Again, you are incorrect. Different sects of Judaism did not agree on the Canon of Scriptures. Again, the Septuagint was used BEFORE Christ by the Diaspora. Again, the Bible itself tells us that the Sadducees only believed in the Torah (first five books) as the Word of God. The Jews before Jamnia were not concerned with solidifying a canon. This did not occur until AFTER Jerusalem was destroyed and the Pharisaical sect that was left decided to set the canon so as to maintain their separateness from the competing sect of Christianity, which obviously had a DIFFERENT OT that they used. Proof of this is when the OT is quoted, over 80% of the quotes are taken from the Greek OT, not the Masoretic Hebrew OT.
The Targums did not contain the extra books.
So what, the Targums don't contain the Prophets, either...
The Peshitta Syriac did not contain them.
Wherever Christianity spread, translations of the Hebrew Scriptures were made based on the LXX. Thus, it became the basis for translations made into Arabic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Old Latin, Coptic, Georgian, and Old Church Slavonic. (It was not the basis either for the Syriac version [known as the Peshitta], which is a pre-Christian translation based directly upon the Hebrew, or for St. Jerome's Latin translation, which is also based on the Hebrew.). Since Jerome's aversion of the Greek OT is well-known, it is not surprising that the Syriac version does not include the Deuts.
The early manuscripts of the Septuagint also don't agree as to what books are accepted as Scripture. Vaticanus doesn't contain I & II Maccabees or The Prayer of Manassah, but includes Psalm 151 and 1 Esdras. Sinaiticus omits II Maccabees and Baruch, and includes Psalm 151, 1 Esdras and IV Maccabees. Alexandrinus includes Psalm 151, 1 Esdras, the Psalms of Solomon and III and IV Maccabees.
We find some Greek Church Fathers quoting the same Old Testament texts, but in very different forms. There is no indication, however, that this troubled to Church leadership. The insistence on letter-for-letter, word-for-word accuracy in the Scriptures was a feature that was not to emerge in Christian thought for many centuries, and then in imitation of Jewish and Islamic models. As far as most early Christians were concerned, any Greek version of the Old Testament read in the Church merited the term Septuagint.
Jesus Himself stated what the Canon was Luke 24:44 "And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. " Nothing about the inter-testamental books there.
Oh brother... And where does the Bible tell us what consisted of the "prophets and psalms"? Does this include the historical books, like Joshua or Chronicles? And how could there be "inter-testamental" books BEFORE the NT was even written???
Jerome and Origen rejected the books as canonical.
Jerome did. And he is the ONLY one I could find in my study on this subject. Origen did not reject them. In his list of Scriptures, he includes Baruch and both Maccabees. He also accepts some other books...
"You begin by saying, that when, in my discussion with our friend Bassus, I used the Scripture which contains the prophecy of Daniel when yet a young man in the affair of Susanna, I did this as if it had escaped me that this part of the book was spurious. You say that you praise this passage as elegantly written, but find fault with it as a more modern composition, and a forgery; and you add that the forger has had recourse to something which not even Philistion the play-writer would have used in his puns between prinos and prisein, schinos and schisis, which words as they sound in Greek can be used in this way, but not in Hebrew. In answer to this, I have to tell you what it behoves us to do in the cases not only of the History of Susanna, which is found in every Church of Christ in that Greek copy which the Greeks use, but is not in the Hebrew, or of the two other passages you mention at the end of the book containing the history of Bel and the Dragon, which likewise are not in the Hebrew copy of Daniel. (Origen,To Africanus, 5)
Later, in this same passage, he will defend the Catholic version of Daniel 3 and the Song of the 3 children. Notice that Origen also defends the use of Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon, as found in Daniel 13 and 14 of the Catholic Bible. He says that Bel and the Dragon and Susanna, Daniel 13 and 14 and only found in the Catholic Bible, is found in every single Church of Christ. Origen himself acknowledges that all Churches use these books. And in which way? He notes that he refers to them as Scripture. His opponent said it was a forgery. He corrects his opponent. It is not a forgery, but he notes his own use of them as Scripture
And what else did Origen find as Scripture?
