Why do Catholics have extra books in their bibles?

From Teach The Net
Jump to: navigation, search

Did Catholics add books to the bible, or did Protestants remove them?

Contents

Canon differences between Protestants and Catholics

Protestants/Catholics agree on 39 books in OT and the 27 books in NT. These books that Catholics and Protestants both accept in the Old Testament are often called the Protocanon.

Catholics Old Testaments have an additional 7 books, and additions to Daniel and Esther. These additional books Catholics accept they call the Deuterocanon, while Protestants call them Apocrypha. Here we will use the term Deuterocanon because it's more specific - under the term Apocrypha, Protestants include these books and many others (that both Catholics and Protestants recognize as Apocrypha), leading to ambiguity.

These are the books of the Deuterocanon:

Tobit
Judith
Esther +
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Wisdom
Sirach
Baruch
Daniel +

Why do those extra books (the Deuterocanon) matter?

The heart of the Protestant Reformation is the doctrine of Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone). Luther first clearly articulated this belief in the nature of authority at the Diet of Worms in 1521.

Martin Luther, 1521, Diet of Worms
Unless I am convinced by the testimony of the Scriptures or by clear reason (for I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures I have quoted and my conscience is captive to the Word of God.

However this led to an immediate problem - which Scripture is authoritative? Catholics had been using the canon from Jerome's Latin Vulgate translation for over a thousand years. As Calvin notes, if you accept that full canon then Catholics can prove purgatory (among other things) from their bibles!

John Calvin, Acts of the Council of Trent with the Antidote, ON THE FOURTH SESSION
Add to this, that they provide themselves with new supports when they give full authority to the Apocryphal books. Out of the second of the Maccabees they will prove Purgatory and the worship of saints; out of Tobit satisfactions, exorcisms, and what not. From Ecclesiasticus they will borrow not a little. For from whence could they better draw their dregs? I am not one of those, however, who would entirely disapprove the reading of those books...

And thus you must decide, what table of contents for the Bible is inspired?

As we'll see, Catholics have one point of view, Luther had another, Calvin had another, and virtually all modern Protestants yet another.

Before you can argue whether a doctrine like Purgatory is biblical, you must define what books are biblical. Let us examine history.

Did the early Church Fathers count the Deuterocanonical books among the Apocrypha?

Protestant Book: Canon of the Old and New Testaments Ascertained, or The Bible Complete without the Apocrypha and Unwritten Traditions

In "Canon of the Old and New Testaments Ascertained, or The Bible Complete without the Apocrypha and Unwritten Traditions", we see a work by 19th century Presbyterian theologian, Archibald Alexander that has become a common reference for modern Protestants on Old Testament canon.

In this work, Alexander makes the argument that "these books [the Deuterocanon] were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal." Let us examine his specific claims in support of this statement.

Note that being Protestant, he refers to the Deuterocanon as the Apocrypha - but his use of the term Apocrypha is meant to describe the Deuterocanonical books, and was not intended to include the many other works that are Apocrypha.

Here is the relevant section from his work, quoted in full. Following the quotation of his work, we will examine the validity of his claims.

Canon of the Old and New Testaments Ascertained, or The Bible Complete without the Apocrypha and Unwritten Traditions
SECTION IV.

TESTIMONIES OF THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS, AND OF OTHER LEARNED MEN DOWN TO THE TIME OF THE COUNCIL OF TRENT, RESPECTING THE APOCRYPHA.

THE fourth argument is, that these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal.

Justin Martyr does not cite a single passage, in all his writings, from any apocryphal book.

The first catalogue of the books of the Old Testament which we have, after the times of the apostles, from any Christian writer, is that of Melito, bishop of Sardis, before the end of the second century, which is preserved by Eusebius. The fragment is as follows: "Melito to his brother Onesimus, greeting. Since you have often earnestly requested of me, in consequence of your love of learning, a collection of the Sacred Scriptures of the Law and the Prophets, and what relates to the Saviour, and concerning our whole faith; and since, moreover, you wish to obtain an accurate knowledge of our ancient books, as it respects their number and order, I have used diligence to accomplish this, knowing your sincere affection towards the faith, and your earnest desire to become acquainted with the word; and that striving after eternal life, your love to God induces you to prefer these to all other things. Wherefore, going into the East, and to the very place where these things were published and transacted, and having made diligent search after the books of the Old Testament, I now subjoin and send you the following catalogue:--"Five books of Moses, viz., Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Chronicles, the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, or Wisdom, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Twelve [prophets] in one book, Daniel, Ezekiel, Ezra."

Origen also says, "We should not be ignorant, that the canonical books are the same which the Hebrews delivered unto us, and are twenty-two in number, according to the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet." Then he sets down, in order, the names of the books, in Greek and Hebrew.

Athanasius, in his Synopsis, says, "All the Scriptures of us Christians are divinely inspired; neither are they indefinite in their number, but determined, and reduced into a Canon. Those of the Old Testament are, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Job, the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel."

Hilary, who was contemporary with Athanasius, and resided in France, has numbered the canonical books of the Old Testament, in the following manner: "The five books of Moses, the sixth of Joshua, the seventh of Judges, including Ruth, the eighth of first and second Kings, the ninth of third and fourth Kings; the tenth of the Chronicles, two books; the eleventh, Ezra (which included Nehemiah;) the twelfth, the Psalms. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth; the twelve Prophets the sixteenth; then Isaiah and Jeremiah, including Lamentations and his Epistle, Daniel, Ezekiel, Job, and Esther, making up the full number of twenty-two." And in his preface he adds, that "these books were thus numbered by our ancestors, and handed down by tradition from them."

Gregory Nazianzen exhorts his readers to study the sacred books with attention, but to avoid such as were apocryphal; and then gives a list of the books of the Old Testament, and according to the Jewish method, makes the number two-and-twenty. He complains of some that mingled the apocryphal books with those that were inspired, "of the truth of which last," says he, "we have the most perfect persuasion; therefore it seemed good to me to enumerate the canonical books from the beginning; and those which belong to the Old Testament are two-and-twenty, according to the number of the Hebrew alphabet, as I have understood." Then he proceeds to say, "Let no one add to these divine books, nor take any thing away from them. I think it necessary to add this, that there are other books besides those which I have enumerated as constituting the Canon, which, however, do not appertain to it; but were proposed by the early Fathers, to be read for the sake of the instruction which they contain." Then, he expressly names as belonging to this class, the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, and Tobit. 

Jerome, in his Epistle to Paulinus, gives us a catalogue of the books of the Old Testament, exactly corresponding with that which Protestants receive: "Which," says he, "we believe agreeably to the tradition of our ancestors, to have been inspired by the Holy Spirit."

Epiphanius, in his book concerning Weights and Measures, distributes the books of the Old Testament into four divisions of five each. "The first of which contains the law, next five poetical books, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs; in the third division he places Joshua, Judges, including Ruth, first and second Chronicles, four books of Kings. The last five, the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel. Then there remain two, Ezra and Esther." Thus he makes up the number twenty-two.

Cyril of Jerusalem, in his Catechism, exhorts his catechumen diligently to learn from the church, what books appertain to the Old and New Testaments, and he says, "Read nothing which is apocryphal. Read the Scriptures, namely, the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, which were translated by the seventy-two interpreters." And in another place, "Meditate, as was said, in the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, and if you wish it, I will give you their names." Here follows a catalogue, agreeing with those already given, except that he adds Baruch to the list. When Baruch is mentioned as making one book with Jeremiah, as is done by some of the Fathers, it is most reasonable to understand those parts of Jeremiah, in the writing of which Baruch was concerned, as particularly the lii. chapter; for, if we understand them as referring to the separate book now called Baruch, the number which they are so careful to preserve will be exceeded. This apocryphal Baruch never existed in the Hebrew, and is never mentioned separately by any ancient author, as Bellarmine confesses. This book was originally written in Greek, but our present copies differ exceedingly from the old Latin translation.

The Council of Laodicea forbade the reading of any books in the churches but such as were canonical; and that the people might know what these were, a catalogue was given, answering to the Canon which we now receive.

Origen barely mentions the Maccabees. Athanasius takes no notice of these books. Eusebius, in his Chronicon, speaks of the History of the Maccabees, and adds, "These books are not received as divine Scriptures."

Philastrius, an Italian bishop, who lived in the latter part of the fourth century, in a work on Heresy says, "It was determined by the apostles and their successors, that nothing should be read in the Catholic church but the law, prophets, evangelists," &c.--And he complains of certain Heretics, "That they used the book of Wisdom, by the son of Sirach, who lived long after Solomon."

Chrysostom, a man who excelled in the knowledge of the Scriptures, declares, "That all the divine books of the Old Testament were originally written in the Hebrew tongue, and that no other books were received." Hom. 4. in Gen.

But Jerome, already mentioned, who had diligently studied the Hebrew Scriptures, by the aid of the best Jewish teachers, enters into this subject more fully and accurately than any of the rest of the Fathers. In his general Preface to his version of the Scriptures, he mentions the books which he had translated out of Hebrew into Latin; "All besides them," says he, "must be placed among the apocryphal. Therefore, Wisdom, which is ascribed to Solomon, the book of Jesus the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobit and Pastor, are not in the Canon. I have found the first book of Maccabees in Hebrew, (Chaldee;) the second in Greek, and, as the style shows, it must have been composed in that language." And in his Preface to Ezra and Nehemiah, (always reckoned one book by the Jews,) he says, "Let no one be disturbed that I have edited but one book under this name; nor let any one please himself with the dreams contained in the third and fourth apocryphal books ascribed to this author; for, with the Hebrews, Ezra and Nehemiah make but one book; and those things not contained in this are to be rejected, as not belonging to the Canon." And in his preface to the books of Solomon, he speaks of "Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus; the former of which," he says, "he found in Hebrew, (Chaldee,) but not the latter, which is never found among the Hebrews, but the style strongly savours of the Grecian eloquence." He then adds, "As the church reads the books of Judith, Tobit, and the Maccabees, but does not receive them among the canonical Scriptures, so, also, she may read these two books for the edification of the common people, but not as authority to confirm any of the doctrines of the church."

Again, in his preface to Jeremiah, he says, "The book of Baruch, the scribe of Jeremiah, is not read in Hebrew, nor esteemed canonical; therefore, I have passed it over." And in his preface to Daniel, "This book among the Hebrews has neither the history of Susanna, nor the Song of the three Children, nor the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which we have retained lest we should appear to the unskilful to have curtailed a large part of the Sacred Volume."

In the preface to Tobit, he says, "The Hebrews cut off the book of Tobit from the catalogue of Divine Scriptures." And in his preface to Judith, he says, "Among the Hebrews, Judith is placed among the Hagiographa, which are not of authority to determine controversies."

Rufin, in his Exposition of the Creed, observes, "That there were some books which were not called canonical, but received by our ancestors, as the Wisdom of Solomon, and another Wisdom of the Son of Sirach; of the same order are the books of Tobit, Judith, and the Maccabees."

Gregory the First, speaking of the testimony in the Maccabees, respecting the death of Eleazer, says, "Concerning which thing we do not act inordinately, although we bring our testimony from a book which is not canonical."

Augustine is the only one among the Fathers who lived within four hundred years after the apostles, who seems to favour the introduction of these six disputed books into the Canon. In his work On Christian Doctrine, he gives a list of the books of the Old Testament, among which he inserts Tobit, Judith, the two books of Maccabees, two of Esdras, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus. These two last mentioned, he says, "are called Solomon's, on account of their resemblance to his writings; although it is known that one of them was composed by the son of Sirach: which deserves to be received among the prophetical books." But this opinion he retracted afterwards.

Augustine was accustomed to the Greek and Latin Bibles, in which those books had been introduced, and we must suppose, unless we would make him contradict himself, that he meant in this place merely to enumerate the books then contained in the sacred volume; for in many other places he clearly shows that he entertained the same opinion of the books of the Old Testament as the other Fathers.

In his celebrated work of "The City of God," he expresses this opinion most explicitly--"In that whole period, after the return from the Babylonish captivity, after Malachi, Haggai, Zachariah and Ezra, they had no prophets, even until the time of the advent of our Saviour. As our Lord says, the law and the prophets were until John. And even the reprobate Jews hold that Haggai, Zachariah, Ezra, and Malachi, were the last books received into canonical authority."

In his commentary on the xl. Psalm, he says, "If any adversary should say you have forged these prophecies, let the Jewish books be produced--The Jews are our librarians." And on the lvi. Psalm, "When we wish to prove to the Pagans that Christ was predicted, we appeal to the writings in possession of the Jews; they have all these Scriptures."

And again, in the work first cited, "The Israelitish nation, to whom the oracles of God were entrusted, never confounded false prophecies with the true, but all these writings are harmonious." Then in another work, in speaking of the books of the Maccabees, he says, This writing the Jews never received in the same manner as the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, to which the Lord gave testimony as by his own witnesses." And frequently in his works, he confines the canonical books to those properly included in this threefold division. He also repeatedly declares that the canonical Scriptures, which are of most eminent authority, are the books committed to the Jews. But in the eighteenth book of the City of God, speaking of Judith, he says, "Those things which are written in this book, it is said, the Jews have never received into the Canon of Scripture." And in the seventeenth book of the same work, "There are three books of Solomon, which have been received into canonical authority, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles; the other two, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, have been called by his name, through a custom which prevailed on account of their similarity to his writings; but the more learned are certain that they are not his; and they cannot be brought forward with much confidence for the conviction of gainsayers."

He allows that the Book of Wisdom may be read to the people, and ought to be preferred to all other tracts; but he does not insist that the testimonies taken from it are decisive. And respecting Ecclesiasticus, he says when speaking of Samuel's prophesying after his death, "But if this book is objected to because it is not found in the Canon of the Jews," &c. His rejection of the books of Maccabees from the Canon is repeated and explicit. "The calculation of the times after the restoring of the temple is not found in the Holy Scriptures, which are called canonical, but in certain other books, among which are the two books of Maccabees. The Jews do not receive the Maccabees as the Law and the Prophets."

It may be admitted, however, that Augustine entertained too high an opinion of these apocryphal books, but it is certain that he did not put them on a level with the genuine canonical books. He mentions a custom which prevailed in his time, from which it appears that although the apocryphal books were read in some of the churches, they were not read as Holy Scripture, nor put on a level with the canonical books; for he informs us that they were not permitted to be read from the same desk as the Canonical Scriptures, but from a lower place in the church.

Innocent the first, who lived about the same time, is also alluded to as a witness to prove that these disputed books were then received into the Canon. But the epistle which contains his catalogue is extremely suspicious. No mention is made of this epistle by any writer for three hundred years after the death of Innocent. But it is noways necessary to our argument to deny that in the end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth century, some individuals, and perhaps some councils, received these books as canonical, yet there is strong evidence that this was not the opinion of the universal church; for in the council of Chalcedon, which is reckoned to be oecumenical, the Canons of the council of Laodicea which contain a catalogue of the genuine books of the Old Testament, are adopted. And it has been shown already that these apocryphal books were excluded from that catalogue.

But it can be proved that even until the time of the meeting of the Council of Trent, by which these books were solemnly canonized, the most learned and judicious of the Popish writers adhere to the opinions of Jerome and the ancients; or at least make a marked distinction between these disputed books and those which are acknowledged to be canonical by all. A few testimonies from distinguished writers, from the commencement of the sixth century down to the era of the Reformation, shall now be given.

It deserves to be particularly observed here that in one of the laws of the Emperor Justinian, concerning ecclesiastical matters, it was enacted, "That the Canons of the first four general councils should be received and have the force of laws."

Anastasius, patriarch of Antioch, in a work on the Creation, makes "the number of books which God hath appointed for his Old Testament" to be no more than twenty-two; although he speaks in very high terms of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus.

Leontius, a learned and accurate writer, in his book against the Sects, acknowledges no other canonical books of the Old Testament, but those which the Hebrews received; namely, twelve historical books, five prophetical, four of Doctrine and Instruction, and one of Psalms; making the number twenty-two as usual; and he makes not the least mention of any others.

Gregory, who lived at the beginning of the seventh century, in his book of Morals, makes an apology for alleging a passage from the Maccabees, and says, "Though it be not taken from the canonical Scripture, yet it is cited from a book which was published for the edification of the church."

Isidore, bishop of Seville, divides the canonical books of the Old Testament into three orders, the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa; and afterwards adds--"There is a fourth order of books which are not in the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament." Here he names these books, and says, "Though the Jews rejected them as apocryphal, the church has received them among the canonical Scriptures."

John Damascene, a Syrian Presbyter, who lived early in the eighth century, adheres to the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament, numbering only two-and-twenty books. Of Maccabees, Judith and Tobit, he says not one word; but he speaks of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as "elegant and virtuous writings, yet not to be numbered among the canonical books of Scripture, never having been laid up in the ark of the Covenant."

Venerable Bede follows the ancient method of dividing the books of the Old Testament into three classes; but he remarkably distinguishes the Maccabees from the canonical books by classing them with the writings of Josephus and Julius the African.

Alcuin, the disciple of Bede, says, "The book of the son of Sirach was reputed an apocryphal and dubious Scripture."

Rupert, a learned man of the twelfth century, expressly rejects the book of Wisdom from the Canon.

Peter Mauritius, after giving a catalogue of the authentic Scriptures of the Old Testament, adds the six disputed books, and says, "They are useful and commendable in the church, but are not to be placed in the same dignity with the rest."

Hugo de S. Victore, a Saxon by birth, but who resided at Paris, gives a catalogue of the books of the Old Testament, which includes no others but the two-and-twenty received from the Jews. Of Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit and Judith, he says, "They are used in the church but not written in the Canon."

Richard de S. Victore, also of the twelfth century, in his Books of Collections, explicitly declares, "That there are but twenty-two books in the Canon; and that Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Judith, and the Maccabees, are not esteemed canonical although they are read in the churches."

Peter Lombard, in his Scholastic History, enumerates the books of the Old Testament, thus--Five books of Moses, eight of the prophets, and nine of the Hagiographa, which leaves no room for these six disputed books; but in his preface to Tobit he says expressly, that it is "in no order of the Canon;" and of Judith, that "Jerome and the Hebrews place it in the apocrypha." Moreover, he calls the story of Bel and the Dragon a fable, and says that the history of Susannah is not as true as it should be.

In this century also lived John of Salisbury, an Englishman, a man highly respected in his time. In one of his Epistles, he treats this subject at large, and professes to follow Jerome and undoubtedly to believe that there are but twenty-two books in the Canon of the Old Testament, all which he names in order, and adds, "That neither the book of Wisdom, nor Ecclesiasticus, nor Judith, nor Tobit, nor the Pastor, nor the Maccabees, are esteemed canonical."

In the thirteenth century, the opinion of the learned was the same, as we may see by the Ordinary Gloss on the Bible, in the composition of which many persons were concerned, and which was high approved by all the doctors and pastors in the western churches. In the preface to this gloss, they are reproached with ignorance who hold all the books, put into the one volume of Scripture, in equal veneration. The difference between these books is asserted to be as great as between certain and doubtful works. The canonical books are declared, "To have been written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost; but who were the authors of the others is unknown." Then it is declared, "That the church permitteth the reading of the apocryphal books for devotion and instruction, but not for authority to decide matters of controversy in faith. And that there are no more than twenty-two canonical books of the Old Testament, and all besides are apocryphal." 6Thus we have the common judgment of the church, in the thirteenth century, in direct opposition to the decree of the Council of Trent in the sixteenth. But this is not all, for when the writers of this Gloss come to the apocryphal books, they prefix a caution, as--"Here begins the book of Tobit, which is not in the Canon;"--"Here begins the book of Judith, which is not in the Canon," and so of every one of them; and to confirm their opinion, they appeal to the Fathers.

Hugo, the Cardinal, who lived in this century, wrote commentaries on all the Scriptures, which were universally esteemed; in these he constantly keeps up the distinction between the canonical and ecclesiastical books: and he explicitly declares that "Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, Judith, Tobit, and the Maccabees, are apocryphal,--dubious,--not canonical,--not received by the church for proving any matters of faith, but for information of manners."

Thomas Aquinas also, the most famous of the schoolmen, makes the same distinction between these classes of books. He maintains that the book of Wisdom was not held to be a part of the Canon, and ascribes it to Philo. The story of Bel and the Dragon, he calls a fable; and he shows clearly enough that he did not believe that Ecclesiasticus was of canonical authority.

In the fourteenth century no man acquired so extensive a reputation for his commentaries on the Bible, as Nicholas Lyra, a converted Jew. In his preface to the book of Tobit, he says, " That having commented on all the canonical books, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation, his intention now was to write on those books which are not canonical." Here he enumerates Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobit, and the Maccabees; and then adds, "The canonical books are not only before these in time but in dignity and authority." And again, "These are not in the Canon, but received by the church to be read for instruction in manners, not to be used for deciding controversies respecting the faith; whereas the others are of such authority that whatever they contain is to be held as undoubted truth."

The Englishman, William Occam, of Oxford, accounted the most learned doctor of his age, in his Dialogues, acknowledges, "That that honor is due only to the divine writers of Scripture, that we should esteem them free from all error." Moreover, in his Prologues, he fully assents to the opinion of Jerome and Gregory, "That neither Judith, nor Tobit, nor the Maccabees, nor Wisdom, nor Ecclesiasticus, is to be received into the same place of honour as the inspired books; "for," says he, "the church doth not number them among the canonical Scriptures."

In the fifteenth century, Thomas Anglicus, sometimes called the Angelical Doctor on account of his excellent judgment, numbers twenty-four books of the Old Testament, if Ruth be reckoned separately from Judges, and Lamentations from Jeremiah.

Paul Burgensis, a Spanish Jew, who, after his conversion to Christianity, on account of his superior knowledge and piety, was advanced to be bishop of Burgos, wrote notes on the Bible, in which he retains the same distinction of books which has been so often mentioned.

The Romanists have at last, as they suppose, found an authority for these disputed books in the Council of Florence, from the Acts of which they produce a decree in which the six disputed books are named and expressly said to be written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.

Though this Canon were genuine, the authority of a council sitting in such circumstances, as attended the meeting of this, would have very little weight; but Dr. Cosins has shown that in the large copies of the acts of this council no such decree can be found, and that it has been foisted into the abridgment by some impostor who omitted something else to make room for it, and thus preserved the number of Canons unchanged, while the substance of them was altered.

Alphonso Tostatus, bishop of Avila, who, on account of his extraordinary learning, was called the wonder of the world, has given a clear and decisive testimony on this subject. This learned man declares, "That these controverted books were not canonical, and that the church condemned no man for disobedience who did not receive them as the other Scriptures, because they were of uncertain origin, and it is not known that they were written by inspiration." And again, "Because the church is uncertain whether heretics have not added to them." This opinion he repeats in several parts of his works."

