The Hebrew/Palestinian Old Testament Canon was not established until 100 AD by Jewish rabbis at Jamnia.
The Hebrew canon used today by protestants and Christians is the same canon that was in use at the time of Christ.
That is factually incorrect. The Alexandrian/Greek Canon existed prior to the Hebrew/Palestinian Canon. The rabbis at Jamnia established the Hebrew Canon in response to the Christian Church. Choosing the Hebrew Canon means you align yourself with those Jews who rejected Christ. Another point of fact, there are ~300 quotations from the Old Testament found in the New Testament that come from the Septuagint, not the Hebrew Canon.
The Greek work to which you refer is a version of the LXX which Jewish authority denies was ever canon and which Catholicism cannot sustain as ever having had the mark of canonicity from the Jews.
The discovery at Qumran of copies of some of the disputed books written in Hebrew renders their rejection moot on at least one of the four criteria utilized by the Council of Jamnia. See "New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture" by Thomas Nelson, 1975, pg. 22 for gurtheredification. The Jewish authorities that you are relying on as a crutch for your position, rejected Christ and persecuted Christians. It would behoove you to learn the real facts rather than simply regurgitating the baloney you've been fed.
Prove it. I know you can't, so that's why I say it. You are referencing the same council of Jamnia that I noted never happened. It isn't a question of another date or whatever, it didn't happen. There was a meeting around that time in Yevnah
"The Rabbis never included the Apocrypha in the canon. The canon was fixed two centuries before Yavneh. This is explicit in numerous places in the Talmud." - Rabbi Shlomo Yaffe, Chabad.org
When I studied on this some time ago, I was referred to the above by the Jewish Learning Institute. And I only went there after finding that the best studied experts on the matter had concluded quite independantly that no council took place at Jevnah in 100AD or anytime therabouts. There is also no mention in that time frame of any modification of the Canon whatsoever. There not only is no evidence supporting your claim, the evidence argues against even the plausibility of it. It didn't happen.
That is factually incorrect. The Alexandrian/Greek Canon existed prior to the Hebrew/Palestinian Canon.
You haven't established that there was an Alexandrian Greek "canon". There was the LXX back at that time; but, you can't produce a catalogue list of what the original content of the LXX was. And per the Jewish scholarship, the deuterocanon was never canonized by the Jews. Never - in any form. So if the LXX was ever canon, the form that would have taken would have excluded the deuterocanonicals. Plain and simple any way you cut it. You can try to argue on semantics games; but, you can't escape the facts.
Prove it. I know you can't, so that's why I say it. You are referencing the same council of Jamnia that I noted never happened. It isn't a question of another date or whatever, it didn't happen. There was a meeting around that time in Yevnah
"The Rabbis never included the Apocrypha in the canon. The canon was fixed two centuries before Yavneh. This is explicit in numerous places in the Talmud." - Rabbi Shlomo Yaffe, Chabad.org
When I studied on this some time ago, I was referred to the above by the Jewish Learning Institute. And I only went there after finding that the best studied experts on the matter had concluded quite independantly that no council took place at Jevnah in 100AD or anytime therabouts. There is also no mention in that time frame of any modification of the Canon whatsoever. There not only is no evidence supporting your claim, the evidence argues against even the plausibility of it. It didn't happen.
That is factually incorrect. The Alexandrian/Greek Canon existed prior to the Hebrew/Palestinian Canon.
You haven't established that there was an Alexandrian Greek "canon". There was the LXX back at that time; but, you can't produce a catalogue list of what the original content of the LXX was. And per the Jewish scholarship, the deuterocanon was never canonized by the Jews. Never - in any form. So if the LXX was ever canon, the form that would have taken would have excluded the deuterocanonicals. Plain and simple any way you cut it. You can try to argue on semantics games; but, you can't escape the facts.
..Hebrew renders their rejection moot on at least one of the four criteria utilized by the Council of Jamnia.
Given that there was no council and they didn't do anything with the canon at yavneh, commenting on criteria used is rather absurd.
Oh, one last point, Qumran is not a collection of canon. Nor is there any note to that extent anywhere in the collection. Saying that works existed at the time is the most you can do. It doesn't make them canon. Try again.