattern.

Peter says:

“that ye should follow his steps.”

The Christian does not merely admire Jesus.

The Christian follows Jesus.

And here Peter is particularly concerned with following Jesus when treated unjustly.

WHAT PART OF JESUS' EXAMPLE?

Peter does not leave us guessing.

He gives us three things.

Jesus:

did not sin,

did not answer abuse with abuse,

and entrusted Himself to the righteous Judge.

That is the pattern Peter wants suffering Christians to follow.

“WHO DID NO SIN”

Peter says:

“Who did no sin…”

Now Peter is drawing directly from Isaiah 53.

Isaiah wrote:

“because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.”
— Isaiah 53:9, KJV

Peter applies Isaiah's suffering Servant language to Jesus.

The innocence of Jesus matters.

Jesus was not suffering because He had done evil.

He was the supreme example of the distinction Peter just made:

suffering for wrongdoing

versus

suffering while doing good.

Jesus belonged entirely to the second category.

“NEITHER WAS GUILE FOUND IN HIS MOUTH”

Again:

“neither was guile found in his mouth.”

Remember that word guile?

Peter used it in 2:1:

“laying aside…all guile…”

Now he points to Christ:

“neither was guile found in his mouth.”

Peter's ethical teaching is Christ-centered.

Why should Christians put away deceit?

Because they are following the One in whose mouth no deceit was found.

Christian behavior is not merely compliance with rules.

It is becoming increasingly like Christ.

“WHEN HE WAS REVILED”

Peter continues:

“Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again…”

Jesus was mocked.

Insulted.

Falsely accused.

Humiliated.

Yet He did not answer insult with insult.

That does not mean Jesus never confronted wrongdoing.

He certainly did.

He openly rebuked hypocrisy.

He challenged religious leaders.

He spoke truth to authorities.

So “reviled not again” cannot mean:

Jesus never said anything critical about anyone.

It means He did not retaliate with abusive speech.

That distinction matters.

TRUTHFUL CONFRONTATION IS NOT REVENGE

Sometimes Christians confuse these things.

Peter does not forbid telling the truth about wrongdoing.

He forbids responding to evil by becoming evil ourselves.

There is a difference between:

“What you are doing is wrong.”

and:

“You hurt me, so now I will hurt you.”

Jesus did the first.

He refused the second.

“WHEN HE SUFFERED, HE THREATENED NOT”

Jesus had power.

That makes this even more remarkable.

He could have threatened His enemies with destruction.

At His arrest He said:

“Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?”
— Matthew 26:53, KJV

Jesus' refusal to retaliate was not helplessness.

It was restraint.

He could have acted.

He chose another path.

WHAT DID JESUS DO INSTEAD?

Peter says:

“but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously.”

The KJV supplies “himself.” The Greek expression conveys the idea that Jesus kept entrusting the matter to the One who judges justly.

Jesus did not need to personally avenge Himself because He trusted the Father's judgment.

That is the foundation of Christian non-retaliation.

It is not:

Wrongdoing doesn't matter.

It is:

Wrongdoing matters enough that I can leave final judgment with the perfectly righteous Judge.

THIS IS NOT THE DENIAL OF JUSTICE

Peter is not saying justice is unimportant.

Quite the opposite.

Jesus entrusted Himself to:

“him that judgeth righteously.”

There will be judgment.

The difference is that Jesus did not seize personal vengeance.

This distinction helps us understand later New Testament teaching:

“Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”
— Romans 12:19, KJV

Refusing personal revenge does not mean declaring evil innocent.

It means leaving ultimate judgment to God.

THEN PETER MOVES BEYOND EXAMPLE

If Peter stopped at verse 23, we might conclude:

The meaning of the cross is that Jesus showed us how to suffer nobly.

But Peter does not stop there.

Verse 24 changes the discussion:

“Who his own self bare our sins…”

Now Jesus is doing something no Christian can imitate.

I cannot bear your sins in the sense Peter means here.

You cannot bear mine.

Christ's death is not merely an example.

It is for us.

“WHO HIS OWN SELF”

The wording is emphatic:

“Who his own self…”

Christ personally bore our sins.

Peter is emphasizing the One who acted.

The rejected Stone.

The suffering Servant.

