Do you take up arguments based on what you’ve heard, or been told, without researching primary sources?
To say that Jerome didn’t state clearly that the Apocrapha wasn’t part of the canon, is to either (1) be ignorant of a fact, or (2) to lie.
Luther isn’t final authority. While his hermaneutic towards the NT was largely correct (particularly salvation by grace), he and other reformers still allegorized the OT, carrying on a RCC tradition since Augustine.
His error led to spiritualizing the OT, which allowed the continual theology of the day of not separating Israel from the church (because the church wasn’t present in the OT). This has major impacts on eschatology.
In other words, he wasn’t correct in all things: but he got the main things right. And those things he got right came from a plain, normal, litteral interpretation (hermaneutic) of the Bible.
That is where Sola Scriptura comes from.
“To say that Jerome didn’t state clearly that the Apocrapha wasn’t part of the canon, is to either (1) be ignorant of a fact, or (2) to lie.”
I never said that he didn’t say this. I simply argued that we have evidence these books were used as seen in the Codex Vaticanus. The Codex Vaticanus includes all of these books, save Maccabees.
“That is where Sola Scriptura comes from.”
Which is why you are arguing with me about Jerome. Jerome has zero argument wrt NT canon. He also provides zero evidence that the Church did not have the authority to determine which books ought to be included in the NT Canon.
Fr’instance, Sinaiticus includes the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd. Books that didn’t make the cut.