Working on a new book, I again had to reach for 1 Peter 2:24. This is the famous passage that reads (in the KJV):
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,
If you've ever been in Pentecostal healing meetings you've probably heard the preachers speak about the stripes of Jesus as the foundation for divine healing. You really can't fault them for saying so because stripes or wounds is how the verse translated in virtually all of the popular translations.
He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, so that, free from sins, we might live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. (NRSV)
He personally carried our sins in his body on the cross so that we can be dead to sin and live for what is right. By his wounds you are healed. (NLT)
He himself bore our sins in his body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; "by his wounds you have been healed." (NIV)
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)
But when you look up stripes or wounds in the Greek you find that the word isn't plural. It is singular (τω μωλωπι, to molopi). The NET Bible notes show this.
The NRSV does too, in the margin.
This changes the context completely, doesn't it? Peter, instead of associating Pilate's scourging with our healing, writes that our healing stems from the bruise Jesus sustained after he had offered himself on the cross. That bruise could only be spiritual.
This might explain why the translations all have used wounds or stripes. Contemporary theology isn't too fond of the idea that "he made him sin" actually means what it says.