Author: Charlie Garrett

Sunday, 10 November 2019

Do not let your adornment be merely outward—arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel— 1 Peter 3:3

The words of Peter here are completely in line with those of Paul which are found in 1 Timothy 2:9 –

“…in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing.”

The word Peter uses for “adornment” is kosmos. It signifies an ordered system. It is used at times to speak of the world, the universe, the people of the world, and etc. With this understood, Peter’s words can more effectively be understood.

He is saying that there is to be a character about the Christian woman which should not be “outward.” The NKJV supplied the word “merely.” The reason for this is that the “ordered system” of a woman isn’t to be based on externals. But this is exactly what the world is caught up in. This is so much the case that sometimes this is all one sees of her. There is nothing internally beautiful to back up the external facade which is seen by all.

In order to ensure that the true, godly character of the woman is seen, Peter says for women to “not let your adornment be merely outward.” It is a way of saying, “Have substance in and of yourself. Don’t just be a false presentation of who you are.” Then, in order to explain his intent, he notes several things to avoid. In doing so, he uses words only found here in Scripture. The first case is “arranging the hair.”

Peter uses the word emploké, meaning an elaborate braiding of the hair. If a woman is trusting in her hair to be the fullest expression of who she is, she is trusting in that which is vain, ostentatious, and vapid. The old saying, “It’s lipstick on a pig,” may be true. Without being able to discern the nature of the woman apart from her hair, there is nothing to really rely on in a meaningful way.

Next, he says, “wearing.” It is another unique word, perithesis. It signifies, “a putting all around.” In having gold on every extremity, and all around the face and neck, that is what the eyes will be directed to. The heart may be pure or wicked, the woman may be a saint or a harlot, but who can tell? Unless the person is known for who she is, the gold is a distraction which hides the truth. Like whitewash on a fence which is corroded and ready to fall down, and which has its true nature hidden, so the gold hides what is most important for others to see.

Peter then says, “or putting on fine apparel.” Again, a third unique word is seen endusis, translated as “putting on.” Further, the NKJV supplies the word “fine.” Vincent’s Word Studies states of this, “Female extravagance in dress in the days of the empire reached an alarming pitch.” In an attempt to compete with others in outward beauty, the inner nature of the woman is covered over and indiscernible. Such should not be the case.

Peter will explain what should rather be the case as he continues in the verses ahead.

Life application: This and similar verses have led to some interesting fashions for Christian women – entire denominations clad in matching dresses and bland appearance. However, it is not good to “pick and choose” intent from a verse simply because it meets someone’s personal preference. Rather, the Bible needs to interpret itself and where there is no comparable thought, wisdom is needed to know what’s being intimated.

As noted above, the NKJV supplies the words “merely” and “fine,” which are not in the original. The reason they do this is because:

1) Elsewhere in Scripture women wear fine apparel and have other outward adornments, thus highlighting their beauty.

2) Nowhere in Scripture is outward adornment to highlight beauty forbidden – in fact, it is often noted with approval.

Great biblical women of faith have adorned themselves with finery; in the Song of Solomon, the beauty and adornments of Solomon’s wife are highlighted, including gold and silver. The exemplary wife of noble character mentioned in Proverbs 31 is robed in “fine linen and purple.” Because of these, the NKJV has rightly inserted “merely” and “fine.” A woman’s beauty should not be “merely” noticed because of her externals.

Lord, no matter what we wear and no matter how we adorn ourselves, we have no true beauty apart from You. But through Jesus, we are radiant and beautiful. Whether we adorn ourselves in fine things or not, may we bring glory to You because of the inward beauty You give us through Jesus. Thank You for Jesus who brings forth the true beauty of who we are! Amen.

Saturday, 9 November 2019

…when they observe your chaste conduct accompanied by fear. 1 Peter 3:2

Peter continues with his reason why women are to be submissive to their husbands, even if they are non-believers. And so he says, “when they observe.”

