“This codex contains Jerome’s Prologus Galeatus, who differentiated between the regular canon and those books, exactly as I said before. It’s also missing Baruch.”
No. The Table of Contents of the Codex Amiatinus says there are 70 books of the Bible. Two letter of Peter are counted as one. Lamentations is in with Jeremiah. This table of contents is found on folio 4r of the ms. The actual contents of Codex Amiatinus are different - which shows the Table of Contents is AN IDEALIZED LIST, a perfect Bible in the view of the compilers and scribes.
“No. The Table of Contents of the Codex Amiatinus says there are 70 books of the Bible. Two letter of Peter are counted as one. Lamentations is in with Jeremiah... The actual contents of Codex Amiatinus are different - which shows the Table of Contents is AN IDEALIZED LIST, a perfect Bible in the view of the compilers and scribes.”
This response tells me that you do not really have any clue what you are talking about, but just want to have the opportunity to say “no” anyway. It’s rather an embarrassing post. As a matter of fact, you cannot say “no” to a post that says that Jerome’s Prologus Galeatus is included (a fact which obliterates you already) and that Baruch is missing from the contents. You even admit this inadvertently since you, lacking experience, don’t understand that Jeremiah and Baruch are traditionally mentioned side by side. You then go on to say that this listing that lacks Baruch, therefore, is the “idealized” Bible. IOW, the idealized Bible is that which contains Jerome’s introduction and lacks one of the books considered divine scripture by the RCC. A double victory, with Jerome being like a little cake to me and Baruch a cherry.