So you are now admitting that the manuscript in question possesses all of the deuterocanonicals but one? Thanks for proving my point.
“So you are now admitting that the manuscript in question possesses all of the deuterocanonicals but one? Thanks for proving my point.”
How is it possible to give an “admission” now for something that I said straight away in my very first post?
“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.”
Did you only just now realize what I am writing?