But he ought to know that those who wish to live according to the teaching of Sacred Scripture understand the saying, 'The knowledge of the unwise is as talk without sense,' [Sirach 21:18] and have learnt 'to be ready always to give an answer to everyone that asketh us a reason for the hope that is in us.’ [1 Pt 3:15] " Origen, Against Celsus, 7:12
Oh, now Sirach is ALSO Scriptures, according to Origen...
To save time, I will note that he also sees Tobit, Judith, and Wisdom as Scriptures. Thus, your claim about Origen are totally false.
...Athanasius did the same
You and your sources are confused with the term "canon" as used by Athanasius, misunderstanding his use in his 39th Festal letter, no doubt. To HIM, canon meant books to be read during the Liturgy, during Mass. It doesn't refer to "which books are Scriptures". Since the Deuteros were contested by some, Athanasius, in an effort to protect his flock from spurious writings, felt it necessary to exclude even those books accepted by other churches. Now, did Athanasius himself think the Deuteros were Scriptures? Yes...
"[T]he sacred writers to whom the Son has revealed Him, have given us a certain image from things visible, saying, 'Who is the brightness of His glory, and the Expression of His Person;' [Heb 1:3] and again, 'For with Thee is the well of life, and in Thy light shall we see lights;' [Ps 36:9] and when the Word chides Israel, He says, 'Thou hast forsaken the Fountain of wisdom;' [Baruch 3:12] and this Fountain it is which says, 'They have forsaken Me the Fountain of living waters' [Jer 2:13]" [3] Athanasius the Great: Defense of the Nicene Faith,2
Baruch is Scripture, mentioned in the same breath as Hebrews and the Psalms and Jeremiah...
"And where the sacred writers say, Who exists before the ages,' and 'By whom He made the ages,’ [Heb 1:2] they thereby as clearly preach the eternal and everlasting being of the Son, even while they are designating God Himself. Thus, if Isaiah says, 'The Everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth;’ [Is 40:28] and Susanna said, 'O Everlasting God;' [Daniel 13:42-Susanna] and Baruch wrote, 'I will cry unto the Everlasting in my days,' and shortly after, 'My hope is in the Everlasting, that He will save you, and joy is come unto me from the Holy One;' [Baruch 4:20,22]" Athanasius the Great: Discourses Against the Arians
Daniel 13 is Scripture
But if this too fails to persuade them, let them tell us themselves, whether there is any wisdom in the creatures or not? If not how is it that the Apostle complains, 'For after that in the Wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God?’ [1 Cor 1:21] or how is it if there is no wisdom, that a 'multitude of wise men' [Wisdom 6:24] are found in Scripture? for 'a wise man feareth and departeth from evil;’ [Prov 14:16] and 'through wisdom is a house builded;’ [Prov 24] and the Preacher says, 'A man's wisdom maketh his face to shine;' and he blames those who are headstrong thus, 'Say not thou, what is the cause that the former days were better than these? for thou dost not inquire in wisdom concerning this.’ [Eccl 8:1,7:10] But if, as the Son of Sirach says, 'He poured her out upon all His works; she is with all flesh according to His gift, and He hath given her to them that love Him,'[Sirach 1:8,9]" [7] Athanasius the Great: Discourses Against the Arians, 2:79
Wisdom and Sirach are Scriptures for the same reason.
Let us not fulfill these days like those that mourn but, by enjoying spiritual food, let us seek to silence our fleshly lusts(Ex. 15:1). For by these means we shall have strength to overcome our adversaries, like blessed Judith (Judith 13:8), when having first exercised herself in fastings and prayers, she overcame the enemies, and killed Olophernes. And blessed Esther, when destruction was about to come on all her race, and the nation of Israel was ready to perish, defeated the fury of the tyrant by no other means than by fasting and prayer to God, and changed the ruin of her people into safety (Esther 4:16) [Athanasius the Great: Letter 4, 2 (A.D. 333
Judith is Scriptures
The Spirit also, who is in him, commands, saying, 'Offer unto God the sacrifice of praise, and pay to the Lord thy vows. Offer the sacrifice of righteousness, and put your trust in the Lord (Sir. 18:17).'[Athanasius the Great: Letter 19, 5
And again, Sirach is Scriptures, unless you believe the Spirit commands us in an uninspired book.
