The Holy Torah is the pre-existent logos through which G-d created the world. It was written by G-d 974 generations before the Creation in letters of black fire upon a scroll of white fire and then, in the 26th generation, dictated to Moses letter for letter (dictation, by the way, is rejected by even the old pre-Vatican II Catholic Church). The Torah, whose most perfect form is the kosher Torah Scroll, represents the very mind of G-d and its every word, letter, and stroke (and even its every blank space) is replete with meaning that most chr*stians (and most certainly not liturgical chr*stians) could never begin to understand. There are even those who claim the names of every single human being who has ever lived or ever will live is incoded in the ancient text. Ask your bishops about this some time and see what they say.
As for the Nevi'im (Prophets) and Ketuvim (Hagiographa), they were canonized some three centuries before chr*stianity ever existed by the 'Anshei HaKeneset HaGedolah (Men of the Great Assembly) which was made up of Prophets such as Ezra, Daniel, Mordecai, etc. That's who canonized the Bible, and no Catholic Church or even chr*stianity was ever needed. Of course, people who cannot conceive of a Bible without a "new testament" in it seem to have difficulty understanding this.
If you ever read church documents, they are generously peppered with quotes from scripture. Mass includes whole passages and readings from both testaments as well as a psalm. There is always a gospel reading.
You know, I sometimes get tired of telling people that I know all this stuff already (having spent six years in the Catholic Church), but I realize that each time I'm responding to someone who doesn't know this. Any way, so what? So there are Bible readings at each mass. Does that change the fact that the clergy who read these passages don't believe them? Does reading a few verses at every mass and breviary make up for regarding them as mythology, or as mere parable whose described events never took place? I used to listen to priests at mass invoking the sacrifices of Abel and Milchizedeq, but that did not change the fact that the priests saying the words did not believe that Abel or Melchizedeq ever existed. So I don't see what you point is.
BTW, I later came to reject the "new testament" anyway, so I'm not interested in who "canonized" it, other than the fact that the Church that did so now promotes irreverence, doubt, and skepticism about every supernatural event in the Bible other than the one (transubstantiation) that gets Protestants' goats.
I love your tag line lol. Nice to meet you. Actually it's always nice to meet someone who is feerless in standing up for a bit of truth. It's kinda rare. Paul was particularly keen to note that the Oracles of God were entrusted to the house of Israel. Had some honored that, many of the debates over what is or is not scripture would be elementary.
If Catholicism had spent less time persecuting Israel and more time learning their roots and understanding them, it might be possible for them to grasp much more of what Christ was about and what the chosen people were and are about. Many, and I'll include "protestants" in this, don't have the first clue about jewish meals of remembrance, holy days, and the like. I don't know all I'd like to know; but, I have learned enough to know there are some really clueless people out there.