The word translated as “observe” was introduced in 1 Peter 2:12. Peter now uses it again for the last time in Scripture. It signifies to look upon or behold. In both instances, observation of the believer leads to a noticeable change in the beholder –

“…having your conduct honorable among the Gentiles, that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may, by your good works which they observe, glorify God in the day of visitation.”

&

“Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, ² when they observe your chaste conduct accompanied by fear.”

Like the non-believing Gentiles who are set to glorify God because of the conduct of believers, even when spoken of as evildoers, so non-believing husbands can be greatly affected by the conduct of their wives which they observe. It is conduct which Peter next describes as “chaste.”

The word signifies pure to the core, unadulterated, uncontaminated, and without any spoil – even to the center of one’s being. There is no mixture of anything impure or worthy of rebuke or condemnation. It is a word used of that which is sacred, holy, and free from ceremonial defilement, as in an offering. Imagine a husband with such a wife. He could never find an accusation against her, and thus his heart would hopefully be pricked each time he considered her ways, knowing it was because of her faith in Christ.

Peter then says that this chaste conduct is to be “accompanied by fear.” The Greek literally reads, “in fear.” There are several possible intents for Peter saying this. The first would be out of reverent fear of God, as it is used elsewhere. Because this has been determined by the Lord, even since the fall of man, it is her duty to act this way in awed fear of the Lord.

The second is out of respect for her husband, fearing that anything less would be improper due to his authority over her, and thus damaging the relationship which exists between them.

And the third would be a fear of the consequences of failing to show proper respect, which would be to further alienate him from a relationship with the Lord. As a believer, her highest duty is to the Lord. Therefore, her duty to her husband is to win him to the Lord. Should she not act with a proper fear of the Lord, of her husband, or towards the gospel, the chances of his salvation would be greatly diminished.

Life application: It should be the great hope of all believers that their conduct would be such that those who observe it will want to know who this wonderful Lord is that the believers would be such fine examples of honorable character.

If you come to Christ and then act in a manner which is in line with the gospel, regardless of how you are treated, others cannot help but notice. Therefore, let your respect for the Lord be of the highest and most exalted manner possible. Let the people of the Lord proclaim His surpassing greatness and be ever mindful of His mercies upon us. By having this attitude, may others see our testimony and our faithful walk and be won over, even without words.

Lord, before we knew You, we lived as those who had no respect or fear for You. Our lips failed to praise You and, in fact, we spoke Your name in inappropriate ways. Now we know You, now we fear You, and now we love You. Give us the desire and ability to always exalt You so that others will see and fear You as well. In all things, may You be glorified through our lives. Amen.

Friday, 8 November 2019

Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, 1 Peter 3:1

Peter has been talking about the patience in suffering and obedience of Christ Jesus for the past eight verses, explaining to servants that they should act in a similar manner. Here, he now says that wives should be likewise submissive to their husbands. He has gone from general thoughts to believers, to an exhortation to “servants,” using a word which indicates a household servant, but which may possibly imply all believers as servants in God’s household (the words which followed in verses 2:18-25 certainly point to something all believers should practice), and now he specifies “wives.”

His words here are in perfect accord with the words of Paul in Ephesians 5:24 –

“Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.”

In that same vein, Peter says to the wives that they are to “be submissive to your own husbands.” The word translated as submissive signifies to place oneself under the ranking authority of another. It is the same word directed to all believers in verse 2:13, and to the “servants” in 2:18. Wives are to be under obedience to the authority of their husband. This is the hierarchy established at the very beginning. At the fall, the words were pronounced by the Lord –

 “To the woman He said:

‘I will greatly multiply your sorrow and your conception;
In pain you shall bring forth children;
Your desire shall be for your husband,
And he shall rule over you.’” Genesis 3:16

This is the divinely established order which is reflected in Scripture and throughout Scripture. It is spoken of by Paul in great detail. Peter gives further elaboration by saying, “that even if some do not obey the word.” The word “obey” carries with it the idea of belief. There is a conscious disbelief of the word, and this leads to not obeying its precepts. The assumption is that these are not believers.