Cardinal Ximenes, the celebrated editor of the Complutensian Polyglot, in the preface to that work, admonishes the reader that Judith, Tobit, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Maccabees, with the additions to Esther and Daniel, which are found in the Greek, are not canonical Scriptures.

John Picus, the learned count of Mirandula, adhered firmly to the opinion of Jerome and the other Fathers on the subject of the Canon.

Faber Stapulensis, a famous doctor of Paris, acknowledges that these books are not in the Canon.

Ludovicus Vives, one of the most learned men of his age, in his commentaries on Augustine's City of God, rejects the third and fourth books of Esdras, and also the history of Susannah, and Bel, as apocryphal. He speaks in such a manner of Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus as to show that he did not esteem them canonical; for he makes Philo to be the author of the former, and the son of Sirach of the latter, who lived in the time of Ptolemy about an hundred years after the last of the Prophets; and of the Maccabees, he doubts whether Josephus was the author or not; by which he sufficiently shows that he did not believe that they were written by inspiration.

But there was no man in this age who obtained so high a reputation for learning and critical skill as Erasmus. In his exposition of the Apostles' Creed and the Decalogue, he discusses this question respecting the canonical books, and after enumerating the usual books of the Old Testament, he says, "The ancient Fathers admitted no more;" but of the other books afterwards received into ecclesiastical use, (naming the whole which we esteem apocryphal,) "It is uncertain what authority should be allowed to them; but the canonical Scriptures are such as without controversy are believed to have been written by the inspiration of God." And in his Scholia on Jerome's preface to Daniel, he expresses his wonder that such stories as Bel and the Dragon should be publicly read in the churches. In his address to students of the Scriptures, he admonishes them to consider well, "That the church never intended to give the same authority to Tobit, Judith and Wisdom, which is given to the five books of Moses or the four Evangelists."

The last testimony which we shall adduce to show that these books were not universally nor commonly received, until the very time of the Council of Trent, is that of Cardinal Cajetan, the oracle of the church of Rome. In his commentaries on the Bible, he gives us this as the rule of the church--"That those books which were canonical with Jerome should be so with us; and that those which were not received as canonical by him should be considered as excluded by us." And he says, "The church is much indebted to this Father for distinguishing between the books which are canonical and those which are not, for thus he has freed us from the reproach of the Hebrews, who otherwise might say that we had framed a new Canon for ourselves." For this reason he would write no commentaries on these apocryphal books; "for," says he, "Judith, Tobit, Maccabees, Wisdom, and the additions to Esther are all excluded from the Canon as insufficient to prove any matter of faith, though they may be read for the edifying of the people."

From the copious citations of testimonies which we have given, it is evident that the books in dispute are apocryphal, and have no right to a place in the Canon; and that the Council of Trent acted unwisely in decreeing, with an anathema annexed, that they should be received as divine. Surely no council can make that an inspired book which was not written by inspiration. Certainly these books did not belong to the Canon while the apostles lived, for they were unknown both to Jews and Christians. Sixtus Sinensis, a distinguished Romanist, acknowledges that it was long after the time of the apostles, that these writings came to the knowledge of the whole Christian church. But while this is conceded, it does not terminate the controversy, for among the many extraordinary claims of the Romish church, one of the most extraordinary is the authority to add to the Canon of Holy Scripture. It has been made sufficiently manifest that these apocryphal books were not included in the Canon during the first three centuries; and can it be doubted whether the Canon was fully constituted before the fourth century? To suppose that a Pope or a Council can make what books they please canonical, is too absurd to deserve a moment's consideration. If, upon this principle, they could render Tobit and Judith canonical, upon the same they might introduce Herodotus, Livy, or even the Koran itself.

Historical Claims reviewed

Claim: Justin Martyr does not cite from the Deuterocanon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The first piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Justin Martyr.

Archibald
Justin Martyr does not cite a single passage, in all his writings, from any apocryphal book.

With this logic, a book not quoted by Justin Martyr (~160 AD) would not be considered canonical. In Ante-Nicene Fathers vol. 1, reviewing Schaff's Index of Scripture References for those cited by Justin Martyr, we see Justin Martyr quoted from only 24 Old Testament books and 13 New Testament books. Are we to argue for a 37 book Bible canon?

Alexander also fails to note that Justin Martyr identified that believers of Christ use the Septuagint (which includes the Deuterocanon), but Jews have started using a smaller set of passages of Scripture (the Hebrew texts) in which they have removed many Scriptures.

Justin Martyr
But I am far from putting reliance in your teachers, who refuse to admit that the interpretation made by the seventy elders who were with Ptolemy [king] of the Egyptians is a correct one; and they attempt to frame another. And I wish you to observe, that they have altogether taken away many Scriptures from the translations effected by those seventy elders who were with Ptolemy, and by which this very man who was crucified is proved to have been set forth expressly as God, and man, and as being crucified, and as dying; but since I am aware that this is denied by all of your nation, I do not address myself to these points, but I proceed to carry on my discussions by means of those passages which are still admitted by you. For you assent to those which I have brought before your attention, except that you contradict the statement, 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive,' and say it ought to be read, 'Behold, the young woman shall conceive.'
- Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 71

Finally, Alexander is being extremely selective. While focusing on just Justin Martyr's (~160 AD) lack of quotes from the Deuterocanon, he fails to acknowledge that Justin's predecessors and contemporaries explicitly did quote from the Deuterocanon.

Clement of Rome (~80 AD) quotes from the deuterocanincal Book of Wisdom in his Letter to the Corinthians 27:5

Clement of Rome
By the word of his might [God] established all things, and by his word he can overthrow them. 'Who shall say to him, "What have you done?" or who shall resist the power of his strength?' [Wis. 12:12 / Wis. 11:21]

Polycarp of Smyrna (~135 AD) quotes from the deuterocanonical Book of Tobit in his Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, Chapter 10

Polycarp of Smyrna
Stand fast, therefore, in these things, and follow the example of the Lord, being firm and unchangeable in the faith, loving the brotherhood [1 Pet. 2:17]. [...] When you can do good, defer it not, because 'alms delivers from death' [Tob. 4:10, 12:9]. Be all of you subject to one another [1 Pet. 5:5], having your conduct blameless among the Gentiles [1 Pet. 2:12], and the Lord may not be blasphemed through you. But woe to him by whom the name of the Lord is blasphemed [Is. 52:5]!

Irenaeus (~189 AD) quotes from the deuterocanonical Book of Baruch in his Against Heresies 4:26:3

Irenaeus
Jeremiah the prophet has pointed out that as many believers as God has prepared for this purpose, to multiply those left on the earth, should both be under the rule of the saints and to minister to this [new] Jerusalem and that [his] kingdom shall be in it, saying, 'Look around Jerusalem toward the east and behold the joy which comes to you from God himself. Behold, your sons whom you have sent forth shall come: They shall come in a band from the east to the west... God shall go before with you in the light of his splendor, with the mercy and righteousness which proceed from him' [Baruch 4:36 - 5:9]

Claim: Melito does not include the Deuterocanon in his list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Melito of Sardis.

Archibald
The first catalogue of the books of the Old Testament which we have, after the times of the apostles, from any Christian writer, is that of Melito, bishop of Sardis, before the end of the second century, which is preserved by Eusebius. The fragment is as follows: "Melito to his brother Onesimus, greeting. Since you have often earnestly requested of me, in consequence of your love of learning, a collection of the Sacred Scriptures of the Law and the Prophets, and what relates to the Saviour, and concerning our whole faith; and since, moreover, you wish to obtain an accurate knowledge of our ancient books, as it respects their number and order, I have used diligence to accomplish this, knowing your sincere affection towards the faith, and your earnest desire to become acquainted with the word; and that striving after eternal life, your love to God induces you to prefer these to all other things. Wherefore, going into the East, and to the very place where these things were published and transacted, and having made diligent search after the books of the Old Testament, I now subjoin and send you the following catalogue: - "Five books of Moses, viz., Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Chronicles, the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, or Wisdom, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Twelve [prophets] in one book, Daniel, Ezekiel, Ezra."

This quote comes from a secondary source dated ~324 AD, Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, Book IV, Chapter 26, Section 14.

Melito's list, preserved by Eusebius, does indeed exclude the Deuterocanon. However, it also excludes Lamentations, Nehemiah, and Esther - are we to argue that those three books are not canon?

Both Protestants and Catholics can agree that Melito's list was not complete.

Claim: Origen does not include the Deuterocanon in his list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Origen.

Archibald
Origen also says, “We should not be ignorant, that the canonical books are the same which the Hebrews delivered unto us, and are twenty-two in number, according to the number of letters of the Hebrew alphabet.” Then he sets down, in order, the names of the books, in Greek and Hebrew... Origen barely mentions the Maccabees.

This quote also comes from the same secondary source dated ~324 AD, Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, Book VI, Chapter 25, Section 1-2. Let us review the quote in full.

Origen
The twenty-two books of the Hebrews are the following: That which is called by us Genesis, but by the Hebrews, from the beginning of the book, Bresith, which means, 'In the beginning'; Exodus, Welesmoth, that is, 'These are the names'; Leviticus, Wikra, 'And he called'; Numbers, Ammesphekodeim; Deuteronomy, Eleaddebareim, 'These are the words'; Jesus, the son of Nave, Josoue ben Noun; Judges and Ruth, among them in one book, Saphateim; the First and Second of Kings, among them one, Samouel, that is, 'The called of God'; the Third and Fourth of Kings in one, Wammelch David, that is, 'The kingdom of David'; of the Chronicles, the First and Second in one, Dabreïamein, that is, 'Records of days'; Esdras, First and Second in one, Ezra, that is, 'An assistant'; the book of Psalms, Spharthelleim; the Proverbs of Solomon, Meloth; Ecclesiastes, Koelth; the Song of Songs (not, as some suppose, Songs of Songs), Sir Hassirim; Isaiah, Jessia; Jeremiah, with Lamentations and the epistle in one, Jeremia; Daniel, Daniel; Ezekiel, Jezekiel; Job, Job; Esther, Esther. And besides these there are the Maccabees, which are entitled Sarbeth Sabanaiel.

First, note the end of the quote, where Origen includes some of the Deuterocanon with his statement "besides these there are the Maccabees." Archibald writes this off as Origen barely mentioning the Maccabees, but it's significant.

Second, note the beginning of the quote, where Origen identifies the list as "the twenty-two books of the Hebrews." The Hebrews was referring to the Jews of his day, who had rejected Christianity and Jesus.

Origen knew that the Jews of his day had an Old Testament which had some differences to the Christian text - indeed, his most significant work was a book identifying those differences (see Appendix Origen's Asterisks). In his letter to Africanus, Origen notes that every Church of Christ use the Septuagint and include the Deuterocanon, but that the Jews are missing the Deuterocanonical books. Origen has made careful study of this, so in his debates with the Jews he ensures he only quotes to them from the scripture they accept. For his part, Origen thinks the elders of the Jews (who rejected Jesus) removed every passage of scripture that cast them in a negative light.

Excerpts from Letter from Origen to Africanus
    In answer to this, I have to tell you what it behooves us to do in the cases not only of the History of Susanna, which is found in every Church of Christ in that Greek copy which the Greeks use, but is not in the Hebrew, or of the two other passages you mention at the end of the book containing the history of Bel and the Dragon, which likewise are not in the Hebrew copy of Daniel; but of thousands of other passages also which I found in many places when with my little strength I was collating the Hebrew copies with ours. [...]
    And I make it my endeavor not to be ignorant of their various readings, lest in my controversies with the Jews I should quote to them what is not found in their copies, and that I may make some use of what is found there, even although it should not be in our Scriptures. [...]
    Wherefore I think no other supposition is possible, than that they who had the reputation of wisdom, and the rulers and elders, took away from the people every passage which might bring them into discredit among the people. We need not wonder, then, if this history of the evil device of the licentious elders against Susanna is true, but was concealed and removed from the Scriptures by men themselves not very far removed from the counsel of these elders. [...]
    What I have said is, I think, sufficient to prove that it would be nothing wonderful if this history were true, and the licentious and cruel attack was actually made on Susanna by those who were at that time elders, and written down by the wisdom of the Spirit, but removed by these rulers of Sodom, as the Spirit would call them. [...]
    Where you get your lost and won at play, and thrown out unburied on the streets, I know not, unless it is from Tobias; and Tobias (as also Judith), we ought to notice, the Jews do not use. They are not even found in the Hebrew Apocrypha, as I learned from the Jews themselves. However, since the Churches use Tobias, you must know that even in the captivity some of the captives were rich and well to do. Tobias himself says...

As for Origen himself, he clearly believed the Deuterocanon were scripture - he explicitly quotes them multiple times, identifying them as holy scripture.

Origen, in De Principiis, Book II, Chapter 1, Section 5
But that we may believe in the authority of holy Scripture that such is the case, hear how in the book of Maccabees, where [...] she says, "I ask of you, my son, to look at the heaven and the earth, and at all things which are in them, and beholding these, to know that God made all these things when they did not exist." [2 Maccabees 7:28]
Origen, in On Prayer Chapter 6
For the Scripture says that after they had prayed, the prayers of them both were heard in the sight of the glory of the great Raphael, and he was sent to heal them both [Tobit 3:16-17].
Origen, Homily 20 on Jeremiah, 7.3
I want to give an example from Scripture of righteous lack of faith in an agreement in order to demonstrate that man can call upon faithlessness in act. Judith made an agreement with Holophernes that though she would leave for certain number of days to pray to God, she also would present herself after these days at the marriage bed of Holophernes.
Origen, in Homily 16 on Jeremiah, 6.2
But we reproach both those who repent and those who convert, though the Scripture says: 'Do not reproach a man who turns away from sin.' [Sirach 8:5]
Origen, in Homily 1 on Leviticus, 1.3
...But it is time for us to use the words of holy Susanna against these wicked presbyters, which indeed those who deny the story of Susanna excise from the list of divine books.  But we both receive it and aptly use it against them...

So while Archibald holds up Origen's list as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" - we instead see that Origen was merely identifying the list of the Jews of his day, and fully believed in the Deuterocanon as holy scripture.

Claim: Athanasius does not include the Deuterocanon in his list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Athanasius.

Archibald
Athanasius, in his Synopsis, says, "All the Scriptures of us Christians are divinely inspired; neither are they indefinite in their number, but determined, and reduced into a Canon. Those of the Old Testament are, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Job, the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel." [...] Athanasius takes no notice of these books [the Deuterocanon].

Archibald attributes this list in a work called The Synopsis of Sacred Scripture to Athanasius, though scholars now generally agree it was written in the 6th century by a clergyman.

However in Athanasius's Letter 39, sections 4 and 7, we see another list. Note that in this list, Athanasius includes the Deuterocanonical book of Baruch. He excludes Esther, as well as the rest of the Deuterocanon, from canon - though he notes that they are appointed by the Fathers to be read for instruction in the word of godliness (and thus not to be removed from the Bible).

Athanasius, Letter 39
    There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua, the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the twelve being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and the epistle, one book; afterwards, Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament...
    But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being [merely] read...

So while Archibald holds up Athanasius' list as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" - we instead see that Athanasius included Baruch, excluded Esther, and did not completely discard the rest of the Deuterocanon as modern Protestants do. It's a far cry from his statement that 'Athanasius takes no notice of these books'.

Claim: Hilary does not include the Deuterocanon in his list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Hilary of Poitiers.

Archibald
Hilary, who was contemporary with Athanasius, and resided in France, has numbered the canonical books of the Old Testament, in the following manner: "The five books of Moses, the sixth of Joshua, the seventh of Judges, including Ruth, the eighth of first and second Kings, the ninth of third and fourth Kings; the tenth of the Chronicles, two books; the eleventh, Ezra (which included Nehemiah;) the twelfth, the Psalms. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth; the twelve Prophets the sixteenth; then Isaiah and Jeremiah, including Lamentations and his Epistle, Daniel, Ezekiel, Job, and Esther, making up the full number of twenty-two.” And in his preface he adds, that "these books were thus numbered by our ancestors, and handed down by tradition from them."

Again Archibald cuts the quote short. Here is the quote in full:

Hilary of Poitiers, Expositions of the Psalms (Tractatus super Psalmos), 15
The reason for reckoning twenty-two books of the Old Testament is that this corresponds with the number of the [Hebrew] letters. They are counted thus according to old tradition: the books of Moses are five, Joshua son of Nun the sixth, Judges and Ruth the seventh, first and second Kings the eighth, third and fourth [Kings] the ninth, the two of Chronicles make ten, the words of the days of Ezra the eleventh, the book of Psalms twelfth, of Solomon the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs are thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth, the Twelve Prophets sixteenth, then Isaiah and Jeremiah (with Lamentations and the Epistle) and Daniel and Ezekiel and Job and Esther complete the number of the books at twenty-two. To this some add Tobit and Judith to make twenty-four books, according to the number of the Greek letters, which is the language used among Hebrews and Greeks gathered in Rome.

Note that the Epistle of Jeremiah, which is part of the Deuterocanonical book of Baruch, is included. Also note at the end he says "to this some add Tobit and Judith", another two Deuterocanonical books. Add to this the fact that elsewhere Hilary quotes from Deuterocanonical 2 Maccabees explicitly as scripture.

Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, Book IV, Section 16
Such suggestions are inconsistent with the clear sense of Scripture. "For all things", as the Prophet says [2 Maccabees 7:28], "were made out of nothing"

So while Archibald holds up Hilary's list as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" - we instead see that Hilary actually believed much of the Deuterocanon was scripture.

Claim: Gregory Nazianzen does not include the Deuterocanon in his list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Gregory Nazianzen.

Archibald
Gregory Nazianzen exhorts his readers to study the sacred books with attention, but to avoid such as were apocryphal; and then gives a list of the books of the Old Testament, and according to the Jewish method, makes the number two-and-twenty. He complains of some that mingled the apocryphal books with those that were inspired, "of the truth of which last," says he, "we have the most perfect persuasion; therefore it seemed good to me to enumerate the canonical books from the beginning; and those which belong to the Old Testament are two-and-twenty, according to the number of the Hebrew alphabet, as I have understood." Then he proceeds to say, "Let no one add to these divine books, nor take any thing away from them. I think it necessary to add this, that there are other books besides those which I have enumerated as constituting the Canon, which, however, do not appertain to it; but were proposed by the early Fathers, to be read for the sake of the instruction which they contain." Then, he expressly names as belonging to this class, the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, and Tobit.

This quote is from Gregory Nazianzen's poem, Concerning the Genuine Books of Divinely Inspired Scripture. Again, let us review the full quote.

Concerning the Genuine Books of Divinely Inspired Scripture (poem)
    The divine oracles should always on the tongue and in the mind be rehearsed. For God will indeed give a reward for this labor, so that you may obtain light from anything hidden, or, what is far better, that you may be spurred by God to greater purity, and thirdly, be called away from the cares of the world by such study. But let not extraneous books seduce your mind. For many malignant writings have been disseminated. Accept, o friend, this my approved number. These are all twelve of the historical books, of the most ancient Hebrew wisdom: First there is Genesis, then Exodus, Leviticus too. Then Numbers, and the Second Law. Then Joshua and Judges. Ruth is eighth. The ninth and tenth books [are] the acts of Kings, and [the eleventh is] Chronicles. Last you have Ezra. The poetic books are five: Job being first, then [the Psalms of] David; and three of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Canticles and Proverbs. And similarly five of prophetic inspiration. There are the Twelve written in one book: Hosea and Amos, and Micah the third; then Joel, and Jonah, Obadiah, Nahum also, and Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, Haggai, then Zechariah, and Malachi. All these are one. The second is of Isaiah. Then the one called as an infant, Jeremiah, Then Ezekiel, and the gift of Daniel. I count therefore, twenty-two of the ancient books, corresponding to the number of the Hebrew letters.
    Now count also those of the new mystery. Matthew wrote the miracles of Christ for the Hebrews, Mark for Italy, Luke for Greece; John for all, the great herald, who walked in the heavens. Then the acts of the wise apostles. Of Paul there are fourteen epistles. And the seven catholic, [which include] one of James, two of Peter, three of John also; and Jude is the seventh. You have them all. And if there are any beyond these, they are not genuine.

Note that in addition to the Deuterocanon, Esther is missing from the Old Testament list, and Revelations is missing from the New Testament list.

Additionally, elsewhere Gregory Nazianzen quotes from the Deuterocanonical book of Judith explicitly as scripture.

Quote from Judith as Scripture
Then the last and gravest plague upon the persecutors, truly worthy of the night; and Egypt mourns the first-born of her own reasonings and actions which are also called in the Scripture the Seed of the Chaldeans [Judith 5:6] removed...
- Oration 45, Section XV

So while Archibald holds up Gregory Nazianzen's list as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" - we instead see that Gregory Nazianzen had an incomplete list (missing Esther, Revelation, and the Deuterocanon), and elsewhere quoted from the Deuterocanon explicitly as scripture.

Claim: Jerome does not include the Deuterocanon in his list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Jerome.

Archibald
Jerome, in his Epistle to Paulinus, gives us a catalogue of the books of the Old Testament, exactly corresponding with that which Protestants receive: "Which," says he, "we believe agreeably to the tradition of our ancestors, to have been inspired by the Holy Spirit."

It is true that Jerome personally disliked much of the Deuterocanon, for a simple logical reason. He noted that the Septuagint Text used by the churches and the Hebrew scriptures used by the Jews in his day had differences - and since the original texts were written in Hebrew, he assumed the superiority of the Hebrew scriptures of the Jews, and that error must have crept in in the translation of the Septuagint. Specifically, he thought the Septuagint was a bad translation of the Hebrew scriptures of the Jews of his day. Thanks to the dead sea scrolls, we now know the Septuagint was rather a good translation of a different tradition of Hebrew scriptures, but we'll dive into that more later.

For now, let us just note that Jerome believed in the superiority of the Hebrew scriptures used by the Jews in his day. However, whatever his personal feelings, it's important to note that Jerome submitted to the church, which had accepted the Deuterocanon as scripture.

Among the Hebrews the Book of Judith is found among the Hagiographa, the authority of which toward confirming those which have come into contention is judged less appropriate. [...] But because this book is found by the Nicene Council to have been counted among the number of the Sacred Scriptures, I have acquiesced to your request...
- Preface to Judith
What sin have I committed in following the judgment of the churches? But when I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible, the man who makes this a charge against me proves himself to be a fool and a slanderer; for I explained not what I thought but what they commonly say against us.
- Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 33
...the book of Tobias, which the Hebrews exclude from the catalogue of Divine Scriptures, being mindful of those things which they have titled Hagiographa. I have done enough for your desire, yet not by my study. For the studies of the Hebrews rebuke us and find fault with us, to translate this for the ears of Latins contrary to their canon. But it is better to be judging the opinion of the Pharisees to displease and to be subject to the commands of bishops...
- Preface to Tobit

When Jerome published his latin translation of the Bible, he included the Deuterocanon. This Bible was then used by the church for over a thousand years.

