Acts 20:28: The Blood of God or the Blood of His Son? An Argument of Exceptions

“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

I was online the other day, discussing this verse. It's one of special, theological importance. A plain reading of this verse shows that God purchased the church, “with His own blood.” Obviously, it was Jesus who shed His blood on the cross so this verse seems to affirm the divinity of Jesus. That is, Jesus is God.

The person with whom I was discussing this verse took exception to that understanding. He resorted to a “mistranslation” argument. I've had dealings with this individual before and his Greek is not really that good. However, in this case, there is a certain amount of ambiguity in the Greek that he was leveraging to bolster his point.

The Greek reads, διὰ (through) τοῦ (the) αἵματος (blood) τοῦ (the) ἰδίου (His own).

The most obvious translation of this verse is the one rendered in most Bibles, “through His own blood.” Another translation, which is a little more awkward in English, is “through the blood which is His own.” But there is still another possibility: “through the blood of His own (Son).”

The latter translation is not the most likely but it is still possible. The question is, which is the intended translation of the three? Since the critic I was conversing with online did not believe Jesus is God, he argued the 3^rd translation, the least likely one, is the correct one. He hooted and cheered that even RKBentley, a conservative Christian, acknowledged that “through the blood of His own” had merit as a possible translation. Of course, he ignored that I said it is the less likely one. As far as he was concerned, it is THE translation because Jesus is not God.

From there, we began discussing some other verses that referred to Jesus as God. Here are a few that I cited – please excuse my frequent use of the word, “clearly,” I was making a point:

In John 20:28, Thomas clearly says to Jesus, “The Lord of me and the God of me.”

John 1:1c clearly says, “the Word was God.”

Titus 2:13 clearly says, “the great God and our Savior, Jesus Christ”

2 Peter 1:1 clearly says, “our God and Savior, Jesus Christ”

In John 10:11, Jesus clearly said, “I AM (ἐγὼ εἰμι) the good shepherd” while Psalm 23:1 clearly says, “Jehovah is my shepherd.”

In Matthew 3:3, John the Baptist said he was preparing the way for the Lord (who is clearly Jesus) just like Isaiah said. Isaiah 40:3 clearly said the prophet will prepare the way for Jehovah.

Joel 2:32 clearly says that whoever calls upon the name of Jehovah will be saved. Roman 10:13 clearly says whoever calls upon the name of the Lord (Jesus) will be saved.

Revelation 1:8, we clearly see that God is the Alpha and Omega. In Revelation 1:17, Jesus clearly says He is the first and the last. In Revelation 22:13, we clearly see that the Alpha/Omega and the first/last is the same Person.

In John 5:21, Jesus clearly says He gives life just as the Father gives life.

In John 5:23 Jesus clearly says we should honor Him in the same way we honor the Father

In John 10:30, Jesus clearly said, “I and the Father are one.”

We also have many clear instances of people worshiping Jesus; The man born blind (John 9:38), the magi (Matthew 2:11), the disciples in the boat (Matthew 14:33), et al.

So we see time after time where the Bible clearly identifies Jesus as God. The response from my critic friend online was to cite William Barclay:

But we shall find that on almost every occasion in the New Testament on which Jesus seems to be called God there is a problem either of textual criticism or of a translation. In almost every case we have to discuss which of two readings is to be accepted or which two possible translations is to be accepted.

Note that Barclay said, “almost every occasion.” If the Bible says even once that Jesus is God, then that would clear up the ambiguous verses but never mind that now. What struck me was that the rebuttal I usually hear to seemingly clear references of Jesus' divinity is to say that the Bible doesn't really mean what it clearly seems to be saying.  Each and every time the Bible seems to identify Jesus as God, they say a more obscure translation of the verse is the correct one.

Is that the best they have? Their only response - ever - is to say, “what that really means is....”  We argue rules and they argue exceptions. How odd it would be if God gave us His revelation in code. How are we expected to understand any part of the Bible if the most ordinary meaning of any verse is never the correct one?

Granville Sharp's Rule and Christologically Significant Verses

If any “rule” can exist in Koine Greek, the Granville Sharp Rule must qualify as the most contested yet most proven. Granville Sharp was the 18th century son of the Archbishop of York. He is best known for his work as an abolitionist but has left us a great legacy in his theological writings. Sharp had no formal education but, while working as a young apprentice to a London linen-draper, he taught himself Greek.

In his studies, Sharp discovered an important Greek idiom – the rule which now bears his name. He noticed that whenever an article+noun+“kai”+noun construction occurred, both nouns always referred to the same person. This construction is commonly called the “TSKS construction.” A key point to this rule is that only the first noun has the article (“the”) and the second noun is anarthrous. Additional points include that the nouns must be singular, personal, and not proper names.

The rule sounds more complicated than it really is. Here is an example in English so that you can see how the construction works: 2 Peter 2:20, “the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (τοῦ Κυρίου καὶ σωτῆρος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ). This short clause has the article (“the”), noun (“Lord”), kai (“and”), and noun (“Savior”). Therefore, according to Sharp's rule, both of these nouns refer to the same person. In this context, they obviously both refer to Jesus.

Here are a few more instances:

Matthew 12:22, τον τυφλον και κωφον (the blind and dumb)

2 Corinthians 1:3, ὁ Θεὸς και πατηρ (the God and Father)

Ephesians 6:21, ὁ ἀγαπητὸς ἀδελφὸς και πιστος διάκονος (the beloved brother and faithful minister)

Hebrews 3:1, τον αποστολον και αρχιερεα (the Apostle and High Priest)

Revelation 16:15, ὁ γρηγορῶν καὶ τηρῶν (the one watching and keeping)

The context of these examples clearly demonstrates that both nouns in each verse are references to the same person. Setting aside textual variations, the TSKS construction occurs some 80 times in the NT and most scholars agree there are no exceptions to Sharp's rule.