Some have tried to align the word “obey” with the Jews only, meaning that Peter’s words here are directed to only Jewish women who believe, and who are married to unbelieving Jews. This is without merit. Paul says to Gentiles in Romans 11, and using the same word twice –

“For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, ³¹ even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. ³² For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.” Romans 11:30-32

Paul also uses the same word in Romans 2:8 when speaking of both Jew and Gentile. The word simply means that these people are disobedient to the gospel through disbelief, whether Jew or Gentile. In Peter’s case, he is addressing Jewish believers, but the distinction is made because he is the Apostle to the Jews, not in the presentation of a variant gospel, but as an ethnic calling.

Understanding this, Peter continues with, “they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives.” Peter uses the same word for “win” that Paul uses five times in 1 Corinthians 9:19-21 when speaking of winning others to Christ through his own serving and submission to others.

For Peter’s words now, this again speaks of the husbands. The conduct of the wife itself is to be submissive and Christ-centered so that their actions alone, even without saying another word concerning the gospel, which the husbands have not believed, will win them over. It is the submission of the wife, because of Christ, which is expected to bring about the conversion. The message has been heard and understood, and to nag about it to the husband will only drive him further away. Therefore, to live out the message as a submissive wife is the expected remedy to the matter.

This takes the reader right back to the end of Chapter 2 where Christ submitted Himself to the righteous judgment set before Him. The time for His ministry of words had ended, and the time for His silent submission had come. This is the thought Peter is conveying to the wife. As Solomon says –

“A time to keep silence,
And a time to speak.” Ecclesiastes 3:7

Peter’s words here have come under attack as authoritative for modern believing women. As an example, Charles Ellicott says –

“Whether this imposes for all time upon Christian wives as complete a submission towards their husbands as is here enjoined might perhaps be questioned, because the special reason for the command in this place was to allay suspicions engendered by the boldness with which Christianity proclaimed the freedom of the individual. St. Peter has just been giving injunctions for absolute submission, even to injustice, on the part of slaves; and the progress of Christianity has abolished slavery altogether. The measure of the Christian wife’s submission may safely be left to her own enlightened conscience, guided by other passages of the New Testament not written, like this, for a special emergency.”

Ellicott’s words are without merit and, in fact, contain several falsehoods. Slavery has not been abolished. It is an ongoing part of the world, even if it was abolished in his nation by Christians. It is also true that all Christians are slaves to righteousness and slaves to God (Romans 6:18-22). Secondly, the submission of the wife is not “left to her own enlightened conscience.” It was ordained by God at the beginning. Peter will cite the submission of Sarah to her husband in a few verses, and Paul continues with the thought in his epistle. The submission of the wife is never “left to her own enlightened conscience” in Scripture.

Further, if the words of Paul and Peter are not prescriptive, then they would not be included in the epistles which govern relations within the body of believers. It is not up to individuals to determine which verses of the church age epistles apply to the church and which do not. Peter’s words are in accord with Paul’s, and they are prescriptive. It is not a right of Christians to shop for their doctrine, but they are to accept the word, which is clear and without ambiguity, as it is written, and they are to comply with it.

Life application: Rather than putting women down, as has so often been proclaimed by liberal theologians and female activists, this verse is actually placing them in a high and exalted position. No one, no matter how bad their theology on Jesus may be, diminishes the high position God places on servanthood and servant leadership. In fact, it is one of the greatest aspects of Jesus’ earthly ministry.

But suddenly the attitude is changed when the role of women is mentioned. It is as if they are saying, “How dare those chauvinistic apostles tell women to be submissive to their husbands?” Peter and Paul, in particular, are treated as if they are women abusers and that they should be dismissed because of their culturally biased attitude towards women. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

As just noted, servants are to be examples to their masters for several reasons –

1) That the name of Jesus won’t be brought into disgrace;

2) That unbelievers will see their behavior and possibly come to be saved by it;

3) That the order of things, which has been established by God, will be maintained – something beneficial to all.

