God’s Blood, Acts 20:28 & Textual Variants
In a remarkable verse found in the New Testament, the Apostle Paul exhorts the Ephesian elders, whom the Holy Spirit appointed, to shepherd the Church of God which God purchased by his own. blood:
“Be on guard for yourselves and for 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 Legacy Standard Bible (LSB)
According to this reading, Jesus is the God-Man who became incarnate and shed his blood in order to redeem a people to be his own possession. Paul says something similar in his epistle to his protégé Titus:
”as we wait for the happy fulfillment of our hope in the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. He gave himself for us to set us free from every kind of lawlessness and to purify for himself a people who are truly his, who are eager to do good.” Titus 2:13-14
In fact, Christ does what the Psalmist proclaims YHWH did in the past:
“A well-written song by Asaph. Why, O God, have you permanently rejected us? Why does your anger burn against the sheep of your pasture? Remember your people whom you acquired in ancient times, whom you rescued so they could be your very own nation, as well as Mount Zion, where you dwell.” Psalm 74:1-2
Not surprisingly, this verse has occasioned textual variations which are reflected in the various English versions of the Holy Bible:
“Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood.” American Standard Version (ASV)
“Take heed, therefore, to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the assembly of the Lord and God which he purchased with his own blood.” World English Bible (WEB)
“Take heed to yourselves and to the entire flocklet, among which the holy spirit appointed you supervisors, to be shepherding the ecclesia of God, which He procures through the blood of His Own." Concordant Literal Version (CLV)
“Watch out for yourselves and for all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son.” New English Translation (NET)
Here I will quote several authorities discussing the variants in order to show that, despite the fact that the evidence overwhelmingly points to the reading, “the Church of God, which He [God] purchased with his own blood,” as genuine, all the variations point in the same direction. They all affirm that Jesus Christ died in order to redeem believers from their bondage to sin and death.
Acts 20:28 tc The reading “of God” (τοῦ θεοῦ, tou theou) is found in א B 614 1175 1505 al vg sy; other witnesses have “of the Lord” (τοῦ κυρίου, tou kuriou) here (so P74 A C* D E Ψ 33 1739 al co), while the majority of the later minuscule mss conflate these two into “of the Lord and God” (τοῦ κυρίου καὶ [τοῦ] θεοῦ, tou kuriou kai [tou] theou). Although the evidence is evenly balanced between the first two readings, τοῦ θεοῦ is decidedly superior on internal grounds. The final prepositional phrase of this verse, διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου (dia tou haimatos tou idiou), could be rendered “through his own blood” or “through the blood of his own.” In the latter translation, the object that “own” modifies must be supplied (see tn below for discussion). But this would not be entirely clear to scribes; those who supposed that ἰδίου modified αἵματος would be prone to alter “God” to “Lord” to avoid the inference that God had blood. In a similar way, later scribes would be prone to conflate the two titles, thereby affirming the deity (with the construction τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ following the Granville Sharp rule and referring to a single person [see ExSyn 272, 276-77, 290]) and substitutionary atonement of Christ. For these reasons, τοῦ θεοῦ best explains the rise of the other readings and should be considered authentic.
Acts 20:28 tn Or “with his own blood”; Grk “with the blood of his own.” The genitive construction could be taken in two ways: (1) as an attributive genitive (second attributive position) meaning “his own blood”; or (2) as a possessive genitive, “with the blood of his own.” In this case the referent is the Son, and the referent has been specified in the translation for clarity. See further C. F. DeVine, “The Blood of God,” CBQ 9 (1947): 381-408.
sn That he obtained with the blood of his own Son. This is one of only two explicit statements in Luke-Acts highlighting the substitutionary nature of Christ’s death (the other is in Luke 22:19). (NET Bible)
Acts 20:28a
TR WH NU ten ekklesian tou theou
"the church of God"
א B syr
KJV NKJV RSV NRSV ESV NASB NTV TNTV NEBmg REBmg NJB NAB NLT HCSB NET
variant 1 ten ekklesian tou kyriou
"the church of the Lord"
P74 A C* D E Ψ 33 1739
variant 2 ten ekklesian tou kyriou kai tou theou
"the church of the Lord and God"
C 3 Maj
NKJVmg HCSBmg NETmg
See following note.
