[griffin]

“Actually, it did.”

[BUZZZ!]False answer!

Pre or post Pentecost....the apocryphal books were never part of the Hebrew scripture.

We're not talking about non-Messianic, Jewish opinion on NT. That is obvious. We're talking about catholic modification of the OT in spite of it being a Jewish compilation.

Funny how the catholics can criticize Luther for modifying the their canon, but feel fine about modifying the Jewish OT. Pretty hypocritical.

[Lilllabettt]

The Jewish canon wasn't finalized until a couple centuries AD.

It was only after the Lord's resurrection and the growth of the Christians that Jewish leadership decided to cut certain parts and pour cement over things.

The Protestant OT is Sanhedrin approved.

Yikes.

[GCC Catholic]

[BUZZZ!]False answer!

Because you say so?

the apocryphal books were never part of the Hebrew scripture.

Yes, they were, up until Jamnia. They were part of the Septuagint. It was not until Jamnia that the Jews had a "canon" to speak of. Until then, they used the books that were in the Septuagint, including those erroneously called 'apocryphal.'

We're not talking about non-Messianic, Jewish opinion on NT. That is obvious.

It is inconsistent to use the opinions of the Jews to judge the OT without using it to judge the NT. After the beginning of the Christian era, I don't much care about non-Messianic, Jewish opinion on the OT either.

We're talking about catholic modification of the OT in spite of it being a Jewish compilation.

No, we're not. See above.

[Petronski]

Pre or post Pentecost....the apocryphal books were never part of the Hebrew scripture.

But the Deuterocanonicals were.