Peter says the same concepts that apply in other hierarchies also apply in familial relationships. To fight against what has been ordained by God in the family structure is no different than fighting against His will for us in the larger society. Don’t ever feel women are being given anything but a high and exalted position in the workings of God. What He has ordained is proper, fitting, and honoring to each – male and female alike.

Heavenly Father, help us to fully appreciate the glorious role that Jesus filled as both a Servant of God and as the Head of the church. Help us likewise to fulfill the role ordained for each of us – as men and women of God, chosen for Your glorious purposes. May we do as You would have us do and thus bring glory to You in the sight of all. Amen.

Thursday, 7 November 2019

For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls. 1 Peter 2:25

There is a necessary correction in the intent of Peter’s words to get the proper sense of what he is saying. Charles Ellicott explains –

“The right reading does not attach ‘going astray’ to ‘sheep,’ but as predicate of the sentence, ‘ye were going astray like sheep.’ The ‘for’ introduces an explanation of how they came to be in need of ‘healing.’”

In this, the verb connected to the present participle denotes habitual action. It is a state of constant going astray. Peter here is continuing to cite Isaiah 53. What he cites is only a part of Isaiah 53:6, which says –

“All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.”

The idea of going astray like a sheep is also found in Psalm 119:175, Jeremiah 50:6, and in Jesus’ parable in Matthew 12:10-14. The idea then is one which would have been fully understood by all of Israel, whether they acknowledged it personally or not. Peter has just noted that it was by the stripes of Christ that these believers had been healed. The “For” which begins this verse is tied to that.

The necessarily healing which came about is shown, definitively, to not be a physical healing, but a spiritual one with Peter’s continued words. All of Israel (Peter is specifically speaking to the Jewish people) had gone astray, just as the Gentiles of the world had. They were in as much need of this spiritual reconnection to God as anyone else. They had constantly wandered from God, as is evidenced by the entire body of Scripture from the moment they left Egypt, even to Peter’s present time (and which continues in Israel to this day).

It is in this state of going astray that Peter then compares them to sheep. Sheep need a constant watch over them, or they will simply wander. This is what happened to Israel. Being like sheep, and without proper overseers, they constantly wandered into the wilderness of spiritual apostasy. However, with the coming of Christ, Peter provides the good news for those who recognized Him for who He is. He says, “but have now returned.”

The verb is passive, and is more correctly translated, “but are now returned.” There was a specific point in time that the event occurred. It is when they received Christ, believing the gospel message. At that time, Christ returned them to Himself. The word “returned” does not imply that they individually had ever been under his care and were brought back to it. Rather, it speaks of the state of man in general. Man had belonged to the Lord, he turned from God, and now these individual humans were returned, they were converted, to that original reconnected state.

Peter then explains what this returning means with the words, “to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.” The idea of the Lord as the Shepherd of the sheep permeates Scripture. David speaks of the Lord being his Shepherd in the 23^rd Psalm. Ezekiel refers to this state several times. Jesus spoke of it as clearly as could be stated in John 10 –

“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. ¹² But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. ¹³ The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep. ¹⁴ I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. ¹⁵ As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. ¹⁶ And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.” John 10:11-16

The word translated as “Overseer” is only used here when speaking of Christ Jesus. The idea of shepherding, however, is connected to it in Acts 20 –

“Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.” Acts 20:28

The Lord appointed lesser overseers within the church, implying that He is the true and greater Overseer. The Greek word is a compound of epi, or “over,” and skopós, or “look intently.” It signifies one who keeps a close eye on his flock. In the case of Christ, He maintains a personal watch over His people, determining the perfect care and protection necessary for each of those who are His. It speaks not of their physical well being, but of their assured salvation. No matter where they are, He is always attentive to their state.

It would be ludicrous to consider that a person could become a part of the flock of God, and to end up lost again. It would not show an attentive overseer, but one lax in his duties. Who can ascribe such negligence to the Lord? Rather, the Lord is the perfect Shepherd and Overseer. Those who are His will never stray so far as to be lost again.

