I'm old enough that I notice younger folks using grammatical constructions that would have been considered ungrammatical when I was their age. The English language undergoes continuous evolution, even within my own lifetime.
I say that to say this: there are Catholics and especially Eastern Orthodox who claim the Greek Fathers had a built-in advantage when reading the NT. After all, Greek was their native tongue.
In some respects, that can be advantages, but in other respects that can be disadvantageous. To begin with, Greek Fathers like Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Cyril of Alexandria, and Theodoret wrote much later than the NT. So you must make allowance for how the Greek language changed over time.
In addition, they were well-educated in Classical Greek. But that's quite different than 1C Koine Greek. In addition, we have to take into account differences in social class. Language varies according to region and social class. In general, NT Greek is less sophisticated than Josephus.
For instance, American working-class English is very different than, say, John Henry Newman. Or consider dialectical variations, like Black English.
Ironically, this can lead a native speaker to misconstrue usage in ways that someone who learned it as a second language might not. A native uses the language of his own time, place, and social class as his frame of reference. But that can be the wrong frame of reference when dealing with a text produced in a different time, place, or social class milieu.