One of the notable changes in NIV 2011 is to no longer use “saints” as the English translation of αγιοι. The most often used translation is “holy people.” But not always. Consider two verses: Acts 9:13 and 9:32
9:13 “Lord,” Ananias answered, “I have heard many reports about this man and all the harm he has done to your holy people in Jerusalem.”
9:32 As Peter traveled about the country, he went to visit the Lord’s people who lived in Lydda.
9:13 But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem.”
9:32 Now has Peter went here and there among them all, he came down also to the saints who lived at Lydda.
9:13 “Lord,” Ananias answered, “I have heard from many people about this man, how much harm he has done to Your •saints in Jerusalem.”
9:32 As Peter was traveling from place to place, he also came down to the saints who lived in Lydda.
•saints is explained in the appendix
9:13 Ananias replied, “Lord, I’ve heard a lot of people tell about the many evil things this man has done to your people in Jerusalem.”
9:32 When Peter was going around to all of God’s people, he came to those who lived in the city of Lydda.
Both NIV 2011 and GW offer alternatives to “saints.” But within the same chapter, each renders it differently. At least in GW, the change is from second person reference addressing God (“your people”) to third person narrative about God (“God’s people”) so they can be connected.
With the change in NIV 2011, though, does this affect what Luke is attempting to do with his account in Acts, namely, that there is no distinction between believers in Jesus Christ, so that the people in Jerusalem (9:13) and the people in Lydda (9:32)? For a lay person studying this chapter, how would someone connect the two referents using only NIV 2011? If “saint” is misunderstood in today’s culture and English use, then the logical step would be to translate both cases as “holy people.”