rebuttal on the Fathers: http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/deut.html
“rebuttal on the Fathers: http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/deut.html";
One that depends on ignorance, unfortunately. For example, he writes:
“However, as we will also see with St. Cyril of Jerusalem and others, the list of the canon is not all of inspired Scripture, and because books are excluded from the canon does not necessarily mean that they are not Scripture.”
Some of the fathers still called the apocrypha “scripture,” just not inspired scripture from which doctrines could be built. Hence the constant refrain “to be read, but not to be brought forward as a confirmation of the faith.” Or “not to be brought forward for doctrine.”
This is an important distinction which destroys modern Catholic claims. Catejan, a contemporary of Luther, as well as the Latin prefaces, gives the majority view of that age, which only changed later, despite the wailing of modern RCC Apologists.