Additionally, Jerome quotes from the Deuterocanonical Book of Wisdom as Holy Scripture, and from the Deuterocanonical Baruch as a prophet.

Quote from Wisdom as Holy Scripture
For in the book of Wisdom, which is inscribed with his name, Solomon says: "God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own eternity." [Wisdom 2:23]... Instead of the three proofs from Holy Scripture which you said would satisfy you if I could produce them, behold I have given you seven.
- Letter 51, Sections 6 & 7
Quote from Baruch as prophet
...those of Baruch, "Arise, arise, O Jerusalem," and many other proclamations made by the trumpets of the prophets.
- Letter 77, Section 4

So while Archibald holds up Jerome's list as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" - we instead see that while Jerome personally did not like them, he accepted them as scripture, submitting himself to the church.

Claim: Epiphanius does not include the Deuterocanon in his list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Epiphanius.

Archibald
Epiphanius, in his book concerning Weights and Measures, distributes the books of the Old Testament into four divisions of five each. “The first of which contains the law, next five poetical books, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs; in the third division he places Joshua, Judges, including Ruth, first and second Chronicles, four books of Kings. The last five, the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel. Then there remain two, Ezra and Esther.” Thus he makes up the number twenty-two.

Again, Archibald is selectively quoting to paint a narrative. In Epiphanius' Panarion, he includes Deuterocanonical Baruch as canon, and notes two more books of disputed canonicity, the Deuterocanonical Sirach and the Book of Wisdom.

Epiphanius, Panarion (also called Against Heresies) viii. 6
By the time of the captives' return from Babylon these Jews had acquired the following books and prophets, and the following books of the prophets: 1. Genesis. 2. Exodus. 3. Leviticus. 4. Numbers. 5. Deuteronomy. 6. The Book of Joshua the son of Nun. 7. The Book of the Judges. 8. Ruth. 9. Job. 10. The Psalter. 11. The Proverbs of Solomon. 12. Ecclesiastes. 13. The Song of Songs. 14. The First Book of Kings. 15. The Second Book of Kings. 16. The Third Book of Kings. 17. The Fourth Book of Kings. 1 18. The First Book of Chronicles. 19. The Second Book of Chronicles. 20. The Book of the Twelve Prophets. 21. The Prophet Isaiah. 22. The Prophet Jeremiah, with the Lamentations and the Epistles of Jeremiah and Baruch. 23. The Prophet Ezekiel. 24. The Prophet Daniel. 25. I Ezra. 26. II Ezra. 2 27. Esther. These are the twenty-seven books given the Jews by God. They are counted as twenty-two, however, like the letters of their Hebrew alphabet, because ten books which (Jews) reckon as five are double. But I have explained this clearly elsewhere. And they have two more books of disputed canonicity, the Wisdom of Sirach and the Wisdom of Solomon, apart from certain other apocrypha. All these sacred books taught (them) Judaism and Law's observances till the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Later on, in Epiphanius' Panarion, he goes even farther and counts Sirach and the Book of Wisdom as "divine writings" alongside the rest of the New and Old Testaments.

Epiphanius, Panarion (also called Against Heresies) lxxvi. 5
If you had been begotten by the Holy Spirit and instructed in the prophets and apostles, you must have gone through (the record) from the beginning of the genesis of the world until the times of Esther in twenty-seven books of the Old Testament, which are (also) numbered as twenty-two, also in the four holy Gospels, and in fourteen epistles of the holy apostle Paul, and in the writings which come before these, including the Acts of the Apostles in their times and the catholic epistles of James, Peter, John and Jude, and in the Revelation of John, and in the Wisdom books, I mean those of Solomon and of the son of Sirach - in short, all the divine writings...

So while Archibald holds up Epiphanius's list as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" - we instead see that Epiphanius definitely included Deuterocanonical Baruch and seemed to personally approve of Deuterocanonical Sirach and the Book of Wisdom.

Claim: Cyril of Jerusalem does not include the Deuterocanon in his list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Cyril of Jerusalem.

Archibald
Cyril of Jerusalem, in his Catechism, exhorts his catechumen diligently to learn from the church, what books appertain to the Old and New Testaments, and he says, "Read nothing which is apocryphal. Read the Scriptures, namely, the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, which were translated by the seventy-two interpreters." And in another place, "Meditate, as was said, in the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, and if you wish it, I will give you their names." Here follows a catalogue, agreeing with those already given, except that he adds Baruch to the list. When Baruch is mentioned as making one book with Jeremiah, as is done by some of the Fathers, it is most reasonable to understand those parts of Jeremiah, in the writing of which Baruch was concerned, as particularly the lii. chapter; for, if we understand them as referring to the separate book now called Baruch, the number which they are so careful to preserve will be exceeded. This apocryphal Baruch never existed in the Hebrew, and is never mentioned separately by any ancient author, as Bellarmine confesses. This book was originally written in Greek, but our present copies differ exceedingly from the old Latin translation.

The full text Archibald is quoting is this:

Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 4, Section 35 & 36
    Of these read the two and twenty books, but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far wiser and more pious than yourself were the Apostles, and the bishops of old time, the presidents of the Church who handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench thou not upon its statutes. And of the Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which, if you are desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them. For of the Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next, Joshua the son of Nave, and the book of Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and second books of the Kings are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and fourth one book. And in like manner, the first and second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second of Esdras are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these are the Historical writings. But those which are written in verses are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth book. And after these come the five Prophetic books: of the Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including Baruch and Lamentations and the Epistle ; then Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel, the twenty-second of the Old Testament...
    Then of the New Testament there are the four Gospels only, for the rest have false titles and are mischievous. The Manichæans also wrote a Gospel according to Thomas, which being tinctured with the fragrance of the evangelic title corrupts the souls of the simple sort. Receive also the Acts of the Twelve Apostles; and in addition to these the seven Catholic Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude; and as a seal upon them all, and the last work of the disciples, the fourteen Epistles of Paul. But let all the rest be put aside in a secondary rank. And whatever books are not read in Churches, these read not even by yourself, as you have heard me say.

As Archibald admitted, Cyril of Jerusalem included Baruch in his Old Testament canon. He also excluded Revelation from his New Testament canon. We see elsewhere he freely quotes from the Deuterocanonical Book of Wisdom, Sirach, and additions to Daniel.

Quote from Book of Wisdom
The Divine Nature then it is impossible to see with eyes of flesh: but from the works, which are Divine, it is possible to attain to some conception of His power, according to Solomon, who says, "For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures proportionably the Maker of them is seen." [Book of Wisdom 13:5] 
- Catechetical Lecture 9, Section 2
Quote from Sirach
If any man attempt to speak of God, let him first describe the bounds of the earth. You dwell on the earth, and the limit of this earth which is your dwelling you know not: how then shall you be able to form a worthy thought of its Creator? You behold the stars, but their Maker you behold not: count these which are visible, and then describe Him who is invisible, Who tells the number of the stars, and calls them all by their names. Violent rains lately came pouring down upon us, and nearly destroyed us: number the drops in this city alone: nay, I say not in the city, but number the drops on your own house for one single hour, if you can, but you can not. Learn then your own weakness; learn from this instance the mightiness of God: for He has numbered the drops of rain, which have been poured down on all the earth, not only now but in all time. The sun is a work of God, which, great though it be, is but a spot in comparison with the whole heaven; first gaze steadfastly upon the sun, and then curiously scan the Lord of the sun. "Seek not the things that are too deep for you, neither search out the things that are above your strength: what is commanded you, think thereupon" [Sirach 3:21-22]
- Catechetical Lecture 6, Section 4
Refers to Susanna (Additions to Daniel)
He endued with wisdom the soul of Daniel, that young as he was he should become a judge of Elders. The chaste Susanna was condemned as a wanton; there was none to plead her cause; for who was to deliver her from the rulers? She was led away to death, she was now in the hands of the executioners. But her Helper was at hand, the Comforter, the Spirit who sanctifies every rational nature. Come hither to me, He says to Daniel; young though thou be, convict old men infected with the sins of youth; for it is written, God raised up the Holy Spirit upon a young stripling ; and nevertheless, (to pass on quickly,) by the sentence of Daniel that chaste lady was saved.
- Catechetical Lecture 16, Section 31

So while Archibald holds up Cyril of Jerusalem's list as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" - we instead see that Cyril accepted and quoted from some of the Deuterocanon, and was missing some books from his list (like Revelation from the New Testament).

Claim: Council of Laodicea does not include the Deuterocanon in its list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of the Council of Laodicea.

Archibald
The Council of Laodicea forbade the reading of any books in the churches but such as were canonical; and that the people might know what these were, a catalogue was given, answering to the Canon which we now receive.

Again, let us review the full quotation.

Council of Laodicea
    These are all the books of Old Testament appointed to be read:  1, Genesis of the world; 2, The Exodus from Egypt; 3, Leviticus; 4, Numbers; 5, Deuteronomy; 6, Joshua, the son of Nun; 7, Judges, Ruth; 8, Esther; 9, Of the Kings, First and Second; 10, Of the Kings, Third and Fourth; 11, Chronicles, First and Second; 12, Esdras, First and Second; 13, The Book of Psalms; 14, The Proverbs of Solomon; 15, Ecclesiastes; 16, The Song of Songs; 17, Job; 18, The Twelve Prophets; 19, Isaiah; 20, Jeremiah, and Baruch, the Lamentations, and the Epistle; 21, Ezekiel; 22, Daniel.
    And these are the books of the New Testament:  Four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; The Acts of the Apostles; Seven Catholic Epistles, to wit, one of James, two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude; Fourteen Epistles of Paul, one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, one to the Ephesians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Hebrews, two to Timothy, one to Titus, and one to Philemon.

First, note that the council is a regional council, and thus not authoritative. Also note that the authenticity of this 60th canon of the council which lists these books is believed to not be genuine but a later addition, as it's missing from various Greek manuscripts.

Finally note that even if it is genuine, it includes the Deuterocanonical book of Baruch, and excludes Revelation.

So while Archibald holds up this canon list as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" - we instead see that some of the Deuterocanon was included in the list, and some canon Protestants and Catholics alike accept were excluded.

Claim: John Chrysostom only accepted OT books originally written in Hebrew tongue - and thus considered the Deuterocanon to be Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of John Chrysostom.

Archibald
Chrysostom, a man who excelled in the knowledge of the Scriptures, declares, "That all the divine books of the Old Testament were originally written in the Hebrew tongue, and that no other books were received." Hom. 4. in Gen.

Unfortunately this resource is not online, so I cannot see the full quotation Archibald is referring to. However, in this case there is no need.

John Chrysostom regularly quoted from the Deuterocanon in his homilies, and even explicitly identified Sirach as Holy Scripture.

Quote from Sirach as Holy Scripture
Let us then repeat to ourselves soothing charms drawn from the holy Scripture, and say, "You are earth and ashes." "Why is earth and ashes proud?" [Sirach 10:9], and, "The sway of his fury shall be his destruction" [Sirach 1:22]: and, "The wrathful man is not comely." [Proverbs 11:25, Septuagint]
- Homily 48 on the Gospel of John, John 7:8, Section 3
Quote from Wisdom
Wherefore we must cast out all wickedness from our souls, and never more contrive any deceit; for, says one, "To the perverse God sends crooked paths" [Proverbs 21:8, Septuagint]; and, "The holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit, and remove from thoughts that are without understanding." [Wisdom 1:5]
- Homily 41 on the Gospel of John, John 5:45-47
Quote from Tobit
And again; "Do not to another what you hate." [Tobit 4:15]
- Homily 13 on the Statues, Section 7
Quote from additions to Daniel
And again, "I have become old in the midst of all mine enemies." [Psalm 6:7 Septuagint] And again, "O you that are become old in evil days." [Daniel 13:52. Hist. Susan]
- Homily 15 on First Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 5:7-8, Section 10

So while Archibald holds up John Chrysostom's statement as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal", instead we see Chrysostom regularly quoted from the Deuterocanon as scripture.

Claim: Rufin (Tyrannius Rufinus) excludes the Deuterocanon in his list of canon - and thus considered them Apocrypha

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Tyrannius Rufinus.

Archibald
Rufin, in his Exposition of the Creed, observes, "That there were some books which were not called canonical, but received by our ancestors, as the Wisdom 53of Solomon, and another Wisdom of the Son of Sirach; of the same order are the books of Tobit, Judith, and the Maccabees."

Again, let us review the full quote.

Tyrannius Rufinus, Commentary on the Apostles' Creed / The Creed of Aquileia, Sections 37 & 38
Of the Old Testament, therefore, first of all there have been handed down five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Then Jesus Nave, (Joshua the son of Nun), The Book of Judges together with Ruth; then four books of Kings (Reigns), which the Hebrews reckon two; the Book of Omissions, which is entitled the Book of Days (Chronicles), and two books of Ezra (Ezra and Nehemiah), which the Hebrews reckon one, and Esther; of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; moreover of the twelve (minor) Prophets, one book; Job also and the Psalms of David, each one book. Solomon gave three books to the Churches, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles. These comprise the books of the Old Testament.

But it should be known that there are also other books which our fathers call not Canonical but Ecclesiastical: that is to say, Wisdom, called the Wisdom of Solomon, and another Wisdom, called the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach, which last-mentioned the Latins called by the general title Ecclesiasticus, designating not the author of the book, but the character of the writing. To the same class belong the Book of Tobit, and the Book of Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees. In the New Testament the little book which is called the Book of the Pastor of Hermas, [and that] which is called The Two Ways, or the Judgment of Peter; all of which they would have read in the Churches, but not appealed to for the confirmation of doctrine. The other writings they have named Apocrypha. These they would not have read in the Churches.

Note first that Rufinus did not completely exclude the Deuterocanon - he believed they should be included as part of the Bible and read in the Churches, but not used for confirmation of doctrine. These books were distinct from Apocrypha, which should not be read in the churches.

Also note that Rufinus does not exclude the Deuterocanonical book of Baruch from his list, but rather seems to include it as part of Jeremiah. Indeed later on he quotes from Baruch as the sayings of a prophet.

Tyrannius Rufinus, Commentary on the Apostles' Creed / The Creed of Aquileia, Section 5
Which also the Prophet foretold when he said, "This is our God: no other shall be accounted of in comparison of Him. He has found out all the way of knowledge, and has given it unto Jacob His servant and to Israel His beloved. Afterward He showed Himself upon the earth, and conversed with men." [Baruch 3:35-37]

So while Archibald holds up Rufinus' list as proof that "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" - we instead see that Rufinus explicitly believed these books were not apocrypha, and indeed likely included Baruch as full canon.

Claim: Augustine did not put the Deuterocanonical books on the same level as the genuine canonical books

The next piece of evidence Archibald exhibits in support of his statement "these books were not received as canonical by the Christian Fathers, but were expressly declared to be apocryphal" is that of Augustine.

Archibald
    Augustine is the only one among the Fathers who lived within four hundred years after the apostles, who seems to favour the introduction of these six disputed books into the Canon. In his work On Christian Doctrine, he gives a list of the books of the Old Testament, among which he inserts Tobit, Judith, the two books of Maccabees, two of Esdras, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus. These two last mentioned, he says, "are called Solomon’s, on account of their resemblance to his writings; although it is known that one of them was composed by the son of Sirach: which deserves to be received among the prophetical books." But this opinion he retracted afterwards.
    Augustine was accustomed to the Greek and Latin Bibles, in which those books had been introduced, and we must suppose, unless we would make him contradict himself, that he meant in this place merely to enumerate the books then contained in the sacred volume; for in many other places he clearly shows that he entertained the same opinion of the books of the Old Testament as the other Fathers...
    [...]
    In his commentary on the xl. Psalm, he says, "If any adversary should say you have forged these prophecies, let the Jewish books be produced—The Jews are our librarians." And on the lvi. Psalm, "When we wish to prove to the Pagans that Christ was predicted, we appeal to the writings in possession of the Jews; they have all these Scriptures."
    [...]
    It may be admitted, however, that Augustine entertained too high an opinion of these apocryphal books, but it is certain that he did not put them on a level with the genuine canonical books. He mentions a custom which prevailed in his time, from which it appears that although the apocryphal books were read in some of the churches, they were not read as Holy Scripture, nor put on a level with the canonical books; for he informs us that they were not permitted to be read from the same desk as the Canonical Scriptures, but from a lower place in the church.

First, let us just note what Archibald acknowledged - Augustine gave a list of canon, and it included the Deuterocanon.

Following this, Archibald attempts to portray that Augustine gradually grew and changed his mind, and came to think of the Deuterocanon as less than normal canon. To support this idea, Archibald quotes from numerous works of Augustine. A common thread in all of them is Augustine noting that Christianity inherited its canon from the Jews.

Archibald's error here is in ambiguity of terms. When Augustine spoke of Christianity inheriting scriptures from the Jews, who were our librarians, he was speaking of the seventy Jewish translators of the Septuagint - which included the Deuterocanon.

Augustine, in The City of God, Book 18, Chapter 43
...yet the Church has received this Septuagint translation just as if it were the only one; and it has been used by the Greek Christian people, most of whom are not aware that there is any other.

Augustine made a big distinction between the Septuagint Jewish translators from before Christ, compared to the Jews of his day who had rejected Christ and removed scriptures. We see this in his letters to Jerome.

Jerome, in Augustine's Letter 75
...In my attempt to translate into Latin, for the benefit of those who speak the same language with myself, the corrected Greek version of the Scriptures, I have labored not to supersede what has been long esteemed, but only to bring prominently forward those things which have been either omitted or tampered with by the Jews, in order that Latin readers might know what is found in the original Hebrew.

Augustine, in Letter 82
As to your translation, you have now convinced me of the benefits to be secured by your proposal to translate the Scriptures from the original Hebrew, in order that you may bring to light those things which have been either omitted or perverted by the Jews. But I beg you to be so good as state by what Jews this has been done, whether by those who before the Lord's advent translated the Old Testament--and if so, by what one or more of them--or by the Jews of later times, who may be supposed to have mutilated or corrupted the Greek Mss., in order to prevent themselves from being unable to answer the evidence given by these concerning the Christian faith. I cannot find any reason which should have prompted the earlier Jewish translators to such unfaithfulness. I beg of you, moreover, to send us your translation of the Septuagint, which I did not know that you had published.

So, rather than accepting the authority of the Jews in his day who denied Jesus was Christ and had a truncated canon, Augustine rather supported the larger Jewish Septuagint canon from before the time of Christ.

Indeed, we see Augustine refer to the Deuterocanonical book of Tobit as angel's testimony.

Augustine, in The City of God (Book I), Chapter 13
And Tobit, according to the angel's testimony, is commended, and is said to have pleased God by burying the dead. [Tobit 12:12]

Augustine also referred to the Deuterocanonical Maccabees as books held as canonical, not by the Jews of his day, but by the Church.

Augustine, in The City of God (Book XVIII), Chapter 36
From this time, when the temple was rebuilt, down to the time of Aristobulus, the Jews had not kings but princes; and the reckoning of their dates is found, not in the Holy Scriptures which are called canonical, but in others, among which are also the books of the Maccabees. These are held as canonical, not by the Jews, but by the Church...

And finally, Augustine gives a resounding defense of the Deuterocanonical Book of Wisdom, saying that it needs to be heard by all Christians with the veneration paid to divine authority.

Augustine, in On the Predestination of the Saints (Book I), Chapter 27
And since these things are so, the judgment of the book of Wisdom ought not to be repudiated, since for so long a course of years that book has deserved to be read in the Church of Christ from the station of the readers of the Church of Christ, and to be heard by all Christians, from bishops downwards, even to the lowest lay believers, penitents, and catechumens, with the veneration paid to divine authority...

So while Archibald attempts to use a plethora of quotations to indicate Augustine did not believe the Deuterocanonical books were part of canon, we instead see Augustine is their great defender.

Where did the modern Protestant Bible (without the Deuterocanon) come from?

Protestant Book: Church History in Plain Language

In "Church History in Plain Language, Third Edition" by Bruce L. Shelley, we see a Protestant interpretation of how the Old Testament canon came to be. This popular book is frequently used by universities. Here's the quote:

Church History in Plain Language, Third Edition, page 60
[The] debate centers around the fact that Jews in Palestine in the early years of Christianity had a canon corresponding to the thirty-nine books of the Protestant Old Testament. Jesus referred to this list when he spoke of the law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms (Luke 24:44). The evidence seems to indicate that neither Jesus nor his apostles ever quoted from the Apocrypha as Scripture.

Beyond Palestine, however, Jews were more inclined to consider as Scripture writings not included in this list of books. The Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint was especially influential in making known certain books of the Apocrypha because it included these books along with the Old Testament books accepted in Palestine.

Early Christians also differed, then, over the question of the Apocrypha. Believers in the eastern portion of the Roman Empire, nearest Palestine, tended to agree with the Jews in that area. In the West, however, Christians under the influence of Augustine, the well-known bishop of Hippo, usually received the Apocrypha as part of the canon of Scripture. During the sixteenth-century Reformation most Protestants accepted the view of early eastern Christians and rejected the Apocrypha as canonical. The Roman Catholic church, following Augustine, accepted the books. And that is how the churches differ to this day.

Shelley implies the modern Protestant canon was simply inheriting their list from the early eastern Christians, when in fact the modern Protestant canon first came into existence in the 1640s (well after the Reformation, and long after the early eastern Christians) - as we will now show from historical record.

How historical canon lists compare to the modern Protestant canon

The modern Protestant Bible is comprised of 39 books in the Old Testament and 27 books in the New Testament, for a total of 66 books.

This modern Protestant canon was never used in a Christian bible until the English civil war in the 1640s. Not even the Reformers or early Protestants used the modern Protestant canon.

Don't just take my word for it, let us prove it by reviewing throughout history all the lists of canon we have, and noting how they diverged from the modern Protestant Bible.

History

Around 170 AD, Melito of Sardis gives an Old Testament list which excludes Lamentations, Nehemiah, and Esther (Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, Book IV, Chapter 26, Section 14)

Also dating from around 170 AD, the Muratorian fragment gives a New Testament list which excludes James, 1 & 2 Peter, Hebrews, and 3 John and includes the Book of Wisdom.

Around 240 AD, Origen gives a New Testament list excluding Revelation (Homilies on Joshua, 7.1), and an Old Testament list for the Jews which excludes the 12 minor prophets and includes the Epistle of Jeremiah - part of the book of Baruch (Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, Book VI, Chapter 25, Section 1-2).

Around 350 AD, Cyril of Jerusalem gives a New Testament list excluding Revelation, and an Old Testament list including the book of Baruch (Catechetical Lecture 4, sections 35-36).

