How is the George Lamsa translation of the Bible (from Aramaic) viewed by Evangelical scholars?

According to , at least one Christian church thinks Acts 20:28 in the Lamsa translation supports thier non-trinitarian viewpoint. Many translations use "church of God" and suggest God's blood purchased our salvation, whereas the Lamsa translation says [emphasis mine]: >Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore to yourselves and to all the flock, over which the Holy Spirit has appointed you overseers, to feed the church of **Christ** which he has purchased with **his** blood. What do evangelical leaders and scholars think about the Lamsa translation? Does it appear to contradict their doctrines?