There are more such verses for Wisdom, but you get the drift, hopefully. St. Athanasius' writings tells us that he considered the Septuagint OT as Scriptures, sometimes using passages from the Deuteros to make a point, giving them the same exact authority as the Protocanonical books. In summary, you misunderstand his 39th Festal letter, as he himself notes that Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch, Judith, and Daniel 13 are inspired by God.
...as did Gregory of Nazianzus.
First, note, as in Athanasius case, Gregory EXCLUDES Esther. He also excludes Revelation from his NT list. So this of itself is not a major problem for the Catholic, as I will soon note that he, like Athanasius, considers many of the Deuteros to be Scriptural
And how shall we preserve the truth that God pervades all things and fills all, as it is written "Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord (Jer. 23:24)" and "The Spirit of the Lord filleth the world" (Wisdom 1:7) if God partly contains and partly is contained. For either He will occupy an empty Universe, and so all things will have vanished for us, with this result, that we shall have insulted God by making Him a body.... St. Gregory Nazianzen: The Second Theological Oration
Wisdom is Scripture
Then the last and gravest plague upon the persecutors, truly worthy of the night; and Egypt mourns the firstborn of her own reasonings and actions which are also called in the Scripture the "Seed of the Chaldeans" (Judith 5:6) removed, and the children of Babylon dashed against the rocks and destroyed; (Psalm 138:9). and the whole air is full of the cry and clamour of the Egyptians. St. Gregory Nazianzen:
Judith is Scripture
How did God sustain her? Not by raining down manna, as for Israel of old (Ex. 16:14), or opening the rock, in order to sustain to give drink to His thirsting people (Ex. 18:6) or feasting her by means of ravens, as Elijah 1 King 17:6), or feeding her by a prophet carried through the air, as He did to Daniel when a-hungered in the den (Daniel 14:33(Bel and the Dragon, V:33). St. Gregory Nazianzen:
There are similar passages for Baruch, Sirach, and the Septuagint version of Daniel.
I suppose that they were just agreeing with the Pharisees and being anti-Christ when they did so. Next thing, you'll be declaring anathema those who agree with them - oops, I guess that already happened too.
Maybe you should get the facts straight before you spout off such nonsense. I have given plenty of evidence that you are wrong and merely mimicing some Protestant apologist who hadn't done his homework...
The rest has nothing to do with our conversation, as I have not said anything hateful towards the Jews. I am merely giving you the historical facts of what the Church believed was Scripture and that the Jews did NOT have a fixed Canon until after the Destruction of Jerusalem and felt the need to consolidate and fight against whom they saw as a wayward sect, the Christians. This theological battle is seen throughout the writings of the New Testament.
Regards
Having some use for other books and considering them Scripture are two different things. Paul quoted from some pagan authors. He hardly considered their words Holy Scripture.
Now, you specifically have stated that in your research you have found that "Jerome was the only one." Considering Jerome's knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew and his translation of the very Bible your church uses, I would consider his word to be authoritative if I were a Catholic. But, since you eagerly dismiss him as the "only one", please read along. Some are mentioned at the Bible Researcher website which the folks on this thread seem to be avoiding like the plague.
Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem (AD 350) wrote: "Learn also diligently, and from the Church, what are the books of the Old Testament, and what those of the New. And read none of the apocryphal writings; for why do you, who know not those which are acknowledged among all, trouble yourself in vain about those which are disputed? Read the divine Scriptures, these twenty-two books of the Old Testament that were translated by the seventy-two translators . . . for the translation of the divine Scriptures that were spoken in the Holy Spirit was accomplished through the Holy Spirit. Read their twenty-two books but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study diligently only these that we also read with confident authority in the church. For much wiser and holier than you were the apostles and ancient bishops who led the church and handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, do not transgress its statutes. And of the Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which, if you desire to have learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them. For of the Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next, Joshua the son of Nun, and the book of Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and second books of the Kings are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and fourth one book. And in like manner, the first and second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second of Esdras are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these are the historical writings. But those which are written in verse are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth book. And after these come the five prophetic books; of the Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including Baruch and Lamentations and the Epistle; then Ezekiel, and the book of Daniel, the twenty-second of the Old Testament."