Around 367 AD, Hilary of Poitiers gives an Old Testament list which includes the Epistle of Jeremiah - part of the book of Baruch, and notes that some accept Tobit and Judith (Expositions of the Psalms, 15).

Also around 367 AD, Athanasius in a letter gives the first full New Testament list comprising all 27 books. He also gives an Old Testament list, including Baruch and excluding Esther. He says Esther, the book of Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermes were called non-Canon but profitable for instruction in the word of godliness (Letter 39).

Around 382 AD, the Council of Rome was held which gave the full New Testament list, and gave an Old Testament list including the full Deuterocanon (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, the Book of Wisdom, etc) (Decretum Gelasianum, Damasine List, Section II).

Around 385 AD, Epiphanius of Salamis gave an Old Testament list which included Baruch. He also noted two more books of disputed canonicity, Sirach and the Book of Wisdom - which he later on called 'divine writings' (Panarion viii. 6 and Panarion lxxvi. 5).

Around 390 AD, Gregory of Nazianzus gave a New Testament list excluding Revelation, and an Old Testament list excluding Esther (Concerning the Genuine Books of Divinely Inspired Scripture).

Also around 390 AD, Augustine gave the full New Testament list, and gave an Old Testament list including the full Deuterocanon (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, the Book of Wisdom, etc) (On Christian Doctrine, Book II, Chapter 8, Section 13).

Also around 390 AD, Jerome argues the Book of Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Tobit, and 2 Maccabees should be placed among the Apocryphal writings (Prologue to the Books of the Kings).

Note that Jerome did not explicitly exclude Baruch. Indeed, later Jerome quotes from Baruch as a prophet (Letter 77, Section 4). It's reasonable to assume that Jerome included Baruch as tacked on to the end of Jeremiah, a common practice in that day.

Equally important is that regardless of Jerome's private opinions, he submitted to the authority of the church, and included the full Deuterocanon (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, the Book of Wisdom, etc) in his Latin Vulgate translation, fully counting them as scripture.

Here's Jerome submitting on Judith based on the authority of the Nicene Council, even if he does not personally approve of the book:

Jerome's Preface to Judith
Among the Hebrews the Book of Judith is found among the Hagiographa, the authority of which toward confirming those which have come into contention is judged less appropriate. [...] But because this book is found by the Nicene Council to have been counted among the number of the Sacred Scriptures, I have acquiesced to your request...

Here's Jerome discussing multiple versions of the book of Daniel that were available, and how he submitted in selecting the one used by the churches - even if he did not believe that translation was good.

Jerome's Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 33
What sin have I committed in following the judgment of the churches? But when I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible, the man who makes this a charge against me proves himself to be a fool and a slanderer; for I explained not what I thought but what they commonly say against us.

Here is Jerome noting that the Jews of his day exclude Tobit from Divine Scriptures - but then submitting to the authority of the church in including it.

Jerome's Preface to Tobit
...the book of Tobias, which the Hebrews exclude from the catalogue of Divine Scriptures, being mindful of those things which they have titled Hagiographa. I have done enough for your desire, yet not by my study. For the studies of the Hebrews rebuke us and find fault with us, to translate this for the ears of Latins contrary to their canon. But it is better to be judging the opinion of the Pharisees to displease and to be subject to the commands of bishops...

Here's Jerome quoting from the Book of Wisdom as Holy Scripture:

Jerome's Letter 51, Sections 6 & 7
For in the book of Wisdom, which is inscribed with his name, Solomon says: "God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own eternity." [Wisdom 2:23]... Instead of the three proofs from Holy Scripture which you said would satisfy you if I could produce them, behold I have given you seven.

And finally, here's Jerome quoting from Sirach as scripture:

Jerome's Letter 108, Section 21
...for does not the scripture say: "Burden not yourself above your power?" [Sirach 13:2]

Around 393 AD, the Council of Hippo was held which gave the full New Testament list, and gave an Old Testament list including the full Deuterocanon (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, the Book of Wisdom, etc) (Canon xxxvi).

Around 397 AD, the Council of Carthage was held which gave the full New Testament list, and gave an Old Testament list including the full Deuterocanon (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, the Book of Wisdom, etc) (Source).

Around 400 AD, Tyrannius Rufinus gave an Old Testament canon list which excluded most of the Deuterocanon - except just like Jerome, note that he did not exclude Baruch (Commentary on the Apostles' Creed, sections 37 & 38). It is likely he included Baruch in his list as tacked on the end of Jerome, a common practice at that time - as he quotes earlier in the same work from Baruch as they sayings of a prophet (section 5).

Rufinus did not count the rest of the Deuterocanon as Apocrypha - rather, he counted them among the scriptures (as part of the Word of God), but he called them "Ecclesiastical" rather than "Canonical". He said they should be read in the churches, though not appealed to for the confirmation of doctrine. They were separate from the Apocrypha, which were not scriptures, and should not be read in the churches (section 38).

Also, Rufinus argued that removing the Deuterocanonical parts of the scriptures would not be a "correction of error" - which gives us confirmation that he indeed included the Deuterocanon as scriptures that weren't to be cut out.

Rufinus' Apology Against Jerome, 2.33
In all this abundance of learned men, has there been one who has dared to make havoc of the divine record handed down to the Churches by the Apostles and the deposit of the Holy Spirit? For what can we call it but havoc, when some parts of it are transformed, and this is called the correction of an error? For instance, the whole of the history of Susanna, which gave a lesson of chastity to the churches of God, has by him been cut out, thrown aside and dismissed. The hymn of the three children, which is regularly sung on festivals in the Church of God, he has wholly erased from the place where it stood. But why should I enumerate these cases one by one, when their number cannot be estimated?

Around 419 AD, another Council of Carthage was held which gave the full New Testament list, and gave an Old Testament list including the full Deuterocanon (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, the Book of Wisdom, etc) (Canon 24).

During this period of time, for about a thousand years Jerome's Latin Vulgate (which included the Deuterocanon) was the bible of Christianity.

Somewhere between 600-1000 AD, the Jewish Masoretes publish their text + canon. This canon matches the modern Protestant Old Testament canon - though these Jews reject the entire New Testament as authoritative.

Around 1442 AD, the Council of Florence was held which gave the full New Testament list, and gave an Old Testament list including the full Deuterocanon (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, the Book of Wisdom, etc) (Session 11-4 February 1442).

Around 1534 AD, Protestant Martin Luther published his Bible translation. In it, he moves Deuterocanon to the end of his Old Testament and labels them "Apocrypha" (Apocrypha introduction, Luther’s Bible). Similar to his Old Testament Apocrypha, he was skeptical of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation, and stuck them at the end of his New Testament, saying "Up to this point we have had to do with the true and certain chief books of the New Testament. The four which follow have from ancient times had a different reputation" (Preface to the Epistle to the Hebrews). He also notes that in his judgment, Esther deserves to be excluded from the Old Testament canon more than the rest of the Deuterocanon (Bondage of the Will, Section XLVI).

Even with Luther being against these Old Testament and New Testament books, he didn't remove them from his Bible translation - he just shifted them to the end of each Testament.

Around 1546 AD, the Catholic Council of Trent was held, which again proclaimed the canon including the full Deuterocanon (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, the Book of Wisdom, etc) (The Fourth Session, DECREE CONCERNING THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES).

Around 1547 AD, John Calvin blasted the Council of Trent, including their proclamation of canon. Calvin says that Catholics give full authority to the Deuterocanonical books, which lets them "prove Purgatory", "the worship of saints", and "exorcisms". He identifies the Deuterocanon as "ecclesiastical books, which might indeed be read to the people, but were not entitled to establish doctrine", as he says Ruffinus and Jerome did. He also notes that he is not "I am not one of those, however, who would entirely disapprove the reading of those books" (Acts of the Council of Trent with the Antidote, ON THE FOURTH SESSION).

Note that in Calvin's list of ecclesiastical but not canonical books, he lists the Deuterocanon... but leaves off Baruch. Ruffinus and Jerome (whom Calvin quotes) likewise leave off Baruch. This is intriguing because Calvin quotes from Baruch, calling him a prophet - just like Ruffinus and Jerome. Calvin even goes so far as to say that it is likely Paul, in his letter 1 Corinthians, borrowed from Baruch (Commentary on Corinthians - Volume 1, 1 Corinthians 10:19-24, Section 20). From this evidence, it appears Calvin accepted Baruch as canon as part of Jeremiah.

Around 1572 AD, the Protestant Church of England's Thirty-Nine Articles gave an Old Testament list that put the Deuterocanon not on the same level as the rest of the canonical books - the Deuterocanon was to be read for example of life and instruction of manners, but not used to establish doctrine (Article 6). The Deuterocanon was however still a part of the Holy Scriptures, and was included in the Church of England's King James Bible of 1611.

Around 1642 AD the English Civil War broke out, and it lasted until 1649 AD. The Long Parliament of 1644 decreed that only the Hebrew Canon would be read in the Church of England, and in 1647 the Westminster Confession of Faith was issued which decreed a 39-book Old Testament, with the Deuterocanon excluded completely from the Bible.

With the restoration of the monarchy to Charles II of England (1660-1685), the Church of England was once again governed by the Thirty-Nine Articles, and thus emphatically maintained that the Deuterocanon is part of the Bible and is to be read with respect by her members (but not used to establish any doctrine).

The modern Protestant bible most widely in use by Presbyterians, Baptists, and many other groups is descended from the Church of England's temporary list, propagated during their civil war in the 1640s. Never before then had a Christian used a bible with the exact same books as the modern Protestant list.

Where did the Old Testament come from?

The original Old Testament is comprised of numerous books, written over thousands of years, all the way up to a few hundred years before Christ. For the sake of clarity in what follows, we will refer to this as the original Hebrew Text for the Old Testament.

In the mid 1900s, the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered and changed our understanding of history. Dated to a few hundred years before Christ, these scrolls were associated with an ancient Jewish sect widely believed to be the Essenes.

Emanuel Tov, the chief editor of the Dead Sea Scrolls Project, identified five broad variation categories of Dead Sea Scroll texts: Proto-Masoretic, Pre-Septuagint, Pre-Samaritan, Qumran "Living Bible", and Non-Aligned (see appendix for more information).

The Proto-Masoretic Dead Sea Scroll texts show that the Masoretic Hebrew text (published 700-1000 years after Christ) remained faithful to the Proto-Masoretic Hebrew text which existed 1000 years previously.

The Pre-Septuagint Dead Sea Scroll texts show that the Greek Septuagint (published a few hundred years before Christ) was NOT a bad translation of the Proto-Masoretic Hebrew text; rather, it was a good translation of the Pre-Septuagint Hebrew text.

The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that the Jews had different Hebrew text traditions a few hundred years before Christ, of which we are concerned with the Pre-Septuagint and the Proto-Masoretic.

The Pre-Septuagint served as the foundation of the translation of the Greek Septuagint. See the appendix Septuagint Origin Stories for the various recorded historical tales of how the translation was made, but in summary the king of Egypt requested the translation be made, and 72 Jewish scholars (6 from each of the 12 tribes of Israel) independently translated identical versions of the entire Hebrew canon.

Why does all this matter? The Old Testament canon could not have been closed before all its books were written, so the earliest it could have been closed is a few hundred years before Christ.

The Protestant Old Testament canon descends from the Masoretic text canon declared by the Jews between 700-1000 AD, who inherited from the Proto-Masoretic Text which was at least as old as a few hundred years before Christ.

The Catholic Old Testament canon descends from the Septuagint text canon, translated a few hundred years before Christ from the Pre-Septuagint Hebrew text.

Jesus & NT Authors use of Septuagint

As it turns out, the New Testament authors (and Christ himself) accepted the Septuagint as authoritative and used it frequently. We know this because the Septuagint, in addition to including the Deuterocanon, has numerous minor textual differences from the Masoretic Text (which is what Protestants base their Old Testament off).

  • In Matthew 21:16, Jesus quotes Psalm 8:2 saying "Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babies you have ordained praise". In the Septuagint translation, Psalm 8:2 also says "ordained praise". However the Hebrew Scriptures (Masoretic Text) says "ordained strength".
  • 1 Peter 4:18 quotes the Septuagint Proverbs 11:31 as "If the truly righteous is scarcely saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?". The Hebrew says, "If the righteous is repaid on earth, how much more the wicked and the sinner!"
  • Hebrews 11:21 quotes the Septuagint Genesis 47:31 with Jacob bowing in worship over the head of his staff, while the Hebrew has Jacob bowing over the head of his bed.
  • Hebrews 10:5-7 quotes the Septuagint Psalm 40:6-8 as "a body have you prepared for me", while the Hebrew reads as "you have given me an open ear".
  • Acts 13:41 quotes the Septuagint Habakkuk 1:5 starting with "Look, you scoffers", while the Hebrew starts with "Look among the nations".
  • Acts 7:42-43 quotes the Septuagint Amos 5:25-27 as "You took up the tent of Moloch and the star of your god Rephan", while the Hebrew reads as "You shall take up Sikkuth your king, and Kiyyun your star-god".
  • Acts 8:32-33 quotes the Septuagint Isaiah 53:7-8 as "In his humiliation justice was denied him. Who can describe his generation? For his life is taken away from the earth.", while the Hebrew reads as "By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living".
  • James 4:6 quotes the Septuagint Proverbs 3:34 as "opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble", while the Hebrew reads similarly but with different underlying word-concepts as "scorns the scornful but he gives grace to the lowly".

In the book "Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey" (pages 25-32), by Protestant authors G. Archer and G. C. Chirichigno, we see that of the 386 times that the New Testament explicitly quotes from the Old Testament, 340 of those are from the Septuagint translation.

This secondary resource also examines Septuagint versus Masoretic quotes in the New Testament.

Early Church used Septuagint

The writings of the early Church Fathers are loaded with references to the Deuterocanonical books, which they clearly considered scripture. All examples below have full references in the Appendix OT Canon Formation

Numerous church fathers quoted from the Deuterocanon liberally in their sermons and writings: Clement of Rome (~80 AD), Polycarp of Smyrna (~135 AD), Irenaeus (~189 AD), Hippolytus (~204 AD), Tertullian (~240 AD), Alexander of Alexandria (~326 AD), and Cyril of Jerusalem (~350 AD).

Merely quoting from them does not by itself necessarily indicate they held them as Scripture, but in addition to the above we have numerous church fathers who explicitly quote from the Deuterocanon as Scripture: Clement of Alexandria (~198 AD), Origen (~240 AD), Cyprian of Carthage (250 AD), Basil of Caesarea (~364 AD), Hilary of Poitiers (~367 AD), Athanasius (~367 AD), Gregory of Nazianzus (~390 AD), Augustine (~390 AD), Jerome (~390 AD), Gregory of Nyssa (~395 AD), Ambrose (397 AD), Tyrannius Rufinus (400 AD), and John Chrysostom (407 AD).

So how and where did the Old Testament canon develop? Christianity inherited scriptures from Judaism, but it did not inherit a set canon.

Around 160 AD, Justin Martyr notes that believers of Christ use the Septuagint (which includes the Deuterocanon), but Jews have started using a smaller set of passages of Scripture (the Hebrew texts) - and he accuses them of removing many Scriptures that point to Christ.

Around 170 AD, Melito of Sardis writes a list that Eusebius records in his Ecclesiastical History around 324 AD. This list excludes the Deuterocanon - as well as excluding Lamentations, Nehemiah, and Esther.

Around 240 AD, Origen quotes from 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Sirach, and Susanna (additions to Daniel) explicitly as Scripture. He also quotes from the Book of Wisdom and Baruch. Origen notes that the Jews of his day have established a different Old Testament canon than that which is every Church of Christ - he identifies the Septuagint as "our Scriptures". In giving the canon the Jews used, he excludes the Deuterocanon - except for part of Baruch (the letter of Jeremiah). His list also appears to have the Jews excluding the 12 minor prophets, but that may be a transcription error (his Jewish canon list is preserved by a secondary source, Eusebius, from around 324 AD). Origen also notes that the reason the Jews of his day have a smaller canon is because their rulers and elders took away from the Scriptures every passage which negatively portrays them (like additions to Daniel). In this, he agrees with Justin Martyr that the Jews have removed some Scriptures from the Old Testament.

Around 325 AD, the Council of Nicaea occurs. Popular belief says this is where the Christian canon was declared - this is wrong. Voltaire in the 1700s popularized a fictitious anecdote that the canon was determined at this council by placing all the competing books on an altar during the council, and then keeping the ones that did not fall off - and this fictional story has been repeated as fact since his day (see this appendix for more information). In reality, nothing we have from the Council of Nicaea indicates they gave any rulings on canon. The only exception to this is in Jerome's preface to Judith from around 382 AD, in which he notes that the Council of Nicaea included the Deuterocanonical book of Judith among the Sacred Scriptures.

Around 350 AD, Cyril of Jerusalem gives an Old Testament list which includes Baruch.

Around 367 AD, Hilary of Poitiers gives an Old Testament list which includes the Epistle of Jeremiah (part of Baruch), and says "to this some add Tobit and Judith". Elsewhere he quotes from 2 Maccabees explicitly as Scripture.

Also around 367 AD, Athanasius gives an Old Testament list which includes Baruch and excludes Esther. He says Esther and the rest of the Deuterocanon (minus Baruch) were called non-Canon but profitable for instruction in the word of godliness. Elsewhere he quotes from the Book of Wisdom explicitly as Scripture.

Around 382 AD, the Council of Rome was held. This Council published the New Testament Canon, as well as the Old Testament Canon which included the Deuterocanon.

Around 385 AD, Epiphanius of Salamis gives an Old Testament list which includes Baruch, and notes "two more books of disputed canonicity", Sirach and the Book of Wisdom. Later on he calls Sirach and the Book of Wisdom "divine writings".

Around 390 AD, Gregory of Nazianzus gives an Old Testament list which excludes Esther and the Deuterocanon. He also gives a New Testament list excluding Revelation. Elsewhere he quotes from Judith explicitly as Scripture.

Also around 390 AD, Augustine gives an Old Testament list including the Deuterocanon. He identifies the Septuagint as the Old Testament that the Church has received. He and Jerome also discuss Jerome's Latin translation, and how Jerome's purpose was to "bring to light those things which have been either omitted or perverted by the Jews."

Also around 390 AD, Jerome took the world by storm. Jerome created the Latin Vulgate, a translation of the bible used for over a thousand years.

In his preface to Kings (called his 'helmeted' preface), Jerome says that Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Tobias, and 2 Maccabees should be placed among the Apocryphal writings, as he did not have a Hebrew version of them to translate into his Latin Vulgate. Note that Baruch is missing from that list, as are the additions to Daniel and Esther.

And yet, Jerome still quotes from the Deuterocanon frequently. He quotes from the Book of Wisdom as Holy Scripture, he cites the word of Baruch as from a prophet, he quotes from Sirach in the same breath as Matthew, and refers to a story in the additions to Daniel.

So what's going on?

Jerome, at great pain and cost, obtained the Hebrew scriptures from the Jews. He notes that the Septuagint has achieved inspired-level status among the Early Church, so his going back to the Hebrew is interpreted as an attack on the validity of the Septuagint.

To counter this zealous devotion to the Septuagint, he argues that Jesus (and the apostles/evangelists) quote from the Hebrew, not the Septuagint. Particularly, he posits that wherever the Septuagint disagrees with the Hebrew, the Apostles of Christ quote from the Hebrew - and their authority is superior to that of the seventy translators.

He then issues a challenge - let his accuser show anything in the New Testament which comes from the Septuagint, but which is not found in the Hebrew, and he will end the controversy (the implication being he will cease pushing for the superiority of the Hebrew texts). As proven in an earlier section here, the New Testament actually quotes from the Septuagint (against the Masoteric text) many times! In this, Jerome's challenge has been met, and he was proven wrong.

So Jerome personally preferred the Hebrew text & canon over the Septuagint, primarily because he believed that the Apostles and Christ quoted from the Hebrew (and that their quotes were mangled in the Septuagint). And yet, even with Jerome’s personal preference, he notes that he does not condemn the Septuagint, and submits himself to the church with regards to canon.

In his Latin Vulgate (latin translation of Old & New Testaments), he both translated and included the deuterocanon as part of the canon.

In the prefaces to his translation, he included his personal reservations - but the prefaces were written not so much as prologues than as cover letters to specific individuals to accompany copies of his translations, and were not intended for a general audience.

Around 393 AD, the Council of Hippo was held. This Council published the New Testament Canon, as well as the Old Testament Canon which included the Deuterocanon.

Also around 397 AD, the Council of Carthage was held. This Council published the New Testament Canon, as well as the Old Testament Canon which included the Deuterocanon. The Council notes that it's canon declaration is pending approval from the "Church across the sea" - that is, Rome.

Around 400 AD, Tyrannius Rufinus gives an Old Testament list where he excludes all the Deuterocanon by name except for Baruch. He may have included Baruch in his canon under Jeremiah, as he later quotes Baruch as the saying of a prophet. He calls the Deuterocanon (minus Baruch) "Ecclesiastical" but not "Canonical" - they would have been read in the Churches, but not appealed to for the confirmation of doctrine. He notes this is separate from Apocrypha, which would not have been read in the Churches.

Around 419 AD, another Council of Carthage was held. This Council published the New Testament Canon, as well as the Old Testament Canon which included the Deuterocanon.

A Question of Authority

Looking through history, we see how both the Protestant and Catholic Old Testament canons developed. The fundamental difference is the question of authority.

Catholics

Catholics hold that the same early Church that had the authority to define the New Testament canon had the authority to define the Old Testament canon. At the time of Christ, Judaism had a collection of Scriptures, but no set canon - and that is what Christianity inherited from them. The Judaism that continued after the time of Jesus - specifically, the Judaism that rejected Jesus - lacked the authority to define a set of canon. The Jewish reduced canon that was declared after the time of Christ was in response to the growing Christian 'sect', which had adopted the larger Septuagint as its Scriptures.

This lack of belief in the authority of Jews who denied Christ is clearly seen in Jerome's letter to Augustine, in which Jerome denies the authority of Theodotion (a scholar from ~150 AD) on the basis of him remaining a Jew after the passion of Jesus Christ:

(Augustine) Letter #75
Jerome: ...seeing that Origen borrowed the things which he has added from the edition of a man who, after the passion of Christ, was a Jew and a blasphemer.

The early church itself was very much so aware of the difference between the Septuagint Christians had adopted, and the smaller Jewish canon - indeed, they believed that the Jews after the time of Christ, who denied Jesus as Christ, had stripped books out.