Life application: Peter says we “were like sheep going astray.” A sheep doesn’t intentionally leave the security of the shepherd. Instead, without thinking, they just keep eating grass and moving farther and farther away from him until they are lost.

This is the comparison God makes to us throughout the Bible. We don’t reason things out, but just amble along without a care or a thought. We are in a state of helplessness, and there is nothing we can do to correct it. We pursue sin like grass, and continue in it until we are so lost that it is what seems normal and proper, like eating grass is to a sheep. It takes the shepherd’s attention to bring the sheep back into the fold and likewise, it takes God’s attention to ensure we are brought back to Himself.

This is just what God has done through Jesus – hence the terminology of Him being the Good Shepherd, the Chief Shepherd, and the Great Shepherd, as well as Peter’s titles in this verse – the Shepherd and Overseer of our souls.

The entire context of the passage is speaking of our being lost in sin and separated from God. But God sent Jesus, the Shepherd and Overseer of our souls, to bring us back to Him. This then is the healing that Peter has referred to.

It is the reversal of the curse of death mentioned in the first pages of Genesis. When God said to Adam that he would die on the day he ate of the fruit, he was referring to this state of spiritual death and helplessness. But He also promised this would be corrected. Thanks be to God! It was in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus our Lord. By His stripes, we truly are healed.

What a marvelous and gracious Creator You are! We departed from You and became lost in sin and death. O! But You sent Jesus to find us and bring us back home again. What a wonderful story of deliverance and redemption! Thank You, O God, for Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Wednesday, 6 November 2019

…who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed. 1 Peter 2:24

In verse 2:22, Peter cited Isaiah 53:7. That came after having said that Christ suffered for us and in so doing He left an example for us. Isaiah’s words prophesied that Christ would commit no sin, nor would there be any deceit found in His mouth. Despite this, Peter relayed the fact that Christ did not turn and revile those who mistreated Him, but instead committed Himself to the One who judges righteously.

The key thought is that He had committed no sin, and yet he suffered. Now Peter explains why He allowed it to be so. In doing this he will cite Isaiah 53:5. Understanding this context is what will help us to avoid one of the greatest errors of the modern church. It is an error in doctrine which has actually led innumerable people into feelings of insecurity, or to the belief that they are not sound, faithful Christians.

Peter’s words of verse 2:24 begin with, “who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree.” It has just been stressed that Christ had no sin of His own, and yet He “bore our sins.” The word “bore” means to “offer up,” as if on a high altar, and thus as a sacrifice which is offered up to God on high. It is reflected in Christ’s bearing of the cross both to the place where He would be crucified, and bearing the cross as He was crucified. The entire process is an offering up to God on high.

In this is found the doctrine of substitution. In Israel, a person would lay his hands on the head of an innocent sacrificial animal, confess his sin over that animal, and then the animal would be slaughtered. The symbolism is that of transferring the sin to the animal who then died in place of the sinner. Christ bore our sins in this manner.

However, Hebrews 10:4 notes that “it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.” Thus, what was done in Israel was only typological, and it was in anticipation of the coming Christ who would fulfill the typology. It is Christ alone – sinless, and thus qualified to be considered “innocent” before God (thus fulfilling the typology) – who bore our sin “on the tree.”

The word “tree” is literally “the wood.” It is the same term used by Peter in Acts 5:30 and 10:39. Paul also uses it in Acts 13:29 and Galatians 3:13. God chose wood from a tree to be the mode of execution by which Christ would bear the sin of the world. Just as death came from a tree in the Garden of Eden, and just as the tree of life was withheld from man at that same time, the wood of Calvary became both the instrument of death for Christ and the instrument of life for those who would then look to Him.

Thus, the wood Peter speaks of is the fulfillment of those types. The cross of Calvary is also the place of transfer. On the cross where He died, the substitution is made, just as it was when the innocent animal died. The transfer that was anticipated, in the types and shadows of the Levitical law, is actually accomplished when one accepts Jesus as his Substitute. This then allows “that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness.”