Acts 20:28b
WH NU en peripoiesato dia tou haimatos tou idiou
"which he [God] purchased with his own blood"
(or, "which he (God) purchased with the blood of his own (Son)")
P74 א A B C E 4 Ψ 33 1739 (P41vid D add heauto after peripoiesato)
RSV NRSV ESV NASB NIV TNIV NEBmg REBmg NJB NAB NLT HCSB NET
variant/TR en peripoiesato dia tou idiou haimatos
"which he purchased with his own blood"
Maj
KJV NKJV NEB REB NETmg
The WH NU reading for 20:28a has two arguments in its favor: (1) It is found in א and B, the two earliest extant manuscripts preserving this passage. (2) We can surmise that "God" was changed to "Lord" because the following clause speaks of the one who purchased the church with his own blood. Uncomfortable with the idea of God having blood, scribes changed "God" to "Lord." The first variant also has two arguments in its favor: (1) It is supported by a greater range of witnesses. (2) The expression "church of the Lord" appears nowhere else in the NT and therefore was subject to be changed to the more common title, "church of God" (used by Paul eleven times). Thus far, the evidence is inconclusive.
The dilemma is complicated further by the fact that the next clause appears in two ways in the manuscripts, the first of which can be interpreted in two ways. The expression tou haimatos tou idiou could simply mean "his own blood" and thereby refer to "the blood of the Lord" or "the blood of God," depending on which variant is selected. But the expression tou idiou ("his own") was also used in Greek papyri to mean "one's own child" (MM 298). God's Son, the one dear to him, is perhaps called here "his own"—as elsewhere he is called his "one and only" (see John 1:14,18; 3:16). Thus, the expression could mean "the blood of his own" (i.e., "the blood of his Son"—see ESVmg).
The textual evidence allows for several different renderings, as follows:
1. "take care of the church of God"
a. "which he (God) purchased with his own blood"
b. "which he (God) purchased with the blood of his own Son"
2. "take care of the church of the Lord"
a. "which he [the Lord) purchased with his own blood"
b. "which he [the Lord) purchased with the blood of his own Son"
Renderings la and lb have the support of א and B, and rendering 2a has the support of P74 A C D E 4 Ψ 33 1739. Rendering 2b is impossible since "the Lord" refers to Jesus. The rendering for la and for lb requires "God" to be the presumed subject, which, in turn, suggests that "church of God" would be in the text. This could very well be the original text and original meaning. As such, it suggests that Paul was assuming Jesus' deity in speaking of the shed blood as being God's (as in rendering la).
Rendering 2a also has much to commend it—not only from documentary attestation but also from the perspective that "the church of the Lord" is both the more natural reading in the immediate context and the more unusual reading in the NT record (see Tregelles 1854, 233). As such, exegetes and translators have recognized the viability of both readings (1 a/b, and 2a) and, while choosing one reading, have usually shown the alternate in a marginal reading. In the end, both readings are communicating the same essential message: The elders are to take care of the church as shepherds caring for their sheep because the church is God's possession, purchased by the blood of Jesus, God's Son. (Philip W. Comfort, New Testament Text and Translation Commentary: Commentary on the variant readings of the ancient New Testament manuscripts and how they relate to the major English translations [Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Carol Stream, Il, in 2008], pp. 415-417; emphasis mine)
God’s Own Blood (Acts 20:28)
Among New Testament references or apparent references to Jesus as God, Acts 20:28 is one of the most disputed. It comes at the high point of Paul’s farewell speech to the elders from the church of Ephesus with whom he met at Miletus (Acts 20:17–35). Consider the following two translations:
The church of God which He purchased with His own blood. (NASB)
The church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son. (NRSV)
Although most contemporary English versions render the last part of the verse in the same way as the NASB (ESV, NIV, NKJV, HCSB, and others), many scholars and commentators in recent decades have preferred the rendering found in the NRSV (and also in the REB).28 There is no doubt as to the reason for this preference: those who dispute the conventional translation find the language, which expresses the idea of God’s having “blood,” difficult if not impossible to entertain.
A little lesson in grammar is unavoidable in order to understand the problem with the NRSV interpretation. The disputed words usually translated “his own blood” but translated “the blood of his own Son” in the NRSV are tou haimatos tou idiou (word for word, “the blood, the his-own”). The word idiou (“his own”) is an adjective, which normally we would understand as modifying the noun haimatos (“blood”). The word order here, with the adjective following the noun with a second article between them, is perfectly normal and common in Greek.29 Another example of this construction appears in the very same verse: “the Holy Spirit” (to pneuma to hagion, word for word, “the Spirit, the Holy”). It was not until the latter half of the nineteenth century30 that anyone proposed that the words here in question did not mean “his own blood.”
The basis for the alternate translation “the blood of his own Son” is that Greek can also use adjectives as if they were nouns (the technical term is substantivally). Many modern scholars argue that tou idiou is such a substantival use of the adjective, and therefore means “of his Own,” comparable to the use of the adjective “the Beloved” (Eph. 1:6) as a kind of term of endearment for Christ.
This reinterpretation of the text is grammatically possible and difficult to disprove absolutely, but it is hardly the most natural understanding. As we mentioned, eighteen centuries went by before anyone came up with it.31 The New Testament nowhere else calls Jesus “his Own” (ho idios), nor was this term ever picked up in the early church as a designation for Jesus. The substantival use of ho idios (or any grammatical variation, such as ton idion) is, in fact, rare in the New Testament, and in the singular occurs only once—and even then not in reference to a specific person (John 15:19).32 On the other hand, ho idios functions as an adjective following the noun—just as in Acts 20:28—in several New Testament texts (John 1:41; 5:43; 7:18; Acts 1:25).
We are inclined to agree with Nigel Turner, a twentieth-century scholar of Greek grammar, who called the alternate translation of Acts 20:28 “a theological expedient, foisting imaginary distinctions into a spontaneous affirmation, and is not the natural way to take the Greek.”33 As Catholic scholar Charles DeVine commented sixty years ago, it is nothing more than an attempt “to avoid at all costs the full force of the expression ‘God’s own blood.’”34 (Robert M. Bowman Jr. & J. Ed Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in His Place: The Case for the Deity of Christ [Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI, 2007], Part 3: Name Above All Names: Jesus Shares the Names of God, 12. Immanuel: God with Us, pp. 144-146; emphasis mine)
28. Somewhat surprisingly, Murray Harris, in his excellent book Jesus as God, comes down in favor of the NRSV rendering, concluding that “it remains unlikely, although not impossible, that in Acts 20:28 ho theos denotes Jesus” (141, cf. 137–41).
29. Technically, this verbal arrangement (article + noun + article + adjective) is known as the second attributive position and is universally recognized in the study of Greek grammar; see Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, 306–7.
30. The first scholars to propose the alternate translation “the blood of his own” appear to have been J. A. Bengel and F. J. A. Hort; see Harris, Jesus as God, 139; and Charles F. DeVine, “The ‘Blood of God’ in Acts 20:28,” CBQ 9 (1947): 405.
31. This does not mean that everyone was perfectly comfortable with the text’s speaking of God’s own blood, since early in church history copyists started changing “church of God” to “church of the Lord.” The copyist or copyists who introduced this reading obviously understood tou haimatos tou idiou to mean “his own blood” but thought that it was more acceptable to speak of the Lord’s blood than of God’s. There is a near consensus today that “God” was the original wording (see Metzger, Textual Commentary on the New Testament, 425–27; Harris, Jesus as God, 134–36). Incidentally, if Acts 20:28 did refer to Jesus by using the expression “the church of the Lord,” this would be a strong affirmation of his deity, since that expression comes directly from the Old Testament as a description of the congregation of YHWH, or Jehovah (Deut. 23:2–3, 8; 1 Chron. 28:8; Mic. 2:5).
32. “If you were of the world, the world would love its own [to idion]” (John 15:19 NASB). Here to idion is a generic singular, referring not to a specific person but to anyone who was of the world. This usage is hardly comparable to the proposed substantival use in Acts 20:28. There are a few clear examples of the plural used in reference to persons (John 1:11; Acts 4:23; 24:23; possibly John 13:1; 1 Tim. 5:8).
33. Nigel Turner, Grammatical Insights into the New Testament (Edinburgh: T & T Clarke, 1965), 14–15.
34. DeVine, “The ‘Blood of God’ in Acts 20:28,” 405. (Ibid, pp. 330-331; emphasis mine)
Further Reading
Comments