~160 AD: Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 71
    But I am far from putting reliance in your teachers, who refuse to admit that the interpretation made by the seventy elders who were with Ptolemy [king] of the Egyptians is a correct one; and they attempt to frame another. And I wish you to observe, that they have altogether taken away many Scriptures from the translations effected by those seventy elders who were with Ptolemy, and by which this very man who was crucified is proved to have been set forth expressly as God, and man, and as being crucified, and as dying; but since I am aware that this is denied by all of your nation, I do not address myself to these points, but I proceed to carry on my discussions by means of those passages which are still admitted by you. For you assent to those which I have brought before your attention, except that you contradict the statement, 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive,' and say it ought to be read, 'Behold, the young woman shall conceive.' And I promised to prove that the prophecy referred, not, as you were taught, to Hezekiah, but to this Christ of mine: and now I shall go to the proof...
~240 AD: Origen in his Letter to Africanus
    In answer to this, I have to tell you what it behooves us to do in the cases not only of the History of Susanna, which is found in every Church of Christ in that Greek copy which the Greeks use, but is not in the Hebrew, or of the two other passages you mention at the end of the book containing the history of Bel and the Dragon, which likewise are not in the Hebrew copy of Daniel; but of thousands of other passages also which I found in many places when with my little strength I was collating the Hebrew copies with ours. [...]
    And I make it my endeavor not to be ignorant of their various readings, lest in my controversies with the Jews I should quote to them what is not found in their copies, and that I may make some use of what is found there, even although it should not be in our Scriptures. [...]
    Wherefore I think no other supposition is possible, than that they who had the reputation of wisdom, and the rulers and elders, took away from the people every passage which might bring them into discredit among the people. We need not wonder, then, if this history of the evil device of the licentious elders against Susanna is true, but was concealed and removed from the Scriptures by men themselves not very far removed from the counsel of these elders. [...]
    What I have said is, I think, sufficient to prove that it would be nothing wonderful if this history were true, and the licentious and cruel attack was actually made on Susanna by those who were at that time elders, and written down by the wisdom of the Spirit, but removed by these rulers of Sodom, as the Spirit would call them. [...]
~400 AD: Jerome & Augustine in their letters to each other

Jerome, Letter 75: ...In my attempt to translate into Latin, for the benefit of those who speak the same language with myself, the corrected Greek version of the Scriptures, I have labored not to supersede what has been long esteemed, but only to bring prominently forward those things which have been either omitted or tampered with by the Jews, in order that Latin readers might know what is found in the original Hebrew.

Augustine, Letter 82: As to your translation, you have now convinced me of the benefits to be secured by your proposal to translate the Scriptures from the original Hebrew, in order that you may bring to light those things which have been either omitted or perverted by the Jews. But I beg you to be so good as state by what Jews this has been done, whether by those who before the Lord's advent translated the Old Testament--and if so, by what one or more of them--or by the Jews of later times, who may be supposed to have mutilated or corrupted the Greek Mss., in order to prevent themselves from being unable to answer the evidence given by these concerning the Christian faith. I cannot find any reason which should have prompted the earlier Jewish translators to such unfaithfulness. I beg of you, moreover, to send us your translation of the Septuagint, which I did not know that you had published.
~600 AD: Isidore of Seville
As a certain one of those who know has recorded, the Hebrews received this work (Wisdom) among the Canonical Scriptures. But after they had seized and killed the Christ, remembering the most evident testimonies concerning Christ in that same book, in which it is written: ‘The impious said among themselves, ‘let us seize the just,’ etc., taking counsel lest we might lay upon them such an evident sacrilege, they cut it off from the prophetic volumes, and prohibited its reading to their people.
- Isidore of Seville, as quoted by Andrew Edward Breen in his A General and Critical Introduction to the Study of Holy Scripture. Original source not identified.

One big dividing moment between Christians and Jews came in the Jewish Bar Kokhba revolt around 132 AD. The Jews rallied behind Simon bar Kokhba, whom many Jews proclaimed the Messiah. Christians refused to join under his rebellion, as they believed Jesus was the messiah, not Simon bar Kokhba - which led to the Jews branding Jewish Christians as traitors.

~160 AD: Justin Martyr in his Dialogue First Apology, Chapter 31
    They are also in the possession of all Jews throughout the world; but they, though they read, do not understand what is said, but count us foes and enemies; and, like yourselves, they kill and punish us whenever they have the power, as you can well believe. For in the Jewish war which lately raged, Barchochebas, the leader of the revolt of the Jews, gave orders that Christians alone should be led to cruel punishments, unless they would deny Jesus Christ and utter blasphemy. In these books, then, of the prophets we found Jesus our Christ foretold as coming, born of a virgin, growing up to man's estate, and healing every disease and every sickness, and raising the dead, and being hated, and unrecognised, and crucified, and dying, and rising again, and ascending into heaven, and being, and being called, the Son of God.
~324 AD: Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, Book IV, Chapter 6, Section 2
The leader of the Jews at this time was a man by the name of Barcocheba (which signifies a star), who possessed the character of a robber and a murderer, but nevertheless, relying upon his name, boasted to them, as if they were slaves, that he possessed wonderful powers; and he pretended that he was a star that had come down to them out of heaven to bring them light in the midst of their misfortunes.

Interestingly, the first Jew to explicitly reject the inspiration of the Deuterocanonical books and Christian New Testament is Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph, who supported Simon bar Kokhba in this rebellion and potentially his claim to being the messiah.

Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph in his Tosefta Yadayim, 2:13
The Gospels and heretical books do not defile the hands. The books of Ben Sira and all other books written from then on, do not defile the hands.

Protestants

Protestants must believe that the early Church had the authority to define the New Testament canon (or at least to recognize it), but lacked the authority to define the Old Testament canon. They believe instead that the Jews who denied Jesus had the authority to determine Old Testament canon. They give Jerome as their champion to defend their cause.

Jerome (through great pains) obtained the post-Christ Jewish copy of the Old Testament, and compared it to the Septuagint used in the Christian church.

...my own familiar friend should frankly accept from a Christian and a friend what he has taken great pains to obtain from the Jews and has written down for him at great cost.
- Jerome, in his Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 35

In this comparison, Jerome found numerous differences. He reasoned that the Jewish copy must be the more accurate of the two, as the Jewish copy was written in Hebrew just like the original Old Testament, while the Septuagint was a translation - and in translating, errors can crop up.

Hear, therefore, O rival; listen, O detractor! I do not condemn, I do not censure the Seventy, but I confidently prefer the Apostles to all of them. Christ speaks to me through their mouth, who I read were placed before the prophets among the Spiritual gifts, among which interpreters hold almost the last place.
- Jerome, in his Preface to Pentateuch

This belief that the Septuagint was a poor translation of the Jewish scripture led him to believe that the Septuagint could also have been mistaken in its collection of scriptures, causing Jerome to prefer the shortened Jewish canon over the expanded Septuagint canon. When reviewing the New Testament, Jerome found that where the New Testament quoted the Old Testament in a spot where the Jewish copy and the Septuagint disagreed on the text, the New Testament followed the Jewish copy (and not the Septuagint).

The Hebrew Scriptures are used by apostolic men; they are used, as is evident, by the apostles and evangelists. Our Lord and Savior himself whenever he refers to the Scriptures, takes his quotations from the Hebrew; as in the instance of the words "He that believes in me, as the Scripture has said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water," and in the words used on the cross itself, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani," which is by interpretation "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" not, as it is given by the Septuagint, "My God, my God, look upon me, why have you forsaken me?" and many similar cases. I do not say this in order to aim a blow at the seventy translators; but I assert that the Apostles of Christ have an authority superior to theirs. Wherever the Seventy agree with the Hebrew, the apostles took their quotations from that translation; but, where they disagree, they set down in Greek what they had found in the Hebrew. 
- Jerome, in his Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 34

This led him to proclaim his great challenge:

And further, I give a challenge to my accuser. I have shown that many things are set down in the New Testament as coming from the older books, which are not to be found in the Septuagint; and I have pointed out that these exist in the Hebrew. Now let him show that there is anything in the New Testament which comes from the Septuagint but which is not found in the Hebrew, and our controversy is at an end.
- Jerome, in his Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 34

As we found earlier in our section examining Jesus' use of the Septuagint, Jerome was wrong. Of the 386 quotations of the Old Testament in the New Testament, 340 of them come from the Septuagint.

Additionally, he was wrong that the Septuagint Greek text was a poor translation of the Proto-Masoretic Hebrew text he obtained. As we noted earlier, the Dead Sea Scrolls showed us that the Septuagint Greek text was rather a good translation of the Pre-Septuagint Hebrew text, one of several Hebrew text traditions that existed a few hundred years before Christ.

The Protestant fathers of the reformation followed Jerome's teaching on this matter.

Of their admitting all the Books promiscuously into the Canon, I say nothing more than it is done against the consent of the primitive Church. It is well known what Jerome states as the common opinion of earlier times. And Ruffinus, speaking of the matter as not at all controverted, declares with Jerome that Ecclesiasticus, the Wisdom of Solomon, Tobit, Judith, and the history of the Maccabees, were called by the Fathers not canonical but ecclesiastical books, which might indeed be read to the people, but were not entitled to establish doctrine.

- Calvin, in his Acts of the Council of Trent with the Antidote, ON THE FOURTH SESSION

And yet... even if Jerome had a different opinion of what should be included in canon, it should be noted that he submitted himself to the church and accepted its declarations.

Among the Hebrews the Book of Judith is found among the Hagiographa, the authority of which toward confirming those which have come into contention is judged less appropriate. [...] But because this book is found by the Nicene Council to have been counted among the number of the Sacred Scriptures, I have acquiesced to your request...
- Jerome, in his Preface to Judith
What sin have I committed in following the judgment of the churches? But when I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible, the man who makes this a charge against me proves himself to be a fool and a slanderer; for I explained not what I thought but what they commonly say against us.
- Jerome, in his Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 33
...the book of Tobias, which the Hebrews exclude from the catalogue of Divine Scriptures, being mindful of those things which they have titled Hagiographa. I have done enough for your desire, yet not by my study. For the studies of the Hebrews rebuke us and find fault with us, to translate this for the ears of Latins contrary to their canon. But it is better to be judging the opinion of the Pharisees to displease and to be subject to the commands of bishops...
- Jerome, in his Preface to Tobit

In his Latin Vulgate translation, he included the Deuterocanon and the translation became the bible for the church for over a thousand years.

Jerome's private opinion on canon, based on the Veritas Hebraica (truth of the Hebrew Scriptures) persisted in the background and gave numerous church fathers pause, or at least caution, through the ages. This has continued up even to modern day Protestants, despite the finding of the existence of the Pre-Septuagint text in the Dead Sea Scrolls (which proved the Septuagint was not a bad translation of the Masoretic hebrew text, but a good translation of a different Hebrew text tradition). See Appendix "Proto-Masoretic and Pre-Septuagint" for more information on this.

Assorted Arguments

Josephus

Against Apion, 1.41
For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, [as the Greeks have,] but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine; and of them five belong to Moses, which contain his laws and the traditions of the origin of mankind till his death. This interval of time was little short of three thousand years; but as to the time from the death of Moses till the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, who reigned after Xerxes, the prophets, who were after Moses, wrote down what was done in their times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God, and precepts for the conduct of human life. It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there hath not been an exact succession of prophets since that time; and how firmly we have given credit to these books of our own nation is evident by what we do; for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add any thing to them, to take any thing from them, or to make any change in them; but it is become natural to all Jews immediately, and from their very birth, to esteem these books to contain Divine doctrines, and to persist in them, and, if occasion be willingly to die for them.

From the above, Protestants argue that Josephus is saying all prophecy ceased after the time of Artaxerxes (timing of events in book of Esther). Therefore, the Deuterocanon is not inspired scripture (as only prophets could write divinely inspired books). So Josephus believed in a closed canon of 22 books matching the modern day Protestant Old Testament canon, and no other works were considered scripture.

The Catholic would start by asking if John the Baptist was a prophet? Jesus said yes, and more than a prophet in Luke 7:26. Christians must accept that Josephus is thus wrong that prophets ceased after the time of Esther. It's important to remember that Josephus was a Jew, AFTER the time of Christ, that denied Jesus. He does not have authority in Christianity.

Also noteworthy is that Josephus exaggerates. In the above quoted section, we see him declare "for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add any thing to them, to take any thing from them, or to make any change in them". The Dead Sea Scrolls discovery proves that even before Josephus this was incorrect, as multiple traditions of the scripture existed within his day.

Finally, Josephus notes that his histories are written using only the authorities of the Jewish sacred books...

Antiquities of the Jews, 20:11:2
I shall now, therefore, make an end here of my Antiquities... I have also carried down the succession of our kings, and related their actions, and political administration, without [considerable] errors, as also the power of our monarchs; and all according to what is written in our sacred books; for this it was that I promised to do in the beginning of this history.

And yet... he quotes from the Deuterocanon multiple times. In Antiquities of the Jews 11.8.7 he quotes from 1 Maccabees 1:1-9, and in Antiquities 12.5.1-3 he quotes from 1 Maccabees 1:10-64, and in Antiquities 11.6.6 he quotes from Deuterocanonical additions to Esther (chapter 13).

Maccabees itself says its not inspired as prophets had ceased to appear

1 Maccabees 9:27
There had not been such great distress in Israel since the time prophets ceased to appear among the people.

From the above, Protestants will argue that Maccabees identifies itself as uninspired, since prophets ceased to appear and thus Maccabees wasn't written by a prophet.

The problem with this argument is that by the same logic, the Psalms and Lamentations aren't inspired.

Psalm 74:8
They said in their hearts, ‘Destroy them all! Burn all the shrines of God in the land!’ Now we see no signs, we have no prophets, no one who knows how long
Lamentations 2:9
Sunk into the ground are her gates; he has removed and broken her bars. Her king and her princes are among the pagans; priestly instruction is wanting, And her prophets have not received any vision from the LORD.

Luke 24:44 and the three-fold division of the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms excludes the Deuterocanon

Luke 24:44
Then he said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you—that everything written about me in the law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms must be fulfilled."

From the above, Protestants will argue that Jesus himself identified the Old Testament canon as the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms - which excludes the Deuterocanon.

The problem with this argument is that this idiomatic phrase with its three-fold division does not necessarily exclude the books of the Deuterocanon. This Jewish work identifies the three-fold division, then identifies the Deuterocanonical book of Sirach as being within it.

Baba Kamma 92b (Jewish work)
This matter is written in the Torah, repeated in the Prophets, and repeated a third time in the Hagiographa, and was taught in the Mishnah, and was taught in a Baraitha... and repeated a third time in the Hagiographa, as it is written, ‘He will stay with you for a time, but if you falter, he will not stand by you’ (Sir 12:15).

Argument: The Deuterocanon is never quoted in the New Testament, therefore its not part of canon

Absence of citation is no argument against canonicity

If absence of New Testament quotations is intended to prove the Deuterocanon as non-canonical, then the same principle would need to be applied to the Protocanonical books of Judges, Ruth, Ezra, Nehemiah, Obadiah, Nahum, Esther, the Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes - all of which are also not quoted in the New Testament. Both Catholics and Protestants believe those books are indeed part of canon, therefore this argument has faulty logic.

Additionally, the Deuterocanon is referenced numerous times in the New Testament. The Protestant King James Bible (1611), which includes the Deuterocanon, even included these cross-references.

Matthew 6:14-15 and Sirach 7:14

Matthew 6:14-15
For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.
Mark 11:25
When you stand to pray, forgive anyone against whom you have a grievance, so that your heavenly Father may in turn forgive you your transgressions.
Sirach 28:2
Forgive your neighbor’s injustice; then when you pray, your own sins will be forgiven.

Matthew 27:43 and Wisdom 2:15,16

Matthew 27:41-43
Likewise the chief priests with the scribes and elders mocked him and said, “He saved others; he cannot save himself. So he is the king of Israel! Let him come down from the cross now, and we will believe in him. He saved others; he cannot save himself. He trusted in God; let him deliver him now if he wants him. For he said, 'I am the Son of God.'
Wisdom 2:17-22
Let us see whether his words be true; let us find out what will happen to him. For if the just one be the son of God, he will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes. With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, 'God will take care of him.' These were their thoughts, but they erred; for their wickedness blinded them, And they knew not the hidden counsels of God; neither did they count on a recompense of holiness nor discern the innocent souls' reward.

Compared to the also applicable, but less specific (for being loved by God vs. for being the son of God):

Psalm 22:8-9
All who see me mock me; they curl their lips and jeer; they shake their heads at me: 'You relied on the LORD—let him deliver you; if he loves you, let him rescue you.'

Historical Christian figures understood this quotation from Matthew to be pointing to the passage in the Book of Wisdom. (Barnabas, Epistle of Barnabas 6:7; Hippolytus of Rome, Against the Jews, 8-9; Cyprian of Carthage, Against the Jews, 2.14.1; Hilary of Poitiers, Tract. in Psalm 41.12; Jerome (without mention of prophecy) Commentary on Isaiah, Book 2, 3:1; Gregory the Great, Commentary on Job 9.89; Nicephorus, Apologeticus Pro Sacris Imaginibus, PG 100:751-752 et al.)

Luke 6:31 and Tobit 4:15

Luke 6:31
Do to others as you would have them do to you.
Matthew 7:12
Do to others whatever you would have them do to you. This is the law and the prophets.
Tobit 4:15
Do to no one what you yourself dislike.

See this citation in a scan of the 1611 KJV Bible here.

Luke 14:13 and Tobit 4:7

Luke 14:13
But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, and the blind…
Tobit 4:7
Give alms out of thy substance, and turn not away thy face from any poor person: for so it shall come to pass that the face of the Lord shall not be turned from thee.

John 10:22 and 1 Maccabees 4:59

John 10:22
And it was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem: and it was winter.
1 Maccabees 4:59
And Judas, and his brethren, and all the church of Israel decreed, that the day of the dedication of the altar should be kept in its season from year to year for eight days, from the five and twentieth day of the month of Casleu, with joy and gladness.

The feast of dedication mentioned in the Gospel of John was established in the time of the Maccabees, and is known today as Hanukkah.

Romans and Wisdom, clay and the potter

Romans 9:20
On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, ‘Why did you make me like this,’ will it?
Wisdom 12:12
For who can say to you, ‘What have you done?’ or ‘who can oppose your decree?’ Or when peoples perish, who can challenge you, their maker; or who can come into your presence as vindicator of unjust men?
Romans 9:21
Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use, and another for common use?
Wisdom 15:7
For truly the potter, laboriously working the soft earth, molds for our service each several article: Both the vessels that serve for clean purposes and their opposites, all alike; As to what shall be the use of each vessel of either class the worker in clay is the judge.
Romans 9:22
What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
Wisdom 12:20
For if thou didst punish the enemies of thy children, and they condemned to death, with such deliberation, giving them time and place, whereby they might be delivered from their malice?

While the imagery of the potter and clay can be found elsewhere in the Protocanon, Romans and Wisdom both share the "twist" that both good and bad are made from the same lump of clay.

Romans 11:34 and Wisdom 9:13

Romans 11:34
For who hath known the mind of the Lord? Or who hath been his counselor?
Wisdom 9:13
For who among men is he that can know the counsel of God? Or who can think what the will of God is?

Paul is actually quoting Isaiah 40:13 here, though the same thought is present in the Wisdom passage above. It's also noteworthy that Paul is specifically quoting the Septuagint version of this passage, not the version that appears in most Protestant bibles from the Masoretic text.

Isaiah 40:13 [Masoretic]
Who has measured the Spirit of the Lord, or what man shows him his counsel?
Isaiah 40:13 [Septuagint]
Who has known the mind of the Lord? and who has been his counsellor, to instruct him?

2 Corinthians 9:7 and Sirach 35:8

2 Corinthians 9:7
Every one as he hath determined in his heart, not with sadness, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.
Sirach 35:8
With each contribution show a cheerful countenance, and pay your tithes in a spirit of joy.
Proverbs 22:8 [Septuagint]
He that sows wickedness shall reap troubles; and shall fully receive the punishment of his deeds. God loves a cheerful and liberal man; but [a man] shall fully prove the folly of his works.
Proverbs 22:8-9 [Masoretic]
Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity, and the rod of his fury will fail. Whoever has a bountiful eye will be blessed, for he shares his bread with the poor. 

Hebrew 1:3 and Wisdom 7:26

Hebrew 1:3
Who is the refulgence of his glory, the very imprint of his being, and who sustains all things by his mighty word. When he had accomplished purification from sins, he took his seat at the right hand of the Majesty on high...
Wisdom 7:26
For she is the refulgence of eternal light, the spotless mirror of the power of God, the image of his goodness.

The word translated refulgence is the Greek word 'apaugasma', which only appears in this spot in the Septuagint (linking the two passages). The author of Hebrews takes Wisdom's description of divine wisdom and applies it to Jesus.

Hebrews 11:35 and 2 Maccabees 7:7

Hebrews 11:35
Women received back their dead through resurrection. Some were tortured and would not accept deliverance, in order to obtain a better resurrection.
2 Maccabees 7:1,13-14
It also happened that seven brothers with their mother were arrested and tortured with whips and scourges by the king, to force them to eat pork in violation of God’s law... Now when this man was dead also, they tormented and mangled the fourth in like manner. So when he was ready to die he said thus, It is good, being put to death by men, to look for hope from God to be raised up again by him: as for thee, thou shalt have no resurrection to life.

This is the only example in the Greek Old Testament of people experiencing torture and not acceptable deliverance for hope of a better resurrection.

Revelation 8:2 and Tobit 12:15

This one is not mentioned in the 1611 KJV, but is still worth noting.

Revelation 8:2
And I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and seven trumpets were given to them.
Tobit 12:15
For I am the angel Raphael, one of the seven, who stand before the Lord.

Seven angels standing before God is not mentioned anywhere else in the Greek Old Testament except this passage in Tobit.

A quotation in the New Testament does not make a work part of canon

Book of Jasher

Joshua 10:13
"And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies." Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day.
2 Samuel 1:17-19
And David lamented with this lamentation over Saul and Jonathan his son, and he said it should be taught to the people of Judah; behold, it is written in the Book of Jashar. He said: "Your glory, O Israel, is slain on your high places! How the mighty have fallen!" [...]
2 Timothy 3:8
Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith.
[Note: These names Jannes and Jambres are not mentioned in Scripture. They are mentioned in the Book of Jasher, Chapter 79. Note there are several works with this title, this one is traced to a book from 1613.]

Book of the Wars of the Lord

Numbers 21:14
Therefore it is said in the Book of the Wars of the Lord, "Waheb in Suphah, and the valleys of the Arnon, [...]"

Book of Shemaiah, and of Iddo the Seer

2 Chronicles 9:29
Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, from first to last, are they not written in the history of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat?
2 Chronicles 12:15
Now the acts of Rehoboam, from first to last, are they not written in the chronicles of Shemaiah the prophet and of Iddo the seer? There were continual wars between Rehoboam and Jeroboam.
2 Chronicles 13:22
The rest of the acts of Abijah, his ways and his sayings, are written in the story of the prophet Iddo.

