[RnMomof7]

I think that understanding that the canon was not CLOSED ( meaning additions and subtractions could be done ) is pretty fundamental..

Reading Trent makes that clear and Trent was a response to Luther

Note that the the Orthodox Canon is different than Rome . But, taking the Council of Trent literally, it is not invalidated by their decree.

Here is a list of litany of post-Jerome Western theologians who held to a shorter canon, including many luminaries:

• Cardinal Cajetan (1469-1534);
• Primasius (died c. 560);
• Gregory the Great (bishop of Rome 590-604);
• Venerable Bede (c. 672 - 735);
• Agobard of Lyons (c. 779 - 840);
• Alcuin (c. 735 - 804);
• Wilafrid Strabo (c. 808 - 849);
• Haymo of Halberstadt (d. 853);
• Ambrose of Autpert (c. 9th century);
• Radulphus Flaviacensis (Webster and a couple of people reliant on Webster refer to him as "Radulphus Flavicencius" and "Radulphus Flavicencius" and mistakenly place him in the 10th century) (get the book) (fl. 1157);
• Hugh of St. Victor (c. 1096 - 1141);
• Richard of St. Victor (d. 1173);
• John of Salisbury (c. 1115 - 1176);
• Peter Cellensis (d. 1183, successor of John of Salisbury);
• Rupert of Deutz (c. 1075 - 1129);
• Honorius of Autun aka Augustodunensis (c. 1080/1090 - 1150);
• Peter Comestor (d. c. 1179);
• Peter "the Venerable" Mauritius (c. 1092-1156);
• Adam Scotus (c. 1140 - 1212);
• Hugh of St. Cher (c. 1200-1263);
• Philip of Harvengt (d. 1183);
• Nicholas of Lyra (c. 1270 - 1340);
• William of Ockham (c. 1287 - 1347);
• Antoninus ("Saint") (c. 1389 - 1459);
• Alonso Tostado (c. 1400 - 1455);
• Dionysius (Denys) the Carthusian (c. 1402 - 1471);
• Thomas "Walden" Netter (c. 1375 - 1430);
• Jean Driedo (d. 1535);
• John Ferus (c. 1497 - 1554); and
• Jacobus Faber Stapulensis (c. 1455 - 1536).

(see the endnotes here, for documentation of these assertions)

Webster also points out that the edition of the Bible printed by Cardinal Ximines and approved by Pope Leo X, followed Jerome and included all of Jerome's prologues, including those identifying the apocrypha as extra-canonical.

Webster's work in regard to documenting the existence of the shorter canon of Scripture down through history is notable, but is not the first such effort.  The great Anglican bishop of Durham, John Cosin, provided "A Scholastical History of the Canon of the Holy Scripture," which was first published in 1657.  The works of the editor in attempting to verify and document Cosin's citations in the edition from Cosin's works (linked above) was itself an enormous effort.

I believe that Webster probably was at least partially reliant on Cosin in locating some of the many testimonies of the medieval authors.  The result of Cosin's and Webster's work, however, is quite impressive.

And it is by no means exhaustive.  In a later post we may explore at least one area where Webster's research can be augmented.

http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2012/12/william-webster-and-canon-of-old.html

[Rashputin]

And just where do the "Scripture Alone" folks claim Scripture says Luther, anti-Christ Pharisees, or individual Catholics, have the right to throw into the garbage what was accepted as Scripture when Christ was preaching and teaching?

Right after the verse that says the Holy Spirit cannot and will not protect His Word from the inclusion of error?

More noise and nothing but noise since from the folks who only accept the anti-Christ Pharisee Approved Luther Subset of Scripture.

It doesn't matter which individuals disagreed with what, the Septuagint was accepted by the Church as it was at the time Christ was walking the earth right through to today except by those who claim the Holy Spirit is both imperfect and incapable of doing what Jesus Christ promised the Holy Spirit would do.

Those who belive anti-Christ Pharisees and/or Martin Luther are more perfect than the Holy Spirit are, of course, free to make up whatever sort of excuse they like for blaspheming the Holy Spirit.