Which is why we have *zero* copies of said Latin bible?
Yet we have Greek manuscripts such as the Codex Vaticanus that are far older? Wouldn’t it make sense that we would have Latin and not Greek bibles if what you say is true?
Why didn’t St. Jerome use them then, and why would the Church undertake a translation project in the 5th century if they had access to such a document? Why didn’t they continue to print this Latin bible?
Jerome’s Latin, corrupted
Vaticanus (Greek text) corruped
Rome’s Greek texts came from North Africa where they were being corrupted by mystics for 300 years before Constantine ordered 300 copies and Eusebius filled the order.
Jerome wouldn’t have had any interest in the Latin that came from further east, because he had to produce a Latin text favoring the Vatican.
The later English translators knew the difference between the two lines or genre of Greek manuscripts, and they knew of the corruption of North Africa (Alexandrai). So they shucked the corrupted line until 1881 when two Roman Catholics. Wescott and Hort, snuck corrupt manuscripts into the revision committees in London for the Revised Version.