Book of Enoch

Jude 1:14-15
It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
1 Enoch 1:9
And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of [His] holy ones to execute judgement upon all, and to destroy [all] the ungodly: and to convict all flesh of all the works [of their ungodliness] which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners [have spoken] against Him.

Some scriptures quoted in the New Testament have no corresponding Old Testament passage

Indeed, there are also many things quoted as scripture in the New Testament that don't appear in the Old Testament at all. Early church fathers believed the Jews of their day who denied Christ had deleted things from scriptures, and these quotations from the New Testament (with no corresponding Old Testament passage) seem to support that.

James 4:5
Or do you suppose it is to no purpose that the Scripture says, "He yearns jealously over the spirit that he has made to dwell in us"?
John 7:38
Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, 'Out of his heart will flow rivers of living water.'
Matthew 2:23
And he went and lived in a city called Nazareth, so that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, that he would be called a Nazarene.
1 Corinthians 15:45
Thus it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
Luke 24:46
As they were talking about these things, Jesus himself stood among them, and said to them, "Peace to you!" [...] Then he said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled." Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. [...]"

- Some claim this is a vague allusion to Hosea 6:2, which says "After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live before him."
Mark 9:12
And he said to them, "Elijah does come first to restore all things. And how is it written of the Son of Man that he should suffer many things and be treated with contempt?"

- Some say this is a vague allusion to Isaiah 53
1 Corinthians 2:9
But, as it is written, "What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him"

- Origen (~240 AD) says the quote comes from the Apocalypse of Elias in his Commentary on Matthew 27:9
- Jerome (~390 AD) found the words in the Ascension of Isaiah and the Apocalypse of Elias
- Some say this is a paraphrase of Isaiah 64:4, which says "From of old no one has heard or perceived by the ear, no eye has seen a God besides you, who acts for those who wait for him." The words are similar, though the concept is different.
Hebrews 11:37
They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were killed with the sword. They went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, afflicted, mistreated...

- There's no reference in the Old Testament to a good man being sawn in two.
- An ancient tradition, mentioned both by Jewish and by early Christian writers, relates that Isaiah was thus put to death by order of Manasseh.

~160 AD: Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 120
But since what follows indicates that the reference is to Christ (for it is, 'and He shall be the expectation of nations'), I do not proceed to have a mere verbal controversy with you, as I have not attempted to establish proof about Christ from the passages of Scripture which are not admitted by you which I quoted from the words of Jeremiah the prophet, and Esdras, and David; but from those which are even now admitted by you, which had your teachers comprehended, be well assured they would have deleted them, as they did those about the death of Isaiah, whom you sawed asunder with a wooden saw.
~160 AD: Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 72
    Justin: I shall do as you please. From the statements, then, which Esdras made in reference to the law of the passover, they have taken away the following: 'And Esdras said to the people, This passover is our Savior and our refuge. And if you have understood, and your heart has taken it in, that we shall humble Him on a standard, and thereafter hope in Him, then this place shall not be forsaken for ever, says the God of hosts. But if you will not believe Him, and will not listen to His declaration, you shall be a laughing-stock to the nations.' And from the sayings of Jeremiah they have cut out the following: 'I [was] like a lamb that is brought to the slaughter: they devised a device against me, saying, Come, let us lay on wood on His bread, and let us blot Him out from the land of the living; and His name shall no more be remembered.' [Jeremiah 11:19] And since this passage from the sayings of Jeremiah is still written in some copies [of the Scriptures] in the synagogues of the Jews (for it is only a short time since they were cut out), and since from these words it is demonstrated that the Jews deliberated about the Christ Himself, to crucify and put Him to death, He Himself is both declared to be led as a sheep to the slaughter, as was predicted by Isaiah, and is here represented as a harmless lamb; but being in a difficulty about them, they give themselves over to blasphemy. And again, from the sayings of the same Jeremiah these have been cut out: 'The Lord God remembered His dead people of Israel who lay in the graves; and He descended to preach to them His own salvation.'
~160 AD: Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 71
    But I am far from putting reliance in your teachers, who refuse to admit that the interpretation made by the seventy elders who were with Ptolemy [king] of the Egyptians is a correct one; and they attempt to frame another. And I wish you to observe, that they have altogether taken away many Scriptures from the translations effected by those seventy elders who were with Ptolemy, and by which this very man who was crucified is proved to have been set forth expressly as God, and man, and as being crucified, and as dying; but since I am aware that this is denied by all of your nation, I do not address myself to these points, but I proceed to carry on my discussions by means of those passages which are still admitted by you. For you assent to those which I have brought before your attention, except that you contradict the statement, 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive,' and say it ought to be read, 'Behold, the young woman shall conceive.' And I promised to prove that the prophecy referred, not, as you were taught, to Hezekiah, but to this Christ of mine: and now I shall go to the proof...
~240 AD: Origen in his Letter to Africanus
    In answer to this, I have to tell you what it behooves us to do in the cases not only of the History of Susanna, which is found in every Church of Christ in that Greek copy which the Greeks use, but is not in the Hebrew, or of the two other passages you mention at the end of the book containing the history of Bel and the Dragon, which likewise are not in the Hebrew copy of Daniel; but of thousands of other passages also which I found in many places when with my little strength I was collating the Hebrew copies with ours. [...]
    And I make it my endeavor not to be ignorant of their various readings, lest in my controversies with the Jews I should quote to them what is not found in their copies, and that I may make some use of what is found there, even although it should not be in our Scriptures. [...]
    Wherefore I think no other supposition is possible, than that they who had the reputation of wisdom, and the rulers and elders, took away from the people every passage which might bring them into discredit among the people. We need not wonder, then, if this history of the evil device of the licentious elders against Susanna is true, but was concealed and removed from the Scriptures by men themselves not very far removed from the counsel of these elders. [...]
    What I have said is, I think, sufficient to prove that it would be nothing wonderful if this history were true, and the licentious and cruel attack was actually made on Susanna by those who were at that time elders, and written down by the wisdom of the Spirit, but removed by these rulers of Sodom, as the Spirit would call them. [...]
~400 AD: Jerome & Augustine in their letters to each other

Jerome, Letter 75: ...In my attempt to translate into Latin, for the benefit of those who speak the same language with myself, the corrected Greek version of the Scriptures, I have labored not to supersede what has been long esteemed, but only to bring prominently forward those things which have been either omitted or tampered with by the Jews, in order that Latin readers might know what is found in the original Hebrew.

Augustine, Letter 82: As to your translation, you have now convinced me of the benefits to be secured by your proposal to translate the Scriptures from the original Hebrew, in order that you may bring to light those things which have been either omitted or perverted by the Jews. But I beg you to be so good as state by what Jews this has been done, whether by those who before the Lord's advent translated the Old Testament--and if so, by what one or more of them--or by the Jews of later times, who may be supposed to have mutilated or corrupted the Greek Mss., in order to prevent themselves from being unable to answer the evidence given by these concerning the Christian faith. I cannot find any reason which should have prompted the earlier Jewish translators to such unfaithfulness. I beg of you, moreover, to send us your translation of the Septuagint, which I did not know that you had published.
~600 AD: Isidore of Seville
As a certain one of those who know has recorded, the Hebrews received this work (Wisdom) among the Canonical Scriptures. But after they had seized and killed the Christ, remembering the most evident testimonies concerning Christ in that same book, in which it is written: ‘The impious said among themselves, ‘let us seize the just,’ etc., taking counsel lest we might lay upon them such an evident sacrilege, they cut it off from the prophetic volumes, and prohibited its reading to their people.
- Isidore of Seville, as quoted by Andrew Edward Breen in his A General and Critical Introduction to the Study of Holy Scripture. Original source not identified.

Appendix

Septuagint Origin Stories

The Letter Of Aristeas, ~250 BC

Demetrius of Phalerum, the president of the king's library, received vast sums of money, for the purpose of collecting together, as far as he possibly could, all the books in the world. By means of purchase and transcription, he carried out, to the best of his ability, the purpose of the king. On one occasion when I was present he was asked, How many thousand books are there in the library? and he replied, 'More than two hundred thousand, O king, and I shall make endeavour in the immediate future to gather together the remainder also, so that the total of five hundred thousand may be reached. I am told that the laws of the Jews are worth transcribing and deserve a place in your library.' 'What is to prevent you from doing this?' replied the king. 'Everything that is necessary has been placed at your disposal.' 'They need to be translated,' answered Demetrius, 'for in the country of the Jews they use a peculiar alphabet (just as the Egyptians, too, have a special form of letters) and speak a peculiar dialect. They are supposed to use the Syriac tongue, but this is not the case; their language is quite different.' And the king when he understood all the facts of the case ordered a letter to be written to the Jewish High Priest that his purpose (which has already been described) might be accomplished.

[...]

The Memorial of Demetrius to the great king. 'Since you have given me instructions, O king, that the books which are needed to complete your library should be collected together, and that those which are defective should be repaired, I have devoted myself with the utmost care to the fulfilment of your wishes, and I now have the following proposal to lay before you. The books of the law of the Jews (with some few others) are absent from the library. They are written in the Hebrew characters and language and have been carelessly interpreted, and do not represent the original text as I am informed by those who know; for they have never had a king's care to protect them. It is necessary that these should be made accurate for your library since the law which they contain, in as much as it is of divine origin, is full of wisdom and free from all blemish. For this reason literary men and poets and the mass of historical writers have held aloof from referring to these books and the men who have lived and are living in accordance with them, because their conception of life is so sacred and religious, as Hecataeus of Abdera says. If it please you, O king, a letter shall be written to the High Priest in Jerusalem, asking him to send six elders out of every tribe - men who have lived the noblest life and are most skilled in their law - that we may find out the points in which the majority of them are in agreement, and so having obtained an accurate translation may place it in a conspicuous place in a manner worthy of the work itself and your purpose. May continual prosperity be yours!'

[...]

King Ptolemy sends greeting and salutation to the High Priest Eleazar... Now since I am anxious to show my gratitude to these men and to the Jews throughout the world and to the generations yet to come, I have determined that your law shall be translated from the Hebrew tongue which is in use amongst you into the Greek language, that these books may be added to the other royal books in my library. It will be a kindness on your part and a regard for my zeal if you will select six elders from each of your tribes, men of noble life and skilled in your law and able to interpret it, that in questions of dispute we may be able to discover the verdict in which the majority agree, for the investigation is of the highest possible importance. I hope to win great renown by the accomplishment of this work. 

[...]

Eleazar the High priest sends greetings to King Ptolemy his true friend... all the people prayed that your plans might prosper continually, and that Almighty God might preserve your kingdom in peace with honour, and that the translation of the holy law might prove advantageous to you and be carried out successfully. In the presence of all the people I selected six elders from each tribe, good men and true, and I have sent them to you with a copy of our law. It will be a kindness, O righteous king, if you will give instruction that as soon as the translation of the law is completed, the men shall be restored again to us in safety. Farewell.

The following are the names of the elders: Of the first tribe, Joseph, Ezekiah, Zachariah, John, Ezekiah, Elisha. Of the second tribe, Judas, Simon, Samuel, Adaeus, Mattathias, Eschlemias. Of the third tribe, Nehemiah, Joseph, Theodosius, Baseas, Ornias, Dakis. Of the fourth tribe, Jonathan, Abraeus, Elisha, Ananias, Chabrias.... Of the fifth tribe, Isaac, Jacob, Jesus, Sabbataeus, Simon, Levi. Of the sixth tribe, Judas, Joseph, Simon, Zacharias, Samuel, Selemias. Of the seventh tribe, Sabbataeus, Zedekiah, Jacob, Isaac, Jesias, Natthaeus. Of the eighth tribe Theodosius, Jason, Jesus, Theodotus, John, Jonathan. Of the ninth tribe, Theophilus, Abraham Arsamos, Jason, Endemias, Daniel. Of the tenth tribe, Jeremiah, Eleazar, Zachariah, Baneas, Elisha, Dathaeus. Of the eleventh tribe, Samuel, Joseph, Judas, Jonathes, Chabu, Dositheus. Of the twelfth tribe, Isaelus, John, Theodosius, Arsamos, Abietes, Ezekiel. They were seventy-two in all. Such was the answer which Eleazar and his friends gave to the king's letter.

[...]

And it so chanced that the work of translation was completed in seventy-two days, just as if this had been arranged of set purpose.

When the work was completed, Demetrius collected together the Jewish population in the place where the translation had been made, and read it over to all, in the presence of the translators, who met with a great reception also from the people, because of the great benefits which they had conferred upon them. They bestowed warm praise upon Demetrius, too, and urged him to have the whole law transcribed and present a copy to their leaders. After the books had been read, the priests and the elders of the translators and the Jewish community and the leaders of the people stood up and said, that since so excellent and sacred and accurate a translation had been made, it was only right that it should remain as it was and no alteration should be made in it. And when the whole company expressed their approval, they bade them pronounce a curse in accordance with their custom upon any one who should make any alteration either by adding anything or changing in any way whatever any of the words which had been written or making any omission. This was a very wise precaution to ensure that the book might be preserved for all the future time unchanged.

- The Letter Of Aristeas
Josephus, 93 AD

And when once Ptolemy asked him how many ten thousands of books he had collected, he replied, that he had already about twenty times ten thousand; but that, in a little time, he should have fifty times ten thousand. But be said he had been informed that there were many books of laws among the Jews worthy of inquiring after, and worthy of the king's library, but which, being written in characters and in a dialect of their own, will cause no small pains in getting them translated into the Greek tongue; that the character in which they are written seems to be like to that which is the proper character of the Syrians, and that its sound, when pronounced, is like theirs also; and that this sound appears to be peculiar to themselves. Wherefore he said that nothing hindered why they might not get those books to be translated also; for while nothing is wanting that is necessary for that purpose, we may have their books also in this library.

[...]

We have also chosen six elders out of every tribe, whom we have sent, and the law with them. It will be thy part, out of thy piety and justice, to send back the law, when it hath been translated, and to return those to us that bring it in safety. Farewell.

[...]

he that pleases may learn the particular questions in that book of Aristeus, which he wrote on this very occasion.

[...]

Now when the law was transcribed, and the labor of interpretation was over, which came to its conclusion in seventy-two days, Demetrius gathered all the Jews together to the place where the laws were translated, and where the interpreters were, and read them over. The multitude did also approve of those elders that were the interpreters of the law. 

- Antiquities of the Jews, Book XII
Justin Martyr, ~155 AD

There were, then, among the Jews certain men who were prophets of God, through whom the prophetic Spirit published beforehand things that were to come to pass, ere ever they happened. And their prophecies, as they were spoken and when they were uttered, the kings who happened to be reigning among the Jews at the several times carefully preserved in their possession, when they had been arranged in books by the prophets themselves in their own Hebrew language. And when Ptolemy king of Egypt formed a library, and endeavoured to collect the writings of all men, he heard also of these prophets, and sent to Herod, who was at that time king of the Jews, requesting that the books of the prophets be sent to him. And Herod the king did indeed send them, written, as they were, in the foresaid Hebrew language. And when their contents were found to be unintelligible to the Egyptians, he again sent and requested that men be commissioned to translate them into the Greek language. And when this was done, the books remained with the Egyptians, where they are until now. They are also in the possession of all Jews throughout the world; but they, though they read, do not understand what is said, but count us foes and enemies; and, like yourselves, they kill and punish us whenever they have the power, as you can well believe. For in the Jewish war which lately raged, Barchochebas, the leader of the revolt of the Jews, gave orders that Christians alone should be led to cruel punishments, unless they would deny Jesus Christ and utter blasphemy.
- The First Apology, Chapter 31
Irenaeus, ~175 AD

For before the Romans possessed their kingdom, while as yet the Macedonians held Asia, Ptolemy the son of Lagus, being anxious to adorn the library which he had founded in Alexandria, with a collection of the writings of all men, which were [works] of merit, made request to the people of Jerusalem, that they should have their Scriptures translated into the Greek language. And they— for at that time they were still subject to the Macedonians— sent to Ptolemy seventy of their elders, who were thoroughly skilled in the Scriptures and in both the languages, to carry out what he had desired. But he, wishing to test them individually, and fearing lest they might perchance, by taking counsel together, conceal the truth in the Scriptures, by their interpretation, separated them from each other, and commanded them all to write the same translation. He did this with respect to all the books. But when they came together in the same place before Ptolemy, and each of them compared his own interpretation with that of every other, God was indeed glorified, and the Scriptures were acknowledged as truly divine. For all of them read out the common translation [which they had prepared] in the very same words and the very same names, from beginning to end, so that even the Gentiles present perceived that the Scriptures had been interpreted by the inspiration of God. And there was nothing astonishing in God having done this—He who, when, during the captivity of the people under Nebuchadnezzar, the Scriptures had been corrupted, and when, after seventy years, the Jews had returned to their own land, then, in the times of Artaxerxes king of the Persians, inspired Esdras the priest, of the tribe of Levi, to recast all the words of the former prophets, and to re-establish with the people the Mosaic legislation.
- Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 21, Section 2
Tractate Megillah [Judaism], ~200 AD

The sages allowed to write in Greek only the Pentateuch, but not anything else. And this was also allowed only because of what occurred with Ptolemy the king, as follows: It happened to Ptolemy the king that he took seventy-two elders from Jerusalem, and placed them in seventy-two separate chambers, and did not inform them to what purpose he had brought them. And afterward he entered to each of them, and said to them: Translate me the Torah of Moses from memory. And the Holy One, blessed be He, sent into the heart of each of them a counsel, and they all agreed to have one mind, and changed as follows: Instead of "In the beginning God created the world," they wrote, "God created the world in the beginning"; instead of Gen. i. 26 they wrote, "I will make a man in an image"; instead of Gen. ii. 2 they wrote, "And God finished on the sixth day, and rested on the seventh day"; instead of Gen. v. 2 they wrote, "created him"; instead of Gen. xi. 7 they wrote, "Let me go down"; [xviii. 12]: "And Sarah laughed among her relatives"; instead of xlix. 6, "In their anger they slew an ox, and their self-will lamed a fattened ox." And instead of Ex. iv. 20, "Set them on a porter (man-carrier)"; instead of ibid. xii. 40, "Dwelt in Egypt and in other lands"; and ibid. xxiv. as ibid., "Against the respectable men of Israel." Instead of Num. xvi. 15, "Not one precious thing I took away"; and instead of Deut. iv. 19 they wrote, "assigned to light for all nations"; instead of ibid. xvii. 3, "which I have not commanded to worship"; and instead of Lev. xi. 6, "the hare," which is expressed in the Bible "Arnebeth," as Ptolemy's wife was named so they wrote, "and the beast that has small feet."
- Tractate Megillah, Chapter 1
Epiphanius, 392 AD

And it is well for us also to explain the matter of the translators. For a knowledge of them will be helpful to you, since by the inclusion of their story it will be seen who and whence and of what race each of them was, and what was the cause of their translating. And the first translators of the divine Scriptures from the Hebrew language into the Greek were seventy-two men in number, those who made the first translation in the days of Ptolemy Philadelphus. They were chosen from the twelve tribes of Israel, six men from each tribe, as Aristeas has transmitted it in his work.81 And their names are these: first, from the tribe of Reuben, Josephus, Hezekiah, Zechariah, Johanan, Hezekiah, Elisha; second, from the tribe of Simeon, Judah, Simeon, Samuel, Addai, Mattathias, Shalmai (Eschlemias); third, from the tribe of Levi, Nehemiah, Joseph, Theodosius, Base (Basaios), Ornias, Dakis; fourth, from the tribe of Judah, Jonathan, Abraios, Elisha, Hananiah, Zechariah, Hilkiah; fifth, from the tribe of Issachar, Isaac, Jacob, Joshua, Sambat (Sabbataios), Simeon, Levi; sixth, from the tribe of Zebulun, Judah, Joseph, Simeon, Zechariah, Samuel, Shalmai (Selemias); seventh, from the tribe of Gad, Sambat (Sabbataios), Zedekiah, Jacob, Isaac, Jesse, Matthew (Natthaios); eighth, from the tribe of Asher, Theodosius, Jason, Joshua, Theodotus, Johanan, Jonathan; ninth, from the tribe of Dan, Theophilus, Abram, Arsamos, Jason, Endemias, Daniel; tenth, from the tribe of Naphtali, Jeremiah, Eliezer, Zechariah, Benaiah, Elisha, Dathaios; eleventh, from the tribe of Joseph, Samuel, Josephus, Judah, Jonathan, Caleb (Chabeu), Dositheus; twelfth, from the tribe of Benjamin, Isaelos, Johanan, Theodosius, Arsamos, Abitos (Abietes), Ezekiel. These are the names, as we have already said, of the seventy-two translators. 

[...]

After the first Ptolemy, the second who reigned over Alexandria, the Ptolemy called Philadelphus, as has already been said was a lover of the beautiful and a lover of learning. He established a library in the same city of Alexander, in the (part) called the Bruchion; this is a quarter of the city today lying waste. And he put in charge of the library a certain Demetrius, from Phaleron, commanding him to collect the books that were in every part of the world.

[...]

Thereupon the seventy-two translators above mentioned the teachers of the Hebrews chose and sent, according to the example that Moses once set when he went up the mountain at the command of the Lord, having heard: "Take with thee seventy men and go up the mountain." But for the sake of peace among the tribes, that he might not take five men from some and six from others and create discord among the tribes, he made up his mind rather to take seventy-two and to add to the number. And in this way, as I have said, they also sent these men who translated the Scriptures on the island called the Pharian (Pharos), as we have already said above, in the way we have described. And so the Scriptures, when they had been transferred to the Greek language, were placed in the first library, which was built in the Bruchion, as I have already said.

