Acts 20:28

Take heed therefore unto yourselves The best MSS. omit "therefore." The Apostle now resigns into their hands a charge which before had been his own, and the form of his language would remind them that the discharge of their duty after his example would be the means of saving both themselves and those over whom they were placed.

and to all the flock He commits to them, as Christ had at first to St Peter, the charge to feed both lambs and sheep, in the name, and with the word, of the "good Shepherd" himself.

over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers These men who are called "elders," i.e. "presbyters" before (Acts 20:17) he now calls "overseers," i.e. "bishops," (see note there). The Rev. Ver.gives " In the which, &c.… bishops." We have no information how these "elders" had been chosen or appointed, but we can see from this verse that there had been some solemn setting apart of the men for their office. The Church, as in Acts 13:2, had recognised some indication that they were to be placed over the church. By reminding them from whence their appointment came, St Paul would enforce on them the solemnity of their position. Though they be "in the flock" they are not as others, more has been given unto them, and so more will be required.

to feed the church of God Perhaps no text in the New Testament has been more discussed than these words. "Many ancient authorities (says Rev. Ver.in a note,) read the Lord" instead of "God." The Revisers have kept "God" in the text, and that reading is accepted as of most authority by Westcott and Hort. The variation, which has much support from MSS., has been discussed and the evidence for it most fully stated by Dr Ezra Abbott, of Harvard University. The text as it stands asserts most strongly the Divinity of our Blessed Lord, but the form of the sentence implies, from what follows, the use of such a phrase as "the blood of God" which is not like the New Testament mode of expression, though it is found in the Epp. of Ignatius, who perhaps derived it from this passage. Because in other places where "the Church of God" is used "God" cannot be taken, as it must here, to mean Christ, some have given a strong force to the word own, which follows, and have explained "His own blood," i.e. "the blood of His own Son." And as the Greek text, which has been accepted, as of most authority, by Westcott and Hort, reads αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου, it has been suggested that after this peculiar collocation of words, υἵου has fallen away in very early times. This would make all easy, rendering "with the blood of his own Son." But there is no evidence that the word "Son" was ever there, and though the death of Christ is in Scripture spoken of as something "given up" by the Father "for us all" (Romans 8:32), yet the price paid and the purchase made are as definitely (1 Corinthians 7:22-23) referred to Christ. The direct assertion of Christ's Godhead has been the occasion of the questioning of this text, and may in early times have led to the various readings. That doctrine does not stand or fall by this verse, but as the authority of MSS. is in favour of the reading "God" we gladly accept it, and feel that to the first readers the harshness of the expression "blood of God" was not much regarded, as the words are not so written, but only suggested by the close of the verse.

which he hath purchased … blood Better, as the price was paid once for all, "which he purchased." The verb implies the "making of what is bought peculiarly one's own." It is not the usual word for "buying."