[BlueDragon]

I'm about fed up with this sort of nonsense;

St. Paul said “all scripture” that Timothy knew “from infancy”, so I understand it to mean “all scripture”, not “the parts of the scripture unconverted Jews half a century later decided to like” or “Luther fifteen centuiries later decided to like”.

the parts unconverted Jews "decided to like"?

What evidence is there for such sort of contemplation?

What are you basing THAT upon?

As for Luther -- he moved the books to an appendix -- a bold move but not entirely without basis of reason -- as undoubtedly you have been shown on these pages numerous times.

Josephus refutes you.

Melito (thru Eusebius) refutes you all but entirely (in this issue of just what the Jews accepted as Holy Writ --and what they did not).

Philo can be seen to refute you -- though that is interpretative as much as anything, depending on there being no evidence of him citing from the books here under dispute, as if those were holy writ.

Origen refutes you.

JEROME refutes you.

Tertullian -- for the most part --also refutes you.

You can look to later Christian Councils for whatever blows your skirts up -- but there cannot be anything of the sort established that the Jews either;

lacked concept of what their own Holy Writ consisted of

OR changed what that consisted of some time soon after the overthrow of the Temple.

Clear enough?

Now face the music, deal with it -- or shut up.

[NKP_Vet]

All the Church Fathers were CATHOLIC.

The Bible is a Catholic document. The Bible came about as a result of the Catholic Church, not the first baptist church of billy bob. Have a nice night.