- On Weights and Measures, Section 9-12
Augustine, ~410 AD

One of the Ptolemies, kings of Egypt, desired to know and have these sacred books. For after Alexander of Macedon, who is also styled the Great, had by his most wonderful, but by no means enduring power, subdued the whole of Asia, yea, almost the whole world, partly by force of arms, partly by terror, and, among other kingdoms of the East, had entered and obtained Judea also, on his death his generals did not peaceably divide that most ample kingdom among them for a possession, but rather dissipated it, wasting all things by wars. Then Egypt began to have the Ptolemies as her kings. The first of them, the son of Lagus, carried many captive out of Judea into Egypt. But another Ptolemy, called Philadelphus, who succeeded him, permitted all whom he had brought under the yoke to return free; and more than that, sent kingly gifts to the temple of God, and begged Eleazar, who was the high priest, to give him the Scriptures, which he had heard by report were truly divine, and therefore greatly desired to have in that most noble library he had made. When the high priest had sent them to him in Hebrew, he afterwards demanded interpreters of him, and there were given him seventy-two, out of each of the twelve tribes six men, most learned in both languages, to wit, the Hebrew and Greek and their translation is now by custom called the Septuagint. It is reported, indeed, that there was an agreement in their words so wonderful, stupendous, and plainly divine, that when they had sat at this work, each one apart (for so it pleased Ptolemy to test their fidelity), they differed from each other in no word which had the same meaning and force, or, in the order of the words; but, as if the translators had been one, so what all had translated was one, because in very deed the one Spirit had been in them all. And they received so wonderful a gift of God, in order that the authority of these Scriptures might be commended not as human but divine, as indeed it was, for the benefit of the nations who should at some time believe, as we now see them doing.
- The City of God, Book XVIII, Chapter 42

Proto-Masoretic and Pre-Septuagint

From Wikipedia

The Biblical manuscripts found in Qumran, commonly known as the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), have prompted comparisons of the various texts associated with the Hebrew Bible, including the Septuagint. Peter Flint cites Emanuel Tov, the chief editor of the scrolls, who identifies five broad variation categories of DSS texts:

1) Proto-Masoretic: This consists of a stable text and numerous and distinctive agreements with the Masoretic Text. About 60% of the Biblical scrolls fall into this category (e.g. 1QIsa-b)

2) Pre-Septuagint: These are the manuscripts which have distinctive affinities with the Greek Bible. These number only about 5% of the Biblical scrolls, for example, 4QDeut-q, 4QSam-a, and 4QJer-b, 4QJer-d. In addition to these manuscripts, several others share distinctive individual readings with the Septuagint, although they do not fall in this category.

3) The Qumran "Living Bible": These are the manuscripts which, according to Tov, were copied in accordance with the "Qumran practice" (i.e. with distinctive long orthography and morphology, frequent errors and corrections, and a free approach to the text. Such scrolls comprise about 20% of the Biblical corpus, including the Great Isaiah Scroll (1QIsa-a)

4) Pre-Samaritan: These are DSS manuscripts which reflect the textual form found in the Samaritan Pentateuch, although the Samaritan Bible itself is later and contains information not found in these earlier scrolls, (e.g. God's holy mountain at Shechem rather than Jerusalem). The Qumran witnesses—which are characterized by orthographic corrections and harmonizations with parallel texts elsewhere in the Pentateuch—comprise about 5% of the Biblical scrolls. (e.g. 4QpaleoExod-m)

5) Non-Aligned: This is a category which shows no consistent alignment with any of the other four text-types. These number approximately 10% of the Biblical scrolls, and include 4QDeut-b, 4QDeut-c, 4QDeut-h, 4QIsa-c, and 4QDan-a.

From Emanuel Tov

Emanuel Tov, in "Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible" (Third Edition, page 107), says:

Due to the absence of objective criteria for classifying the Qumran scrolls, they are classified here according to their textual character. Only 121 of the 210-212 biblical scrolls can be classified in this way. In this classification, an attempt is made to characterize and analyze three groups and a cluster of texts, three of which were unknown before Qumran discoveries (2, 3, 4)...

In the 46 Torah texts that are sufficiently extensive for analysis, 22 (48%) are Masoretic-like (Proto-Masoretic) (or, in a few cases, are equally close to the Masoretic and the Pre-Samaritan Text), 5 exclusively reflect the Pre-Samaritan Text (11%), one reflects the Septuagint (2%), and 18 are non-aligned (39%). In the remainder of the Hebrew-Aramaic Scripture, in the 75 texts that are sufficiently extensive for analysis, 33 texts (44%) are Masoretic-like (Proto-Masoretic) (or, in a few cases, are equally close to the Masoretic and the Septuagint), 5 reflect the Septuagint (7%), and 37 form a cluster of non-aligned texts (49%). 

Proto-Masoretic Text

e.g. 1QIsab

Pre-Samaritan Text

4QpaleoExodm, 4QExod-Levf, 4QNumb, 4QRPa (4Q158), and 4QRPb (4Q364) reflect the characteristics of the Pre-Samaritan Text... and was popular in Palestine.

Texts close to the Hebrew Source of the Septuagint (called Pre-Septuagint Texts)

  • 4QJerb,d bears a strong resemblance to the Septuagint in characteristic details (ch. 7B1)
  • Similarly close to the Septuagint, though not to the same degree, is 4QDeutq (ch. 4, Table 8, page 249-250) [agrees with the Septuagint against the Masoretic Text in the addition of two significant stichs in Deut 32:43...]
  • Similarly close to the Septuagint, though not to the same degree, is 4QSama (close to the Septuagint and the SeptuagintLuc; group 4 in book)
  • Similarly close to the Septuagint, though not to the same degree, is 4QSamb
  • Similarly close to the Septuagint, though not to the same degree, is 11QPsa Psalm 151
  • Occasional agreements with the Septuagint, but being close to the Pre-Samaritan Text, is 4QNumb
  • 4QJosha agrees with the Septuagint in two details and its reconstructed text lacks most of 8:11b-13, as does the Septuagint.

On all these texts, see Tov* 2011

Unaligned texts

Many Qumran texts are not exclusively close to the Proto-Masoretic Text, the Pre-Septuagint Text, or the Pre-Samaritan Text and are therefore considered non-aligned (indicating they follow an inconsistent pattern of agreements and disagreements with the Proto-Masoretic Text, the Pre-Septuagint Text, and the Pre-Samaritan Text).

Digging into Proto-Septuagint text 4QJerb,d

From pg 286, chapter 7B1:

Noted by Origen in ad Afric. 4, where he mentioned the distinctive nature of the Septuagint-Jeremiah, in which he found many deviations from the Hebrew text known to him... The question that has pre-occupied scholars is whether the translator changed his Vorlage, or whether he had a different Hebrew text of the book before him. With the discovery of 4QJerb and 4QJerd, which, though fragmentary, reflect the two main editorial characteristics, of the Septuagint, this question has been solved, especially in studies by Janzen*, Tov 1985-199, and Bogaert* 1981-1994. It seems very likely that the Septuagint was translated from a Hebrew text that was very close to these two Qumran texts.

More info on the above on Emanuel Tov's The Qumran Hebrew Texts and the Septuagint: An Overview

  • The Septuagint in these texts is shorter by one-sixth, which is reflected in 4QJerb,d
  • The Septuagint deviates from the order of the Masoretic in several sections and chapters. The Masoretic 23:7-8 are found in the Septuagint after 23:40, and the internal arrangement of 10:5-12 in the Septuagint and 4QJerb differs from the Masoretic.
  • The most striking difference in this regard pertains to the chapters containing the prophecies against the nations, which in the Masoretic are found at the end of the book in chapters 46-51, before the historical "appendix," ch. 52, whereas in the Septuagint they occur in the middle, after 25:13.
  • Verses 10:6-8, 10 are lacking in this scroll as in the Septuagint. In spite of the fragmentary condition of the scroll, Tov, DJD XV (1997) 173 and Saley* 2010 showed that the order of the verses in 4QJerb cannot be reconstructed in any way other than that of the Septuagint, i.e., 3, 4, 5a, 9, 5b, 11.

Jeremiah throughout history

Noted by Origen in ad Afric. 4, where he mentioned the distinctive nature of the Septuagint-Jeremiah, in which he found many deviations from the Hebrew text known to him... The question that has pre-occupied scholars is whether the translator changed his Vorlage, or whether he had a different Hebrew text of the book before him. With the discovery of 4QJerb and 4QJerd, which, though fragmentary, reflect the two main editorial characteristics, of the Septuagint, this question has been solved, especially in studies by Janzen*, Tov 1985-199, and Bogaert* 1981-1994. It seems very likely that the Septuagint was translated from a Hebrew text that was very close to these two Qumran texts.
- Emanuel Tov
Besides this, the order of visions, which is entirely confused among the Greeks and Latins, we have corrected to the original truth. And the Book of Baruch, his scribe, which is neither read nor found among the Hebrews
- Jerome, preface to Jeremiah

4QJerb,d

Letters between Origen and Africanus

Origen's most important contribution to biblical literature was his elaborate attempt to rectify the text of the Septuagint by collating it with the Hebrew original and other Greek versions. On this he spent twenty-eight years, during which he travelled through the East collecting materials.

Letters between Origen and Africanus

Core points:

  • All Christian churches were using the Greek Septuagint translation of the OT
  • Origen was aware of all the differences between the Hebrew Text and the Septuagint.
  • He was against declaring the Septuagint invalid, because God would not have allowed the church to be led so astray that it would have to beg and ask for valid copies from the Jews again.
  • He rather believed the Jews had removed various stories that spoke negatively of elders, and gave examples of New Testament references to things no longer in existence - if true, the things in the Septuagint missing from the Hebrew Text were maliciously removed by Jewish elders!
From Africanus
Greeting, my lord and son, most worthy Origen, from Africanus. In your sacred discussion with Agnomon you referred to that prophecy of Daniel which is related of his youth. This at that time, as was meet, I accepted as genuine. Now, however, I cannot understand how it escaped you that this part of the book is spurious. For, in sooth, this section, although apart from this it is elegantly written, is plainly a more modern forgery. There are many proofs of this... 

And when the one said, "Under a holm-tree" ( prinos ), he answered that the angel would saw him asunder ( prisein ); and in a similar fashion menaced the other who said, "Under a mastich-tree" ( schinos ), with being rent asunder ( schisthenai ). Now, in Greek, it happens that "holm-tree" and "saw asunder," and "rend" and "mastich-tree" sound alike; but in Hebrew they are quite distinct. But all the books of the Old Testament have been translated from Hebrew into Greek...

But a more fatal objection is, that this section, along with the other two at the end of it, is not contained in the Daniel received among the Jews...

From all this I infer that this section is a later addition. Moreover, the style is different. I have struck the blow; do you give the echo; answer, and instruct me.
From Origen
You say that you praise this passage as elegantly written, but find fault with it as a more modern composition, and a forgery; and you add that the forger has had recourse to something which not even Philistion the play-writer would have used in his puns between prinos and prisein, schinos and schisis, which words as they sound in Greek can be used in this way, but not in Hebrew. In answer to this, I have to tell you what it behooves us to do in the cases not only of the History of Susanna, which is found in every Church of Christ in that Greek copy which the Greeks use, but is not in the Hebrew, or of the two other passages you mention at the end of the book containing the history of Bel and the Dragon, which likewise are not in the Hebrew copy of Daniel; but of thousands of other passages also which I found in many places when with my little strength I was collating the Hebrew copies with ours. For in Daniel itself I found the word "bound" followed in our versions by very many verses which are not in the Hebrew at all, beginning (according to one of the copies which circulate in the Churches) thus: "Ananias, and Azarias, and Misael prayed and sang unto God," down to "O, all ye that worship the Lord, bless ye the God of gods. Praise Him, and say that His mercy endures for ever and ever. And it came to pass, when the king heard them singing, and saw them that they were alive." Or, as in another copy, from "And they walked in the midst of the fire, praising God and blessing the Lord," down to "O, all ye that worship the Lord, bless ye the God of gods. Praise Him, and say that His mercy endures to all generations." [The Song of the Three Holy Children, which appears after Daniel 3:23 in some manuscripts like the Septuagint] But in the Hebrew copies the words, "And these three men, Sedrach, Misach, and Abednego fell down bound into the midst of the fire," are immediately followed by the verse, "Nabouchodonosor the king was astonished, and rose up in haste, and spoke, and said unto his counsellors." For so Aquila, following the Hebrew reading, gives it, who has obtained the credit among the Jews of having interpreted the Scriptures with no ordinary care, and whose version is most commonly used by those who do not know Hebrew, as the one which has been most successful. Of the copies in my possession whose readings I gave, one follows the Seventy [Septuagint], and the other Theodotion; and just as the History of Susanna which you call a forgery is found in both, together with the passages at the end of Daniel, so they give also these passages, amounting, to make a rough guess, to more than two hundred verses...

And in many other of the sacred books I found sometimes more in our copies than in the Hebrew, sometimes less. I shall adduce a few examples, since it is impossible to give them all. Of the Book of Esther neither the prayer of Mardochaios nor that of Esther, both fitted to edify the reader, is found in the Hebrew. Neither are the letters; nor the one written to Amman about the rooting up of the Jewish nation, nor that of Mardochaios in the name of Artaxerxes delivering the nation from death. Then in Job, the words from "It is written, that he shall rise again with those whom the Lord raises," to the end, are not in the Hebrew, and so not in Aquila's edition; while they are found in the Septuagint and in Theodotion's version, agreeing with each other at least in sense. And many other places I found in Job where our copies have more than the Hebrew ones, sometimes a little more, and sometimes a great deal more: a little more, as when to the words, "Rising up in the morning, he offered burnt-offerings for them according to their number," they add, "one heifer for the sin of their soul;" and to the words, "The angels of God came to present themselves before God, and the devil came with them," "from going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it." Again, after "The Lord gave, the Lord has taken away," the Hebrew has not, "It was so, as seemed good to the Lord." Then our copies are very much fuller than the Hebrew, when Job's wife speaks to him, from "How long will you hold out? And he said, Lo, I wait yet a little while, looking for the hope of my salvation," down to "that I may cease from my troubles, and my sorrows which compass me." For they have only these words of the woman, "But say a word against God, and die."

 Again, through the whole of Job there are many passages in the Hebrew which are wanting in our copies, generally four or five verses, but sometimes, however, even fourteen, and nineteen, and sixteen. But why should I enumerate all the instances I collected with so much labor, to prove that the difference between our copies and those of the Jews did not escape me? In Jeremiah I noticed many instances, and indeed in that book I found much transposition and variation in the readings of the prophecies. Again, in Genesis, the words, "God saw that it was good," when the firmament was made, are not found in the Hebrew, and there is no small dispute among them about this; and other instances are to be found in Genesis, which I marked, for the sake of distinction, with the sign the Greeks call an obelisk, as on the other hand I marked with an asterisk those passages in our copies which are not found in the Hebrew. What needs there to speak of Exodus, where there is such diversity in what is said about the tabernacle and its court, and the ark, and the garments of the high priest and the priests, that sometimes the meaning even does not seem to be akin? And, forsooth, when we notice such things, we are immediately to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery! Are we to suppose that that Providence which in the sacred Scriptures has ministered to the edification of all the Churches of Christ, had no thought for those bought with a price, for whom Christ died; [1 Corinthians 6:20; Romans 14:15] whom, although His Son, God who is love spared not, but gave Him up for us all, that with Him He might freely give us all things? [Romans 8:32]

In all these cases consider whether it would not be well to remember the words, "You shall not remove the ancient landmarks which your fathers have set." [Proverbs 22:28] Nor do I say this because I shun the labor of investigating the Jewish Scriptures, and comparing them with ours, and noticing their various readings. This, if it be not arrogant to say it, I have already to a great extent done to the best of my ability, laboring hard to get at the meaning in all the editions and various readings; while I paid particular attention to the interpretation of the Seventy [Septuagint], lest I might to be found to accredit any forgery to the Churches which are under heaven, and give an occasion to those who seek such a starting-point for gratifying their desire to slander the common brethren, and to bring some accusation against those who shine forth in our community. And I make it my endeavor not to be ignorant of their various readings, lest in my controversies with the Jews I should quote to them what is not found in their copies, and that I may make some use of what is found there, even although it should not be in our Scriptures. For if we are so prepared for them in our discussions, they will not, as is their manner, scornfully laugh at Gentile believers for their ignorance of the true reading as they have them. So far as to the History of Susanna not being found in the Hebrew.

Let us now look at the things you find fault with in the story itself. And here let us begin with what would probably make any one averse to receiving the history: I mean the play of words between prinos and prisis, schinos and schisis. You say that you can see how this can be in Greek, but that in Hebrew the words are altogether distinct. On this point, however, I am still in doubt; because, when I was considering this passage (for I myself saw this difficulty), I consulted not a few Jews about it, asking them the Hebrew words for prinos and prisein, and how they would translate schinos the tree, and how schisis. And they said that they did not know these Greek words prinos and schinos, and asked me to show them the trees, that they might see what they called them. And I at once (for the truth's dear sake) put before them pieces of the different trees. One of them then said, that he could not with any certainty give the Hebrew name of anything not mentioned in Scripture, since, if one was at a loss, he was prone to use the Syriac word instead of the Hebrew one; and he went on to say, that some words the very wisest could not translate. "If, then," said he, "you can adduce a passage in any Scripture where the schinos is mentioned, or the prinos, you will find there the words you seek, together with the words which have the same sound; but if it is nowhere mentioned, we also do not know it." This, then, being what the Hebrews said to whom I had recourse, and who were acquainted with the history, I am cautious of affirming whether or not there is any correspondence to this play of words in the Hebrew. Your reason for affirming that there is not, you yourself probably know.

But probably to this you will say, Why then is the "History" not in their Daniel, if, as you say, their wise men hand down by tradition such stories? The answer is, that they hid from the knowledge of the people as many of the passages which contained any scandal against the elders, rulers, and judges, as they could, some of which have been preserved in uncanonical writings (Apocrypha). As an example, take the story told about Esaias; and guaranteed by the Epistle to the Hebrews, which is found in none of their public books. For the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in speaking of the prophets, and what they suffered, says, "They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, they were slain with the sword." [Hebrews 11:37] To whom, I ask, does the "sawn asunder" refer (for by an old idiom, not peculiar to Hebrew, but found also in Greek, this is said in the plural, although it refers to but one person)? Now we know very well that tradition says that Esaias the prophet was sawn asunder; and this is found in some apocryphal work, which probably the Jews have purposely tampered with, introducing some phrases manifestly incorrect, that discredit might be thrown on the whole.

However, some one hard pressed by this argument may have recourse to the opinion of those who reject this Epistle as not being Paul's; against whom I must at some other time use other arguments to prove that it is Paul's. At present I shall adduce from the Gospel what Jesus Christ testifies concerning the prophets, together with a story which He refers to, but which is not found in the Old Testament, since in it also there is a scandal against unjust judges in Israel. The words of our Savior run thus: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, and say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partaken with them in the blood of the prophets. Wherefore be ye witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of Gehenna? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes; and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation." And what follows is of the same tenor: "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets, and stone them which are sent unto you, how often would I have gathered your children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." [Matthew 23:29-38]

Let us see now if in these cases we are not forced to the conclusion, that while the Savior gives a true account of them, none of the Scriptures which could prove what He tells are to be found. For they who build the tombs of the prophets and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, condemning the crimes their fathers committed against the righteous and the prophets, say, "If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets." [Matthew 23:30] In the blood of what prophets, can any one tell me? For where do we find anything like this written of Esaias, or Jeremias, or any of the twelve, or Daniel? Then about Zacharias the son of Barachias, who was slain between the temple and the altar, we learn from Jesus only, not knowing it otherwise from any Scripture. Wherefore I think no other supposition is possible, than that they who had the reputation of wisdom, and the rulers and elders, took away from the people every passage which might bring them into discredit among the people. We need not wonder, then, if this history of the evil device of the licentious elders against Susanna is true, but was concealed and removed from the Scriptures by men themselves not very far removed from the counsel of these elders.

In the Acts of the Apostles also, Stephen, in his other testimony, says, "Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? And they have slain them which showed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers." [Acts 7:52] That Stephen speaks the truth, every one will admit who receives the Acts of the Apostles; but it is impossible to show from the extant books of the Old Testament how with any justice he throws the blame of having persecuted and slain the prophets on the fathers of those who believed not in Christ. And Paul, in the first Epistle to the Thessalonians, testifies this concerning the Jews: "For ye, brethren, became followers of the Churches of God which in Judea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews; who both killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men." [1 Thessalonians 2:14,15] What I have said is, I think, sufficient to prove that it would be nothing wonderful if this history were true, and the licentious and cruel attack was actually made on Susanna by those who were at that time elders, and written down by the wisdom of the Spirit, but removed by these rulers of Sodom, [Isaiah 1:10] as the Spirit would call them...

Where you get your "lost and won at play, and thrown out unburied on the streets," I know not, unless it is from Tobias; and Tobias (as also Judith), we ought to notice, the Jews do not use. They are not even found in the Hebrew Apocrypha, as I learned from the Jews themselves. However, since the Churches use Tobias, you must know that even in the captivity some of the captives were rich and well to do...

Letters between Augustine and Jerome

Jerome and Augustine Letters on Septuagint vs Hebrew Texts

Augustine: For if your translation begins to be more generally read in many churches, it will be a grievous thing that, in the reading of Scripture, differences must arise between the Latin Churches and the Greek Churches, especially seeing that the discrepancy is easily condemned in a Latin version by the production of the original in Greek, which is a language very widely known; whereas, if anyone has been disturbed by the occurrence of something to which he was not accustomed in the translation taken from the Hebrew, and alleges that the new translation is wrong, it will be found difficult, if not impossible, to get at the Hebrew documents by which the version to which exception is taken may be defended. And when they are obtained, who will submit to have so many Latin and Greek authorities pronounced to be in the wrong? Besides all this, Jews, if consulted as to the meaning of the Hebrew text, may give a different opinion from yours: in which case it will seem as if your presence were indispensable, as being the only one who could refute their view; and it would be a miracle if one could be found capable of acting as arbiter between you and them...

I wish you would have the kindness to open up to me what you think to be the reason of the frequent discrepancies between the text supported by the Hebrew codices and the Greek Septuagint version. For the latter has no mean authority, seeing that it has obtained so wide circulation, and was the one which the apostles used, as is not only proved by looking to the text itself, but has also been, as I remember, affirmed by yourself. You would therefore confer upon us a much greater boon if you gave an exact Latin translation of the Greek Septuagint version: for the variations found in the different codices of the Latin text are intolerably numerous; and it is so justly open to suspicion as possibly different from what is to be found in the Greek, that one has no confidence in either quoting it or proving anything by its help.
Jerome: It is, however, more in keeping with your enlightened judgment, to grant to all others the liberty which you tolerate in yourself for in my attempt to translate into Latin, for the benefit of those who speak the same language with myself, the corrected Greek version of the Scriptures, I have labored not to supersede what has been long esteemed, but only to bring prominently forward those things which have been either omitted or tampered with by the Jews, in order that Latin readers might know what is found in the original Hebrew. If anyone is averse to reading it, none compels him against his will. Let him drink with satisfaction the old wine, and despise my new wine, i.e. the sentences which I have published in explanation of former writers, with the design of making more obvious by my remarks what in them seemed to me to be obscure...

...it would have been but fair to have given me credit for the same fidelity in the Old Testament; for I have not followed my own imagination, but have rendered the divine words as I found them understood by those who speak the Hebrew language. If you have any doubt of this in any passage, ask the Jews what is the meaning of the original.
Augustine: As to your translation, you have now convinced me of the benefits to be secured by your proposal to translate the Scriptures from the original Hebrew, in order that you may bring to light those things which have been either omitted or perverted by the Jews. But I beg you to be so good as state by what Jews this has been done, whether by those who before the Lord's advent translated the Old Testament--and if so, by what one or more of them--or by the Jews of later times, who may be supposed to have mutilated or corrupted the Greek Mss., in order to prevent themselves from being unable to answer the evidence given by these concerning the Christian faith. I cannot find any reason which should have prompted the earlier Jewish translators to such unfaithfulness...