Sharp's rule takes on considerable, theological significance when applied to two verses: Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. Here are the verses in the Greek:

Titus 2:13, τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ).

2 Peter 1:1, τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (our God and Savior Jesus Christ).

In both of these verses, “God” has the article and “Savior” is anarthrous so, according to Sharp's rule, they are references to the same Person. In these contexts, that Person is Jesus. Therefore, this explicitly means that Jesus is both God and Savior.

Those who deny the divinity of Christ refuse to see what should be obvious. The usual objection raised is to question the intent of the original authors: was this “rule” in the minds of the writers as they penned the New Testament? Considering the frequency where the TSKS construction appears and the large number of unambiguous examples that exist in the NT, I would say the writers understood well and precisely meant to say that Jesus is God and Savior. Indeed, where such a large number of unambiguous examples exist, to insist that these two passages are exceptions is nothing more than special pleading.

Is Jesus God?

There are some people who deny the divinity of Christ. The typical argument goes something like, Jesus is the Son of God; He is not God. To justify their position by pointing to the many references where Jesus calls Himself the “Son of God” and further point out that Jesus never said, “I am God.”

So what are we to believe? Are there any verses that claim Jesus is God? There are actually more than I can list in a single blog. But we’ll look at a few of the most obvious examples. For the sake of certainty, I picked some verses from the OT which clearly describe God and compared them to some verses from the NT which clearly describe Jesus. See what you think:

The heavens are the work of God's hand and He laid the foundation of the earth. (Psalms 102:24-25)
The heavens are the work of Jesus Christ's hand and He laid the foundation of the earth. (Hebrews 1:8-10)

God is the Creator of the earth (Jeremiah 27:5)
Jesus Christ is the Creator of the earth (John 1:10)

God Himself is judge (Psalm 50:6)
Jesus Christ judges the quick and the dead (2 Timothy 4:1)

Only God is our savior (Isaiah 43:11)
Jesus Christ is our savior (Titus 2:13)

God is the first and last (Isaiah 44:6)
Jesus Christ is the first and last (Revelation 1:17-18)

To God, every knee will bow and every tongue confess (Isaiah 45:22-23)
To Jesus Christ, every knee will bow and every tongue confess (Philippians 2:1011)

Forgiveness is with God (Psalms 130:4)
Forgiveness is in the blood of Jesus (Ephesians 1:7)

Jehovah is God Almighty (Genesis 35:11)
Jesus Christ is God Almighty (Revelation 4:8)

Are you convinced yet? And as if these weren’t enough examples, consider this: When Moses asked God His name, God answered, “I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you” (Exodus 3:14). So I AM is a reference to Jehovah of the OT.

In the New Testament, Jesus often referred to Himself as, I AM. The most famous example is in,John 8:58 where Jesus said, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”

But John recorded many instances where Jesus used the name I AM even though it was not translated as such. Another very good example is John 8:24, “I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.” In the KJV, italicized words (such as “he” here) are not in the original Greek.

So any attempt to deny the divinity of Christ is easily refuted. Christ is the Son AND He is God. I’ll leave you with this final verse:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1

Can Anyone Lose His Salvation?

An often asked question is, after a person becomes saved, can he ever lose his salvation? I knew a lady once who thought the term, “once saved always saved” was a quote from the Bible. Unfortunately, it’s not. However, I think the Bible is clear on the issue and we’ll look at a few verses to support it.

First, consider what salvation is; It’s a free gift (Romans 6:23, Ephesians 2:8). So if we cannot work to earn our salvation by our works, it’s difficult to believe we must keep it by good works.

Next, consider these Biblical descriptions of being saved:

>“We know that we have passed from death unto life,…” (1 John 3:14)
>“Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.” (2 Corinthians 5:17)
>“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:3-4)
>“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” (John 5:24)

These verses and many others clearly demonstrate that being saved in not simply a description of a current status. It’s not like, say, working at a job – you’re there now but in the future you may not be. Being saved is a permanent change of who we are – new creatures no longer dead but passed unto life.

Also, there’s the simple term of “eternal life” (Matthew 25:46, John 3:15-16, Romans 6:23, Titus 1:2, et al). The Bible seems clear that believing faith brings ETERNAL life. Not life that lasts as long as you’re good. How can something end if it's eternal? If you had eternal life and lost it, then, by definition, you did not have eternal life.

Finally, we have the testimony of Jesus Himself. When He was speaking with the Samaritan woman at the well, He made this interesting comment:

“Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.” (John 4:13-14)

So the “water” Jesus gives us becomes “everlasting life.” He then says we will never thirst again. But if we have eternal life, then lose it, wouldn’t that mean we would thirst again? Wouldn’t that make Jesus a liar?

There is yet another passage even more explicit. Jesus said:

“And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:39-40)

Wow! Jesus is saying that He will lose NOTHING the Father has given Him and will raise the one who believes in Him on the last day. So, if someone did once believe in Jesus, then later “fell away” and was not raised on the last day, wouldn’t that mean that Jesus lost him? Again I’ll ask, wouldn’t that make Jesus a liar?

I’m not sure how Jesus could have been much clearer. I think John summed it up well, “These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.” (1 John 5:13)