Neat trick, considering the earliest extant Masoretic proper dates at least some 500 years after Jerome.
Rather, to be precise, as with the Dead Sea Scrolls, one should argue a proto-Masoretic text, which ultimately must defend the Masoretic.
Bingo! I noticed that right away too. Some deep confusion there.
No it does not date to at least 500 years after Jerome.
It received prominence in the 7th to 10th century AD, but even the proto-Masoretic text date back to at least 150 B.C. with some arguing a date before that.
I WILL provide the quote (I have to look for it) from a professor at a Jesuit university, who himself said that Jerome used the 4th century Masoretic Text. This professor said that it was in use during the 4th century, and he isn’t the only one, either.
From R. A. F Mackenzie, S.J., Professor of Old Testament, Jesuit Seminary
“After Damasus’ death, Jerome, finding himself out of favor with the vlergy of Rome, migrated to Palestine in 385. He settled in Bethlehem, where henceforward he devoted himself to the monastic life, to his Hebrew studies, and to the production of Scriptural translations and commentaries. He had conceived the ambitious project of a complete new version of he Old Testament Scriptures directly from the original texts, so that Latin-speaking Christians should have available a Bible more faithful than the Old Latin version made from the Septuagint. ... Although Jerome was not one to accept any man’s authority blindly, still he had learned from his Jewish teachers a great deal besides the bare knowledge of Hebrew. Along with much valuable erudition, he had acquired their exaggerated idea of the infallibility of the 4th century Hebrew text and its superiority when they told him which books were canonical and which were not, especially since their list had been fixed for three centuries, while the extent of the Christian canon was still somewhat indefinite. Hence he omitted from his program of translation most of the books of the Septuagint ( that is, the Apocrypha of the Authorized Version) - Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, I and II Maccabees, - and only reluctantly translated Tobit, Judith, and the Greek additions to the books of Damiel and Esther. ...”
The Encylopedia Americana, Copyright 1961, page 197, Volume 26.
This is an older Encyclopedia set (among even older ones in my collection), as it serves here to avoid the pitfall of historical revisionism. So the Vulgate was “inspired” but what of the Old Latin Versions made from the Septuagint? They, containing the Septuagint were inspired, then Jerome’s work was, then later the Septuagint was once again the way to go? If so, who was inspired on this” “inspired” roller coaster?
Was MaI get it... Those older Latin compilations with the Srptuagint and all Catholic Apocryphal books were inspired... But where did that leave Jerome and his Vulgate minus 5 Catholic Apocrypha? I guess he was inspired until the Council of Trent, then the older Latin then were inspired once again...