[Rashputin]

The canon of the OT is what was in the Septuagint and anyone who disagrees with that must assert that the Holy Spirit cannot and did not protect His Holy Word from the inclusion of error for about eighteen hundred years. That's roughly three hundred years prior to the birth of Christ and fifteen hundred years after the birth of Christ.

Anyone who claims that's just a "talking point" is also claiming that the Holy Spirit is not perfect and therefore cannot be part of the Trinity which is in effect blaspheming the Holy Spirit as well as denying that the Trinity exists.

Facts are facts and the fact of the matter is that Protestants assert that anti-Christ, anti-Christian, Pharisees and their follower Martin Luther are all more perfect than the Holy Spirit

The desperation of Protestantism is clear when the fantasy of a Pharisee council was dreamed up in the eighteen seventies when older Hebrew language versions of several of the books Luther threw out were found and the claim that they shouldn't be included because they weren't written in Hebrew was shown to be nothing but more trash from Luther and his pals.

Until a nitwit heretic like Luther claimed he had the right to alter the canon there was no need to "close" or otherwise confirm what had been accepted for eighteen hundred years which means the BS about it not being closed is just more of the same Protestant revolt againist Christ smokescreen that claiming Luther could alter the canon is.

Typical Protestant circular reasoning : Luther changed the canon so when the Church affirmed that he had no right to do so it "proves" Luther had the right to do so.

Someone can play games all they like but denying that what is in the Septuagint is the inspired Word of God is denying the the perfection of the Holy Spirit. PERIOD

[RnMomof7]

I think that understanding that the canon was not CLOSED ( meaning additions and subtractions could be done ) is pretty fundamental..

Reading Trent makes that clear and Trent was a response to Luther

Note that the the Orthodox Canon is different than Rome . But, taking the Council of Trent literally, it is not invalidated by their decree.

Here is a list of litany of post-Jerome Western theologians who held to a shorter canon, including many luminaries:

• Cardinal Cajetan (1469-1534);
• Primasius (died c. 560);
• Gregory the Great (bishop of Rome 590-604);
• Venerable Bede (c. 672 - 735);
• Agobard of Lyons (c. 779 - 840);
• Alcuin (c. 735 - 804);
• Wilafrid Strabo (c. 808 - 849);
• Haymo of Halberstadt (d. 853);
• Ambrose of Autpert (c. 9th century);
• Radulphus Flaviacensis (Webster and a couple of people reliant on Webster refer to him as "Radulphus Flavicencius" and "Radulphus Flavicencius" and mistakenly place him in the 10th century) (get the book) (fl. 1157);
• Hugh of St. Victor (c. 1096 - 1141);
• Richard of St. Victor (d. 1173);
• John of Salisbury (c. 1115 - 1176);
• Peter Cellensis (d. 1183, successor of John of Salisbury);
• Rupert of Deutz (c. 1075 - 1129);
• Honorius of Autun aka Augustodunensis (c. 1080/1090 - 1150);
• Peter Comestor (d. c. 1179);
• Peter "the Venerable" Mauritius (c. 1092-1156);
• Adam Scotus (c. 1140 - 1212);
• Hugh of St. Cher (c. 1200-1263);
• Philip of Harvengt (d. 1183);
• Nicholas of Lyra (c. 1270 - 1340);
• William of Ockham (c. 1287 - 1347);
• Antoninus ("Saint") (c. 1389 - 1459);
• Alonso Tostado (c. 1400 - 1455);
• Dionysius (Denys) the Carthusian (c. 1402 - 1471);
• Thomas "Walden" Netter (c. 1375 - 1430);
• Jean Driedo (d. 1535);
• John Ferus (c. 1497 - 1554); and
• Jacobus Faber Stapulensis (c. 1455 - 1536).

(see the endnotes here, for documentation of these assertions)

Webster also points out that the edition of the Bible printed by Cardinal Ximines and approved by Pope Leo X, followed Jerome and included all of Jerome's prologues, including those identifying the apocrypha as extra-canonical.

Webster's work in regard to documenting the existence of the shorter canon of Scripture down through history is notable, but is not the first such effort.  The great Anglican bishop of Durham, John Cosin, provided "A Scholastical History of the Canon of the Holy Scripture," which was first published in 1657.  The works of the editor in attempting to verify and document Cosin's citations in the edition from Cosin's works (linked above) was itself an enormous effort.

I believe that Webster probably was at least partially reliant on Cosin in locating some of the many testimonies of the medieval authors.  The result of Cosin's and Webster's work, however, is quite impressive.

And it is by no means exhaustive.  In a later post we may explore at least one area where Webster's research can be augmented.

http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2012/12/william-webster-and-canon-of-old.html