The verb Peter uses, translated as “having died,” is found only here in Scripture. Transferring it to English is a difficult task which will only form a somewhat awkward translation. It signifies “to become from.” As Vincent’s Word Studies states it, “…having become off unto sin; not becoming separate from sins, but having ceased to exist as regards them.”

Christ died for our sins, and thus we have died to sins. The transfer is made, and the sin is forgiven. Once forgiven, a person is no longer a slave to what he was forgiven of. If a person is in prison and he serves his time, he is set free from prison. But even more, if a person is in prison, and the President pardons him, it is as if he never committed the crime. It can never be held against him again. If he is no longer bound by that crime, he is freed unto freedom.

Likewise, a person who is dead to sin is then freed unto righteousness. This is exactly what Paul speaks of in Romans 6. Consider what Peter has just said, and think on it as you read Paul’s words –

“For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, ⁶ knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. ⁷ For he who has died has been freed from sin. ⁸ Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, ⁹ knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. ¹⁰ For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. ¹¹ Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

¹² Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. ¹³ And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. ¹⁴ For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.” Romans 6:5-14

Paul then sums up this state of “become from” in regards to sins in Romans 6:18 by saying, “And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.”

Paul and Peter proclaim exactly the same gospel which produces exactly the same effects. They further speak of exactly the same obligation once that effect has been produced. And the reason for this obligation, that of living for righteousness, is that it is because of the work of Christ “by whose stripes you were healed.” This is where Peter cites a portion of Isaiah 53:5 –

“But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.”

The words, “by His stripes,” speak of the punishment of scourging that Christ suffered. Peter uses a singular noun, mólóps, found only here in Scripture. It signifies a body wound. In the case of Christ, it consisted of that which was received during His scourging.

He was punished for sins He did not commit, and then He was crucified in order to die, thus carrying away those sins for which He was punished. The verb Peter uses shows this as an accomplished fact. The healing is done, and it is imputed to the one who believes (the verb is also passive – the person simply believes, and the work of Christ is transferred to him). The write below understood the passion Peter must have felt as he wrote out his epistle to us –

“Such a sight we feel sure, as we read this descriptive passage, St. Peter’s eyes beheld on the body of his Master, and the flesh so dreadfully mangled made the disfigured form appear in his eyes like one single bruise” (Lumby).

The obvious question for all believers to consider is “healed of what?” What is it that Peter has spoken of? Is it healing from the sniffles? Is it healing from cancer? Is it healing from any body ailment at all? The answer is “No” to all of them. Peter has referred to sin, and only sin. The highly inappropriate nature of claiming physical healing based on the words of either Isaiah 53:5, or 1 Peter 2:24, is obvious.

The only healing that Peter speaks of is that of sin. Healing from the effects of sin, which is sickness, anxiety, trouble, and death itself, may come about through prayer and/or right living, or it may only come about when the believer is translated to glory. But claiming physical healing of any type based on the words here is not only poor doctrine, it is a false teaching which leads hopeful believers into sad paths of dejection and turmoil when they are not healed of the physical affliction they fervently desire to be healed of.

Life application: As noted, the context of what Peter is quoting – and what Isaiah was looking forward to – is spiritual healing, not physical healing. This is the healing provided by Jesus in these passages.

Because this verse is not at all implying physical healing, by quoting this over someone with a physical problem, and “claiming healing” because of it, can only lead to false expectations and weakened faith.

The amazing part of what is conveyed to us here is that God took our pain and our suffering, and placed it on His own precious Son. The precious healing we receive because of His cross is spiritual and it is eternal. We have new life because of the work of Jesus Christ. Praise God in the highest for what He has done for His wayward children.

Thank You, O Lord, for the wonderful blessing of Jesus and the healing He provides. Through Him and through His suffering, we are healed of our state of corruption and death, and we now have new life through Him. O, to be called a son of the Living God because of His terrible trials! May we never forget what transpired to restore us to You. Thank You for Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.