You are simply displaying ignorance and invalidating your argument.

Thank You for that Christian salutation.
While you think you can deflect from your off the cuff Tobit-smack-
YOU clearly had stated YOUR disbelief that one should (or could) believe in those writings of what we call “Tobit”-
which I reminded you - 5 copies, more than any other book had been found being used by the Essenes. They thought something of that book then to be sure. NO disbelief on their part.
So I indeed had to correct you and make you aware that Tobit was in fact a reading of the most pious and ascetic Jews, the Essenes, of CHRIST’S day- which they clearly held a place for Tobit in their worship community. You were wrong to suggest that no one could believe Tobit in Christ’s day… ancient Israel – you just can’t admit to it.

Thus according to your standard, since all such were found along sacred scripture then all must be scripture just as you claim your fable was!

No, this is your lack of understanding. No one would suggest the Essenes “Community Rule” was sacredly inspired. Obviously MANY of the writings of the Qumran find WERE NOT scriptural in nature. For you to infer this shows the weakness of your position.
25% of what was found in the caves did not have a liturgical import. For you to use this false comparison to discredit Tobit, is a straw man deflection.
You might note that none of these other writings were found to be inspired as the Catholic Church Councils determined Tobit,
-and others to be –
and keep in mind -it is at THIS point WHAT WAS DECIDED UPON AS SACRED SCRIPTURE by Church magisterium, for what we like to call the CHRISTIAN Holy Bible…
along with Macabees and the Deutero…
The CHURCH – BY the divine Grace and guidance of the HOLY SPIRIT - determined the canonicity of what was to be considered Sacred.
(Though you reject Maccabees in the same way- disregarding that Christ even celebrated what would become "Chanukah")

You have to have a plausible answer then, why the Holy Spirit would allow this Church error of canonicty to exist for over 1000 years.
I am curious how you spin that.

"YOU clearly had stated YOUR disbelief that one should (or could) believe in those writings of what we call “Tobit”- " Have you eyes but see not? I called it a fable, which your own church describes it as.

"which I reminded you - 5 copies, more than any other book had been found being used by the Essenes."

And as said, since Scripture mss were fond along with non-Scripture, but your perverse logic all was Scripture!

"25% of what was found in the caves did not have a liturgical import. For you to use this false comparison to discredit Tobit, is a straw man deflection."

Liturgical import? THAT is what is is a straw man deflection for the principle you attempted to work off of what that since "5 copies of Tobit were found in the Qumran deposit of Sacred Writings used by the Essenes" then that validated Tobit as being Scripture, and thus by arguing that "liturgical import" makes this case then at best you can only argue that Tobit likely had "liturgical import" and not that this proves Tobit was Scripture! Why is this so hard to understand?

Did you know that Luther included apocryphal books in his translation, in a separate section as not being Scripture proper (a judgment many other Catholics had) yet while Luther expressed sentiments toward the book of Tobit as being a book “useful and good for us Christians to read...and whose writings and concerns are extraordinarily Christian.” Why I have Tobit in my Bible program. Thus according to your logic both Luther and myself must consider Tobit to be Scripture!

"and keep in mind -it is at THIS point WHAT WAS DECIDED UPON AS SACRED SCRIPTURE by Church magisterium, for what we like to call the CHRISTIAN Holy Bible… You have to have a plausible answer then, why the Holy Spirit would allow this Church error of canonicty to exist for over 1000 years. I am curious how you spin that."

"Plausible answer?!" Once again you are engaging in the logical fallacy of begging the question. What Rome decides simply does not translate into what the Holy Spirit declares as Truth, as if what the RC church decides settles a matter. Distinctive Catholic teachings themselves are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).

The novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome is itself self-proclaimed. For Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.

And as for the premise that the Holy Spirit allowed this Church error of canonicty to exist for over 1000 years, if that was true then you need to ask why the same Catholic church did not definitively settle the matter of the canon until about 1500 years after the last book was penned. For as shown here multiple times (and in tomes) before, the FACT is that scholarly disagreements over the canonicity (proper) of certain books continued down through the centuries and right into Trent, until it provided the first "infallible," indisputable canon after the death of Luther. Read it.

Thus Luther was no maverick but had substantial RC support for his non-binding personal view on the canon. Thus his views were not made an issue in his excommunication. Meanwhile you can argue with some of your cousins who effectively view Rome removed books, since the canon of the EOs (if not formally defined) and Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahdo Church are slightly larger. How much is irrelevant.

Once again your arguments are an embarrassing argument against being a RC.

You have to have a plausible answer then, why the Holy Spirit would allow this Church error of canonicty to exist for over 1000 years.

As I typed above...

Read the Book!

Matthew 13:24-30

24 Another parable He put forth to them, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field;
25 but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way.
26 But when the grain had sprouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared.
27 So the servants of the owner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’
28 He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The servants said to him, ‘Do you want us then to go and gather them up?’
29 But he said, ‘No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them.
30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ”