‘Redeemed Us’ and ‘His Wrath’: Revelation 5:9 and 6:17

This is Part 6 of “The Moving Standard: NA29 and the Theology of a Revised Greek New Testament.”

Pronouns Carry Theology

Small words are easily dismissed in textual debate. A pronoun can look slight beside a missing sentence or a disputed title. Yet pronouns identify persons, objects, possession, and relation. In Revelation 5:9 and 6:17, two pronouns determine who is named among the redeemed and whether the great day is described as “their wrath” or “his wrath.” The NA29-basis text restores the received reading at both places. Neither restoration invents a doctrine: the Lamb’s blood redeems a people throughout the New Testament, and divine wrath fills the Apocalypse. The changes matter because they restore the form in which these truths stand in the Textus Receptus and Authorized Version.

Revelation 5:9: The Singers Say “Us”

The four living creatures and twenty-four elders fall before the Lamb and sing a new song. The Authorized Version reads:

Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.

The received Greek text contains ἡμᾶς, “us.” NA28 omits the object. Its song says that the Lamb was slain and purchased for God from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation, without stating in verse 9 whom he purchased. The NA29-basis text restores ἡμᾶς. The immediate effect is personal identification. Under the received reading, the worshippers include themselves in the blood-bought company: “thou hast redeemed us.” The song is not merely a statement about redemption occurring somewhere among the nations, but the confession of those who praise the Lamb for what he has done for them.

This bears upon the identity of the heavenly singers, but it should not be pressed beyond the text. The pronoun shows that the speakers identify themselves with the redeemed company; it does not by itself settle every question about the symbolic relation of the living creatures, the elders, Israel, the church, or heavenly worship. The new critical text also remains internally mixed. NA29 restores “us” in verse 9 but, because Revelation 5:10 is not among the announced changes, retains the critical third-person forms commonly rendered “you made them … and they shall reign.” The Textus Receptus and Authorized Version continue in the first person: “And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.” NA29 therefore returns one pronoun while leaving the following verse outside the received sequence. The restoration is real but partial.

That partial return is itself significant. The prior edition’s omission of the object was not a theologically empty choice. The new editors now place “us” in the text, and translators following them must decide how the renewed first person relates to the third person that follows.

Revelation 6:17: One Great Day of “His Wrath”

At the sixth seal, the rulers and peoples of the earth hide from “the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb.” They then cry:

For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

The Textus Receptus reads αὐτοῦ, the singular “his.” NA28 reads αὐτῶν, the plural “their.” The NA29-basis text restores the singular. Both readings place the sinner before the One upon the throne and the Lamb. Both confess judgment, and neither permits the sentimental fiction of a Lamb who never exercises wrath. The grammatical relation nevertheless differs. “Their wrath” distributes the wrath across the two figures named in verse 16. “His wrath” presents a single wrath, with the nearest grammatical referent being the Lamb, while the whole scene holds together the throne and the Lamb in the one divine judgment.

The singular should not be turned into an argument that erases the personal distinction between the Father and the Son. The Apocalypse distinguishes the One seated upon the throne from the Lamb even while joining them in worship, salvation, kingship, and judgment. The precise point is that the verse calls the day the day of “his wrath.” The received pronoun states unity at the level of the wrath under discussion; it does not dissolve the persons. It also sharpens the Christological force of the phrase “wrath of the Lamb.” The slain Lamb of chapter 5 opens the seals of chapter 6, and the world seeks death rather than face him. His sacrificial death and judicial authority are not opposed attributes. The Redeemer is the Judge.

What NA28 Lost

It would be easy to say that no doctrine changed because redemption and wrath were present in NA28. That would miss what the later editors themselves have now altered. At 5:9, NA28 lacked the explicit object “us.” At 6:17, it replaced the singular unity of “his wrath” with the plural “their wrath.” NA29 restores both received forms. These are not victories bestowed upon the Textus Receptus by the ECM, but concessions from a newer critical state against an older one. The church’s reading did not wait for the committee. The Authorized Version has allowed English congregations to sing “redeemed us” and tremble before “his wrath” all along.

The reversals also expose the poverty of the doctrine-survival defense. No creed fell when NA28 omitted or altered the pronouns. Yet exegesis changed: the singers no longer expressly included themselves among the purchased, and one wrath became grammatically plural. A doctrine can survive while its words are thinned. NA29’s restorations prove that the words were worth restoring.

The Lamb Who Redeems and Judges

Placed together, the two passages form a powerful sequence. The Lamb purchases his people by his blood; the same Lamb brings the world to the day of wrath. Grace and judgment meet in one person. Those redeemed from every kindred, tongue, people, and nation sing because he was slain. Those who reject his reign call upon the mountains because his wrath has come. The received text gives both relations with exact pronouns. The modern edition first obscured them and now returns. The proper conclusion is not merely that NA29 reads better than NA28 at two locations, but that a textual standard already existed by which both editions could have been judged.

Notes and Further Reading

• Karrer et al., ECM VI.1: Revelation, p. 49*.
• <a href="https://www.logosapostolic.org/bibles/textusreceptusking_james/revelation/rev05.htm”>Revelation 5 in the Textus Receptus and Authorized Version.
• <a href="https://www.logosapostolic.org/bibles/textusreceptusking_james/revelation/rev06.htm”>Revelation 6 in the Textus Receptus and Authorized Version.
• Darius Müller, “ECM Revelation: The Details”.