The sinless Christ.

He Himself bore our sins.

“BARE OUR SINS”

Again Peter is drawing from Isaiah 53.

Isaiah says:

“Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows…”
— Isaiah 53:4, KJV

And:

“the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.”
— Isaiah 53:6, KJV

And:

“he shall bear their iniquities.”
— Isaiah 53:11, KJV

And:

“he bare the sin of many…”
— Isaiah 53:12, KJV

Peter sees these words fulfilled in Jesus.

Christ's suffering was not merely an unfortunate death.

It was connected with our sins.

WHAT DOES “BORE OUR SINS” MEAN?

Peter's language clearly presents Christ acting on behalf of sinners and dealing with their sins through His death.

Different theological traditions have developed detailed explanations of atonement:

substitution,

sacrifice,

victory,

reconciliation,

ransom,

and other biblical themes.

Those themes deserve study.

But we should begin with Peter's words.

Christ:

“bare our sins in his own body on the tree.”

Whatever complete theology of the atonement we construct must preserve that statement.

Our sins are not merely an example of something Jesus opposed.

They are something He bore.

“IN HIS OWN BODY”

Peter makes the suffering physical and historical:

“in his own body…”

Christian salvation is not based upon an abstract spiritual idea.

Jesus suffered bodily.

He died bodily.

And Peter has already grounded Christian hope in His resurrection.

The body matters in the Christian story.

“ON THE TREE”

Why does Peter call the cross a tree?

The Greek word xylon can mean wood, tree, or something made of wood.

Peter himself used this language in Acts:

“The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.”
— Acts 5:30, KJV

And again:

“whom they slew and hanged on a tree.”
— Acts 10:39, KJV

The expression likely carries an echo of Deuteronomy 21:22–23, where one hanged on a tree is associated with a curse.

Paul makes that connection explicit:

“Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us…”
— Galatians 3:13, KJV

Peter does not explicitly explain the Deuteronomy connection here, so we should not put Paul's whole argument into Peter's mouth.

But “tree” is clearly established apostolic language for Christ's crucifixion.

WHY DID CHRIST BEAR OUR SINS?

Peter tells us.

Not merely so that we could be forgiven and then continue unchanged.

He says:

“that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness…”

The cross has an ethical purpose.

Christ saves us from sin so that we can live differently.

Grace is not permission to continue serving the thing from which Christ came to rescue us.

“BEING DEAD TO SINS”

The expression is unusual and strong.

The idea is separation from the old allegiance to sin.

Compare Paul's language:

“How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?”
— Romans 6:2, KJV

Peter and Paul express the point somewhat differently, but the direction is the same.

Christ's saving work changes the believer's relationship with sin.

“LIVE UNTO RIGHTEOUSNESS”

Christianity is not merely:

Stop doing bad things.

It is:

Begin living for what is right.

Peter's pattern is repeatedly:

FROM something

and

TO something.

From darkness → light.

From not God's people → God's people.

From no mercy → mercy.

From sinful desires → holiness.

From sins → righteousness.

Salvation changes direction.

“BY WHOSE STRIPES YE WERE HEALED”

Now we reach the famous phrase:

“by whose stripes ye were healed.”

The KJV's “stripes” refers to wounds produced by beating.

Peter again quotes Isaiah 53:

“and with his stripes we are healed.”
— Isaiah 53:5, KJV

But what kind of healing does Peter mean?

This verse is sometimes quoted as a promise that Christ's death guarantees physical healing from disease.

We need to examine Peter's own context.

LOOK AT THE SENTENCE AROUND IT

Immediately before:

“bare our sins…”

Then:

“being dead to sins…”

Then:

“live unto righteousness…”

Then:

“by whose stripes ye were healed.”

Immediately afterward:

“For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned…”

Everything surrounding the healing statement concerns:

sin,

righteousness,

straying,

and returning to God.

That strongly indicates Peter's primary meaning is spiritual restoration from sin.

ISAIAH'S CONTEXT POINTS THE SAME WAY

Isaiah 53 says:

“he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities…”
— Isaiah 53:5, KJV

The wounds are connected with:

transgressions

and

iniquities.

Then Isaiah says:

“All we like sheep have gone astray…”
— Isaiah 53:6, KJV

Peter uses precisely that sheep language in his next verse.