Athanasius of Alexandria says in his Thirty-ninth Festal Epistle: "7. But for the sake of greater exactness I add this also, writing under obligation, as it were. There are other books besides these, indeed not received as canonical but having been appointed by our fathers to be read to those just approaching and wishing to be instructed in the word of godliness: Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being merely read; nor is there any place a mention of secret writings. But such are the invention of heretics, who indeed write them whenever they wish, bestowing upon them their approval, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as if they were ancient writings, they find a means by which to lead astray the simple-minded."
Gregory of Nazianzus wrote: Let not other books seduce your mind: for many malignant writings have been disseminated. The historical books are twelve in number by the Hebrew count, [then follow the names of the books of the Old Testament but Esther is omitted, one Esdras, and all the Deutero-Canonical books]. Thus there are twenty-two books of the Old Testament which correspond to the Hebrew letters. The number of the books of the New Mystery are Matthew, who wrote the Miracles of Christ for the Hebrews; Mark for Italy; Luke, for Greece; John, the enterer of heaven,602602 This seems to imply a knowledge of the Revelation, although it is not mentioned. was a preacher to all, then the Acts, the xiv. Epistles of Paul, the vii. Catholic Epistles, and so you have all the books. If there is any beside these, do not repute it genuine. (also found at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xvii.xxii.html )
Amphocilus Bishop of Iconium- We should know that not every book which is called Scripture is to be received as a safe guide. For some are tolerably sound and others are more than doubtful. Therefore the books which the inspiration of God has given I will number. [Then follow the names of the Old Testament books as in Gregory of Nazianzus, but concluding with "some add Esther."] It is time for me to speak of the books of the New Testament. Receive only four evangelists: Matthew, then Mark, to whom, having added Luke as a third, count John as fourth in time, but first in height of his teachings, for I call this one rightly a son of thunder, sounding out most greatly with the word of God. And receive also the second book of Luke, that of the catholic Acts of the apostles. Add next the chosen vessel, the herald of the Gentiles, the apostle Paul, having written wisely to the churches twice seven epistles: to the Romans one, to which one must add two to the Corinthians, that to the Galatians, and that to the Ephesians, after which that in Philippi, then the one written to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, two to Timothy, and to Titus and to Philemon, one each, and one to the Hebrews. But some say the one to the Hebrews is spurious, not saying well, for the grace is genuine. Well, what remains? Of the catholic epistles some say we must receive seven, but others say only three should be received that of James, one, and one of Peter, and those of John, one. And some receive three of John, and besides these, two of Peter, and that of Jude a seventh. And again the Revelation of John, some approve, but the most say it is spurious. This is perhaps the most reliable canon of the divinely inspired Scriptures.
Hilary, Bishop of Poitiers: There are twenty-two books of the Old Testament because this corresponds with the number of their [Hebrew] letters. They are counted thus according to old tradition: the books of Moses are five, Joshua son of Nun the sixth, Judges and Ruth the seventh, first and second Kings the eighth, third and fourth [Kings] the ninth, the two of Chronicles make ten . . . Ezra the eleventh, the book of Psalms twelfth, of Solomon the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs are thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth, the Twelve Prophets sixteenth, then Isaiah and Jeremiah (with Lamentations and the Epistle) and Daniel and Ezekiel and Job and Esther complete the number of the books at twenty-two. To this some add Tobit and Judith to make twenty-four books, according to the number of the Greek letters, which is the language used among Hebrews and Greeks gathered in Rome . . .
There are more. Some accepting of the Apocryphal books, some not, some with mixture. But this should suffice to answer your assertion that "Jerome was the ONLY one."