Replies

The Christian church was made up of people, people speaking many different languages but the koine Greek was widely understood and thus it made sense to have the Scriptures written in this amalgam Greek

Nice try at rewriting the history. Paul was preaching to Greek-sepaking crowds and the Gospels and the rest of the epistles were written after the destruction of the Temple (70 AD) when Christianity was all but rejected and actively persecuted by Israel and Rome.

The Church in Jerusalem was closed after, as the legend goes, James was stoned to death (62 AD), and by then Peter (who was in Rome and either dead or soon to be, but he wasn't in the Aramaic-speaking part of the world. Mark was in Egypt where Alexandrian Jews haven't spoken anything but Greek in centuries, and Thomas was in or near India. Andrew was in Asia minor (Greek speaking), and the rest of the legendary apostles were only God knows where, but they were not in Israel.

So, when the NT was written it was written in Greek, by Greeks and for Greeks. By the end of the century, Judaism rejected all Christian books (including the Old Testament LXX) because they were not in Hebrew, as well as their beliefs.

At that point, Christianity was no longer a Jewish sect by any stretch, but a sect of a Greek-speaking people, and that's when "John" wrote his Gospel, hellenizing Jesus into a Platonic deity for the pagan Greeks to find acceptable.

I don't need 19th century Protestant concordance sources because the Greek Church has records dating back to antiquity when the language of the Gospels was still the spoken language of the Fathers and the Church.

Their records therefore do have a copyright to koine Greek, understood and written in context of the times and culture when and where the NT was written. Your Protestant scholars don't.

Modern Evangelical translations seek to "harmonize" scripture at all cost even if it means changing the original. The Greeks swear "in" their prophets and not "by" their prophets and translating it as "by" is incorrect.

It is better to say "in the name of their prophets" then "by their prophets" because the "by" on many occasions in English leads to a conceptual change in biblical verses, which leads to theological errors due to translation.

One such famous change is to be found in "by whom all things were made..." rather than "in whom all things were made..." as written in the oldest of manuscripts in the original Greek.

On rare occasions akouo is pared with the verb to understand and in that context it is understood as a secondary form of 'understanding,' the way English expression "I see" can be.

But just as the English "to see," by itself, never means to understand, so neither does the Greek "akouo," by itself, mean to understand. Moreover, negative "akouo" by itself never means to not understand, which is precisely what the NIV and the like are peddling with Act 22:9, just so there would be no internal inconsistency.

It wouldn't be the first alteration of the text intended to fit the doctrine. The Bible is full of them.