So Peter appears to be reading Isaiah's healing in the context of restoration from the damage and guilt of sin.

DOES GOD STILL PHYSICALLY HEAL?

Certainly the Bible records physical healing.

Christ healed the sick.

The apostles healed the sick.

Christians may pray for the sick.

God remains able to heal.

But that is a different question from whether 1 Peter 2:24 promises that every faithful Christian is guaranteed physical healing because of the atonement.

Peter's immediate explanation points toward healing from sin and estrangement from God.

We should not make the verse promise something Peter is not discussing.

“FOR YE WERE AS SHEEP GOING ASTRAY”

Again Isaiah 53:

“All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way…”
— Isaiah 53:6, KJV

Peter says:

“For ye were as sheep going astray…”

That little word “For” is important.

It explains the healing.

How were they sick?

They were straying sheep.

What did healing look like?

They:

“are now returned…”

That is powerful evidence for understanding verse 24.

“BUT ARE NOW RETURNED”

Again Peter contrasts:

THEN

and

NOW.

They were wandering.

Now they have returned.

The gospel is not merely:

God has changed your legal status while everything else remains the same.

God has brought wandering sheep home.

WHO BROUGHT THEM BACK?

Peter says they:

“are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.”

The passive wording can naturally carry the sense of having been brought back or turned back.

Again we see God's saving work and human response together.

The sheep who wandered have come home to their Shepherd.

“THE SHEPHERD”

Jesus is now:

“the Shepherd…”

That image has enormous biblical background.

Psalm 23 begins:

“The LORD is my shepherd…”

Ezekiel 34 condemns Israel's corrupt shepherds and promises that God Himself will seek His scattered sheep.

It also promises God's servant David as shepherd.

Jesus brings those themes together when He says:

“I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.”
— John 10:11, KJV

Peter had heard Jesus say those words.

Now Peter calls Christ:

“the Shepherd…”

And later:

“the chief Shepherd.”
— 1 Peter 5:4, KJV

“AND BISHOP OF YOUR SOULS”

This is particularly interesting.

The KJV says:

“Bishop of your souls.”

The Greek word is episkopos.

It means overseer.

This is the same family of terminology later used for church overseers.

So before Peter talks about human shepherds and overseers in chapter 5, he identifies the ultimate Shepherd and Overseer:

Jesus Christ.

Every human church leader serves under Him.

No elder.

No bishop.

No preacher.

No apostle.

No later church official.

owns the flock.

Christ does.

“BISHOP” DID NOT ORIGINALLY MEAN A HIGH CHURCH RANK

This is worth noticing.

When modern readers hear bishop, they may picture a particular position within a later hierarchical church structure.

But Peter uses episkopos here simply for the One who watches over and cares for the sheep.

The basic meaning is overseer.

Later church history developed more elaborate distinctions among offices.

But we should not read those later structures backward into Peter's vocabulary.

Here the supreme Overseer is Christ.

ISAIAH 53 RUNS THROUGH THE WHOLE PASSAGE

Look at the connections:

ISAIAH 53:9

No deceit in His mouth.

1 PETER 2:22

“neither was guile found in his mouth.”

ISAIAH 53:7

The Servant suffers without retaliating.

1 PETER 2:23

“when he was reviled, reviled not again.”

ISAIAH 53:11–12

The Servant bears sins.

1 PETER 2:24

“bare our sins…”

ISAIAH 53:5

By His wounds we are healed.

1 PETER 2:24

“by whose stripes ye were healed.”

ISAIAH 53:6

Sheep have gone astray.

1 PETER 2:25

“ye were as sheep going astray.”

Peter is not borrowing one isolated phrase from Isaiah.

He is reading Jesus' suffering through the whole pattern of Isaiah's suffering Servant.

SOMETHING PETER ONCE DID NOT UNDERSTAND

There is something especially powerful about Peter writing this.

When Jesus first told the disciples that He must suffer and die, Peter objected.

Jesus had said:

“that the Son of man must suffer many things…and be killed…”
— Mark 8:31, KJV

Peter took Him aside and rebuked Him.

Peter believed Jesus was the Messiah.

But he did not yet understand a suffering Messiah.

Now, years later, Peter writes:

“Christ also suffered for us…”

and explains Christ's death through Isaiah 53.

Peter eventually saw what he could not see clearly at Caesarea Philippi.

The Messiah's suffering was not an interruption of God's plan.

It was part of the plan.

CHRIST IS BOTH EXAMPLE AND SAVIOR

We should hold both truths together.

CHRIST IS OUR EXAMPLE

“follow his steps.”

When mistreated:

do not sin,

do not retaliate,

do not threaten,

trust God's judgment.

CHRIST IS OUR SIN-BEARER

“Who his own self bare our sins…”

We cannot imitate that.

Christ did for us what we could not do for ourselves.

If we emphasize only the example, we reduce the cross to moral instruction.

If we emphasize only sin-bearing while ignoring the example, we miss Peter's immediate application.

Peter gives us both.

THE CROSS CHANGES HOW WE TREAT OUR ENEMIES

This entire section began with people suffering unjustly.

Peter does not answer injustice by saying:

Become stronger than your enemy and make him suffer.

He points to the cross.

Jesus suffered without becoming sinful.

He confronted evil without imitating evil.

He refused personal revenge.

He trusted the righteous Judge.

That becomes Peter's model for Christians living in a hostile world.

BUT AGAIN—THIS DOES NOT MEAN PROTECTING ABUSERS

Nothing here requires Christians to conceal crimes.

Nothing requires us to leave vulnerable people in danger.

Nothing says reporting wrongdoing is revenge.

Nothing says seeking lawful protection demonstrates lack of faith.

Peter's subject is personal retaliation and faithfulness under unjust suffering.

We should not turn Christ's refusal to retaliate into a rule requiring victims to make continued wrongdoing easier.

That would go beyond Peter's words.

TEXT BEFORE TRADITION

This passage has been used to support several different ideas.

Some have emphasized Jesus merely as a moral example.

But Peter says:

“bare our sins.”

Others have quoted:

“by whose stripes ye were healed”

as though Peter promised physical healing to every Christian.

But Peter explains the healing in terms of:

sin, righteousness, straying, and returning to the Shepherd.

Still others have used Jesus' non-retaliation to tell suffering people that they must never seek protection.

Peter does not say that either.

So we should let the whole paragraph speak.

Jesus suffered unjustly.

Jesus did not retaliate sinfully.

Jesus trusted God's righteous judgment.

Jesus bore our sins.

His wounds brought healing from our sinful wandering.

And the wandering sheep have returned to their Shepherd.

That is Peter's argument.

QUESTIONS WORTH THINKING ABOUT

1. In what sense is Christ's suffering an example we are supposed to follow?

2. What did Christ do in His suffering that we cannot imitate?

3. What is the difference between confronting wrongdoing and reviling again?

4. Why could Jesus refuse personal revenge while still taking evil seriously?

5. What does Peter mean when he says Christ “bare our sins”?

6. Why does Peter emphasize that Christ bore our sins “in his own body”?

7. What purpose does Peter give for Christ's sin-bearing? What does “live unto righteousness” add to our understanding of salvation?

8. Does the context of “by whose stripes ye were healed” point primarily to physical disease or to healing from sin and estrangement from God?

9. How does verse 25 help answer that question?

10. What does it mean for Jesus to be both Shepherd and Overseer of His people?

11. How much of Peter's understanding here comes directly from Isaiah 53?

12. How might Peter's own earlier rejection of the idea of a suffering Messiah make these words especially meaningful?

NEXT DEEPER STUDY

1 PETER 3:1–6 — “WIVES, BE IN SUBJECTION TO YOUR OWN HUSBANDS”

This is another passage that requires careful reading rather than either avoiding it or using it as a weapon.

Peter specifically speaks about wives whose husbands:

“obey not the word.”

He says such husbands may be:

“won without the word by the conversation of the wives.”

What does “without the word” mean? Does Peter forbid a wife from speaking about Christ?

What does submission mean—and what does it not mean?

Why does Peter point to Sarah and Abraham?

And when he praises a “meek and quiet spirit,” is he telling women to remain silent, or describing something deeper about Christian character?

Those questions need to be answered from Peter's actual argument.

Return to HOME page

Return to PETER page