...my only reason for objecting to the public reading of your translation from the Hebrew in our churches was, lest, bringing forward anything which was, as it were, new and opposed to the authority of the Septuagint version, we should trouble by serious cause of offense the flocks of Christ, whose ears and hearts have become accustomed to listen to that version to which the seal of approbation was given by the apostles themselves.

Origen's Asterisks

Origen (Letter to Africanus): Again, through the whole of Job there are many passages in the Hebrew which are wanting in our copies, generally four or five verses, but sometimes, however, even fourteen, and nineteen, and sixteen. But why should I enumerate all the instances I collected with so much labor, to prove that the difference between our copies and those of the Jews did not escape me? In Jeremiah I noticed many instances, and indeed in that book I found much transposition and variation in the readings of the prophecies. Again, in Genesis, the words, "God saw that it was good," when the firmament was made, are not found in the Hebrew, and there is no small dispute among them about this; and other instances are to be found in Genesis, which I marked, for the sake of distinction, with the sign the Greeks call an obelisk, as on the other hand I marked with an asterisk those passages in our copies which are not found in the Hebrew.
Augustine (Letter 71): In this letter I have further to say, that I have since heard that you have translated Job out of the original Hebrew, although in your own translation of the same prophet from the Greek tongue we had already a version of that book. In that earlier version you marked with asterisks the words found in the Hebrew but wanting in the Greek, and with obelisks the words found in the Greek but wanting in the Hebrew; and this was done with such astonishing exactness, that in some places we have every word distinguished by a separate asterisk, as a sign that these words are in the Hebrew, but not in the Greek. Now, however, in this more recent version from the Hebrew, there is not the same scrupulous fidelity as to the words; and it perplexes any thoughtful reader to understand either what was the reason for marking the asterisks in the former version with so much care that they indicate the absence from the Greek version of even the smallest grammatical particles which have not been rendered from the Hebrew, or what is the reason for so much less care having been taken in this recent version from the Hebrew to secure that these same particles be found in their own places. I would have put down here an extract or two in illustration of this criticism; but at present I have not access to the Ms. of the translation from the Hebrew. Since, however, your quick discernment anticipates and goes beyond not only what I have said, but also what I meant to say, you already understand, I think, enough to be able, by giving the reason for the plan which you have adopted, to explain what perplexes me.
Jerome (Letter 75): In another letter you ask why a former translation which I made of some of the canonical books was carefully marked with asterisks and obelisks, whereas I afterwards published a translation without these. You must pardon my saying that you seem to me not to understand the matter: for the former translation is from the Septuagint; and wherever obelisks are placed, they are designed to indicate that the Seventy have said more than is found in the Hebrew. But the asterisks indicate what has been added by Origen from the version of Theodotion. In that version I was translating from the Greek: but in the later version, translating from the Hebrew itself, I have expressed what I understood it to mean, being careful to preserve rather the exact sense than the order of the words. I am surprised that you do not read the books of the Seventy translators in the genuine form in which they were originally given to the world, but as they have been corrected, or rather corrupted, by Origen, with his obelisks and asterisks; and that you refuse to follow the translation, however feeble, which has been given by a Christian man, especially seeing that Origen borrowed the things which he has added from the edition of a man who, after the passion of Christ, was a Jew and a blasphemer. Do you wish to be a true admirer and partisan of the Seventy translators? Then do not read what you find under the asterisks; rather erase them from the volumes, that you may approve yourself indeed a follower of the ancients. If, however, you do this, you will be compelled to find fault with all the libraries of the Churches; for you will scarcely find more than one Ms. here and there which has not these interpolations.
Augustine (Letter 82): I beg of you, moreover, to send us your translation of the Septuagint, which I did not know that you had published... I desire, moreover, your translation of the Septuagint, in order that we may be delivered, so far as is possible, from the consequences of the notable incompetency of those who, whether qualified or not, have attempted a Latin translation...
Jerome (Letter 172): We suffer in this province from a grievous scarcity of clerks acquainted with the Latin language; this is the reason why we are not able to comply with your instructions, especially in regard to that version of the Septuagint which is furnished with distinctive asterisks and obelisks; for we have lost, through some one's dishonesty, the most of the results of our earlier labor.
Augustine (City of God, Book 18, Chapter 43): Some, however, have thought that the Greek copies of the Septuagint version should be emended from the Hebrew copies; yet they did not dare to take away what the Hebrew lacked and the Septuagint had, but only added what was found in the Hebrew copies and was lacking in the Septuagint, and noted them by placing at the beginning of the verses certain marks in the form of stars which they call asterisks. And those things which the Hebrew copies have not, but the Septuagint have, they have in like manner marked at the beginning of the verses by horizontal spit-shaped marks like those by which we denote ounces; and many copies having these marks are circulated even in Latin. But we cannot, without inspecting both kinds of copies, find out those things which are neither omitted nor added, but expressed differently, whether they yield another meaning not in itself unsuitable, or can be shown to explain the same meaning in another way. If, then, as it behooves us, we behold nothing else in these Scriptures than what the Spirit of God has spoken through men, if anything is in the Hebrew copies and is not in the version of the Seventy, the Spirit of God did not choose to say it through them, but only through the prophets. But whatever is in the Septuagint and not in the Hebrew copies, the same Spirit chose rather to say through the latter, thus showing that both were prophets.

Council of Nicaea and the Canon of Scripture

The records from the Nicene Council that survived to the modern day make no mention of setting a canon of scripture.

Jerome's preface to Judith, less than 100 years after the council, says that the Nicene Council included Judith (one of the Deuterocanon) among the Sacred Scriptures.

Jerome's Preface to Judith

Among the Hebrews the Book of Judith is found among the Hagiographa, the authority of which toward confirming those which have come into contention is judged less appropriate. [...] But because this book is found by the Nicene Council to have been counted among the number of the Sacred Scriptures, I have acquiesced to your request...

We don't know what Jerome meant by this - doubtlessly there are works and records that existed in Jerome's day that haven't survived to the present day.

Around 900 AD, the Synodicon Vetus was written. This anonymous, psuedo-historical book contains information on synods and ecumenical councils up through the year 887 AD.

On the Council of Nicea, it says that the canon was determined by placing the books on the altar, and after prayer to God the inspired works were found on top.

The Synodicon Vetus [English Translation], chapter 35 (page 29)

The divine and sacred First Ecumenical Council of three hundred and eighteen God-inspired fathers was convened at Nicaea, metropolis of the province of Bithynia. Its presiding leaders were the presbyters Vito and Vicentius taking the place of Rome's Pope Sylvester and his successor Julius, Alexander of Alexandria, Macarius of Jerusalem, Eustathius of Antioch, the presbyter Alexander representing Metrophanes of Constantinople, Hosius the bishop of Cordoba, and Constantine the apostle among Christian emperors. This holy council attached the term "consubstantial" to the Holy Trinity, fixed the time of the divine and mystical Passover, and set forth the divinely inspired teaching of the Creed against all heretics, Arius, Sabellius, Photinus, Paul of Samosata, Manes, Valentinus, Marcion, and their followers. It condemned also Meletius of Thebais, along with those ordained by him, and Eusebius of Nicomedia. **The canonical and apocryphal books it distinguished in the following manner: in the house of God the books were placed down by the holy altar; then the council asked the Lord in prayer that the inspired works be found on top and--as in fact happened--the spurious on the bottom.**

There are many details only recorded in this book that scholars find spurious, as well as some councils or synods recorded that scholars suspect never happened. This gives credence to doubt the above account of the canon being determined at the Council of Nicea.

Voltaire popularized the story from the Synodicon Vetus around ~1764 AD.

Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary, Councils, Section III

We have already said, that in the supplement to the Council of Nice it is related that the fathers, being much perplexed to find out which were the authentic and which the apocryphal books of the Old and the New Testament, laid them all upon an altar, and the books which they were to reject fell to the ground.

For legends that the Council of Nicea voted on the canon, the only source I can find that popularized that idea is from Thomas Paine ~1794 AD, though he does not mention the council by name.

Thomas Paine's Age of Reason, Part First, Section 4

Be this as it may, they decided by vote which of the books out of the collection they had made should be the WORD OF GOD, and which should not. They rejected several; they voted others to be doubtful, such as the books called the Apocrypha; and those books which had a majority of votes, were voted to be the word of God. Had they voted otherwise, all the people, since calling themselves Christians, had believed otherwise — for the belief of the one comes from the vote of the other. Who the people were that did all this, we know nothing of; they called themselves by the general name of the Church, and this is all we know of the matter.

In the 1800s, radical Christian Robert Taylor again brought up the Synodicon's theory.

Robert Taylor (~1829 AD), in The diegesis, Appendix, page 432

A.D. 327. Grand Council of Nice in Bythinia, under the presidency of Constantine the Great, gave us the God of God creed used in the communion service. Pappus, in his Synodicon to the council of Nice, asserts, that having promiscuously put all the books under the communion table in a church, they besought the Lord, that the inspired records might get upon the table, while the spurious ones remained underneath, which accordingly happened.

And finally in the modern era, Dan Brown's fictional story implied that Constantine basically chose the canon of the Bible, either at or around the time of the Council of Nicaea.

Dan Brown's fictional Da Vinci Code (~2003 AD)

Constantine needed to strengthen the new Christian tradition, and held a famous ecumenical gathering known as the Council of Nicaea. At this gathering [...] many aspects of Christianity were debated and voted upon – the date of Easter, the role of bishops, the administration of sacraments, and, of course, the divinity of Jesus...

From this sprang the most profound moment in Christian history. Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ's human traits and embellished those gospels that made him Godlike. The earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up, and burned.

NT Canon formation

The New Testament Books were written by various authors, to various geographic regions, spread across time.

Book Date Audience
James ~45 AD Outside Palestine
Galatians ~48 AD Galatia
1 Thessalonians ~50 AD Thessalonica
2 Thessalonians ~50 AD Thessalonica
Mark ~53 AD Gentile believers
1 Corinthians ~55 AD Corinth
2 Corinthians ~56 AD Corinth
Romans ~57 AD Rome
Matthew ~60 AD Jewish Christians, likely in Syria
Ephesians ~62 AD Ephesus
Luke ~62 AD Theophilus (unknown person)
Acts ~62 AD Theophilus (unknown person)
Philippians ~62 AD Philippi
Colossians ~62 AD Colossae
Philemon ~62 AD Philemon in Colossae
1 Peter ~63 AD Asia Minor
Titus ~64 AD Titus at Island of Crete
1 Timothy ~64 AD Timothy in Ephesus
Hebrews ~65 AD Jewish Christians
2 Peter ~65 AD Asia Minor
Jude ~66 AD Jewish Christians
2 Timothy ~67 AD Timothy in Ephesus
1 John ~85 AD Likely Gentile Christians
2 John ~87 AD The elect lady and her children (unknown person)
John ~90 AD Asia Minor?
3 John ~92 AD Gaius (unknown person)
Revelation ~95 AD Christians suffering persecution


Note: The above dates are taken from the ESV's New Testament Timeline. Their exact accuracy isn't important - the sole point we're trying to make is that the New Testament books were written across time, and spread out geographically.

Development of New Testament Canon

The 27 books of the New Testament were not delivered to the door one day of the church in Jerusalem. Rather, they were written to various groups, spread across both the world and across time.

If a church father did not mention a book from the new testament, the typical reason was simply that he hadn’t seen it yet!

Also keep in mind that a document could speak only truths, and be beneficial to read, but not be part of canon.

Let us now examine what documents the church fathers called scripture over time, resulting in the formation of the New Testament canon.

Here's a great external resource for quotations of NT over time.


~155 AD: Justin Martyr

Refers to the gospels.

For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, This do in remembrance of Me, this is My body; and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, This is My blood; and gave it to them alone.
- The First Apology, Chapter 66. Of the Eucharist.

~170 AD: Muratorian fragment

Includes 22 of the 27 books of the new testament.

  • Does not mention James, 1 & 2 Peter, Hebrews, and 3 John.
  • Includes Book of Wisdom.
  • Notes some accept Apocalypse of Peter, and The Shepherd of Hermas should be read but not on same level as other scripture.
  • Explicitly rejects several Apocrypha.
...at which nevertheless he was present, and so he placed [them in his narrative]. The third book of the Gospel is that according to Luke. Luke, the well-known physician, after the ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken with him as one zealous for the law, composed it in his own name, according to [the general] belief. Yet he himself had not seen the Lord in the flesh; and therefore, as he was able to ascertain events, so indeed he begins to tell the story from the birth of John. The fourth of the Gospels is that of John, [one] of the disciples. To his fellow disciples and bishops, who had been urging him [to write], he said, 'Fast with me from today to three days, and what will be revealed to each one let us tell it to one another.' In the same night it was revealed to Andrew, [one] of the apostles, that John should write down all things in his own name while all of them should review it. And so, though various elements may be taught in the individual books of the Gospels, nevertheless this makes no difference to the faith of believers, since by the one sovereign Spirit all things have been declared in all [the Gospels]: concerning the nativity, concerning the passion, concerning the resurrection, concerning life with his disciples, and concerning his twofold coming; the first in lowliness when he was despised, which has taken place, the second glorious in royal power, which is still in the future. What marvel is it then, if John so consistently mentions these particular points also in his Epistles, saying about himself, 'What we have seen with our eyes and heard with our ears and our hands have handled, these things we have written to you? For in this way he professes [himself] to be not only an eye-witness and hearer, but also a writer of all the marvelous deeds of the Lord, in their order. Moreover, the acts of all the apostles were written in one book. For 'most excellent Theophilus' Luke compiled the individual events that took place in his presence — as he plainly shows by omitting the martyrdom of Peter as well as the departure of Paul from the city [of Rome] when he journeyed to Spain. As for the Epistles of Paul, they themselves make clear to those desiring to understand, which ones [they are], from what place, or for what reason they were sent. First of all, to the Corinthians, prohibiting their heretical schisms; next, to the Galatians, against circumcision; then to the Romans he wrote at length, explaining the order (or, plan) of the Scriptures, and also that Christ is their principle (or, main theme). It is necessary for us to discuss these one by one, since the blessed apostle Paul himself, following the example of his predecessor John, writes by name to only seven churches in the following sequence: To the Corinthians first, to the Ephesians second, to the Philippians third, to the Colossians fourth, to the Galatians fifth, to the Thessalonians sixth, to the Romans seventh. It is true that he writes once more to the Corinthians and to the Thessalonians for the sake of admonition, yet it is clearly recognizable that there is one Church spread throughout the whole extent of the earth. For John also in the Apocalypse, though he writes to seven churches, nevertheless speaks to all. [Paul also wrote] out of affection and love one to Philemon, one to Titus, and two to Timothy; and these are held sacred in the esteem of the Church catholic for the regulation of ecclesiastical discipline. There is current also [an epistle] to the Laodiceans, [and] another to the Alexandrians, [both] forged in Paul's name to [further] the heresy of Marcion, and several others which cannot be received into the catholic Church - for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey. Moreover, the epistle of Jude and two of the above-mentioned (or, bearing the name of) John are counted (or, used) in the catholic [Church]; and [the book of] Wisdom, written by the friends of Solomon in his honour. We receive only the apocalypses of John and Peter, though some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church. But Hermas wrote the Shepherd very recently, in our times, in the city of Rome, while bishop Pius, his brother, was occupying the [episcopal] chair of the church of the city of Rome. And therefore it ought indeed to be read; but it cannot be read publicly to the people in church either among the Prophets, whose number is complete, or among the Apostles, for it is after [their] time. But we accept nothing whatever of Arsinous or Valentinus or Miltiades, who also composed a new book of psalms for Marcion, together with Basilides, the Asian founder of the Cataphrygians...
- The Muratorian Fragment

~180 AD: Irenaeus

  • Quotes from 21 of the 27 books of the New Testament.
  • Of the 6 remaining, he may refer to Hebrews, James, and 2 Peter.
  • He does not quote from Philemon, 3 John or Jude.
  • Identifies The Shepherd of Hermas as Scripture.
  • Identifies letter of 1 Clement as authoritative.
  • Condemns the Gospel of Judas.


The 4 Gospels

Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.
- Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 1, Section 1

Quoted NT Books

Scripture Quoted In
Matthew 1:1 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 16, Section 2
Mark 16:19 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 10, Section 5
Luke 1:2 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 14, Section 2
John 1:1 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 11, Section 1
Acts 20:5-6 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 14, Section 1
Romans 1:1-4 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 16, Section 3
1 Corinthians 1:18 Against Heresies, Book I, Chapter 3, Section 5
2 Corinthians 4:4 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 7, Section 1
Galatians 4:4 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 22, Section 1
Ephesians 5:30 Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter 2, Section 3
Philippians 4:18 Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter 18, Section 4
Colossians 3:11 Against Heresies, Book I, Chapter 3, Section 4
1 Thessalonians 5:23 Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter 6, Section 1
2 Thessalonians 2:8 Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter 25, Section 3
1 Timothy 1:4 Against Heresies, Book I, Preface, Section 1
2 Timothy 4:10-11 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 14, Section 1
Titus 3:10 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 3, Section 4
1 Peter 1:8 Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter 9, Section 2
1 John 5:1 Against Heresies, Book III, Chapter 16, Section 8
2 John 1:11 Against Heresies, Book I, Chapter 16, Section 3
Revelation 3:7 Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter 20, Section 2


Scripture Possible Quote (???)
Hebrews 1:3 Against Heresies, Book II, Chapter 30, Section 9
James 2:23 Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter 16, Section 2
2 Peter 3:8 Against Heresies, Book V, Chapter 28, Section 3


Unquoted Scripture
Philemon
3 John
Jude

Apocryphal Books

The Shepherd of Hermas identified as scripture:

Truly, then, the Scripture declared, which says, "First of all believe that there is one God, who has established all things, and completed them, and having caused that from what had no being, all things should come into existence: He who contains all things, and is Himself contained by no one." [The Shepherd of Hermas, Book 2, First Commandment] Rightly also has Malachi said among the prophets: "Is it not one God who has established us? Have we not all one Father?" [Malachi 2:10] In accordance with this, too, does the apostle say, "There is one God, the Father, who is above all, and in us all." [Ephesians 4:6] Likewise does the Lord also say: "All things are delivered to Me by My Father" [Matthew 11:27]
- Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter 20, Section 2

Letter of 1 Clement identified as authoritative:

The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome dispatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spoke with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand the tradition of the Church, since this Epistle is of older date than these men who are now propagating falsehood, and who conjure into existence another god beyond the Creator and the Maker of all existing things.
- Against Heresies Book III, Chapter 3, Section 3

Gospel of Judas condemned:

Others again declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. On this account, they add, they have been assailed by the Creator, yet no one of them has suffered injury. For Sophia was in the habit of carrying off that which belonged to her from them to herself. They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas...For it is now in your power, and in the power of all your associates, to familiarize yourselves with what has been said, to overthrow their wicked and undigested doctrines, and to set forth doctrines agreeable to the truth.
- Against Heresies, Book I, Chapter 31, Section 1 + Section 4

~250 AD: Origen

  • Includes 26 of the 27 NT books in his list.
  • Excludes Revelation (though some manuscripts include it in his list)
  • Does quote from Revelation as scripture elsewhere in his writings.
  • Attributes 14 letters to Paul (thus counts Hebrews as a letter from Paul)
But when our Lord Jesus Christ comes, whose arrival that prior son of Nun designated, he sends priests, his apostles, bearing “trumpets hammered thin,” the magnificent and heavenly instruction of proclamation. Matthew first sounded the priestly trumpet in his Gospel; Mark also; Luke and John each played their own priestly trumpets. Even Peter cries out with trumpets in two of his epistles; also James and Jude. In addition, John also sounds the trumpet through his epistles [and Revelation], and Luke, as he describes the Acts of the Apostles. And now that last one comes, the one who said, “I think God displays us apostles last,” and in fourteen of his epistles, thundering with trumpets, he casts down the walls of Jericho and all the devices of idolatry and dogmas of philosophers, all the way to the foundations.
- Homilies on Joshua, 7.1
The one who reclined on Jesus' breast, John, who left behind one gospel while admitting that he could produce so many that the world would not be able to contain them [John 21:25]. He also wrote the Apocalypse, after being ordered to be silent and not to write what the seven thunders said [Rev 10:3-4]... 
- Expositions on the Gospel of John

~350 AD: Cyril of Jerusalem

  • Includes 26 of the 27 NT books in his list.
  • Excludes Revelation
  • Attributes 14 letters to Paul (thus counts Hebrews as a letter from Paul)
Then of the New Testament there are the four Gospels only, for the rest have false titles and are mischievous. The Manichæans also wrote a Gospel according to Thomas, which being tinctured with the fragrance of the evangelic title corrupts the souls of the simple sort. Receive also the Acts of the Twelve Apostles; and in addition to these the seven Catholic Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude; and as a seal upon them all, and the last work of the disciples, the fourteen Epistles of Paul. But let all the rest be put aside in a secondary rank. And whatever books are not read in Churches, these read not even by yourself, as you have heard me say.
- Catechetical Lecture 4, #36

367 AD: Athanasius

  • Includes all 27 NT books in his list
  • Attributes 14 letters to Paul (thus counts Hebrews as a letter from Paul)
Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John.
- Letter 39

382 AD: Council of Rome

  • Includes all 27 New Testament texts (and Septuagint version of OT list)
Now indeed the issue of the divine scriptures must be discussed, which the universal Catholic church receives or which it is required to avoid.

THIS IS THE ORDER OF THE OLD TESTAMENT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Kings four books, Chronicles two books, 150 Psalms, proverbs, ecclesiastes, song of songs, The same of Wisdom, ecclesiasticus

LIKEWISE THE ORDER OF THE PROPHETS: Isaiah, Jeremiah, with Cinoth i.e. his lamentations , Ezechiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habbakuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi

LIKEWISE THE ORDER OF THE HISTORIES: Job, Tobit, Esdras two books, Ester, Judith, Maccabees two books

LIKEWISE THE ORDER OF THE SCRIPTURES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT which the holy and catholic Roman church upholds and is venerated:

Four books of the Gospels: according to Mathew, according to Mark, according to Luke, according to John. Likewise the acts of the apostles. The letters of the apostle Paul in number fourteen: to the Romans, to the Corinthians two letters, to the Ephesians, to the Thesalonians two letters, to the Galatians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, to Timothy two letters, to Titus, to the Philemon, to the Hebrews. Likewise the apocalypse of John. Likewise the canonical [catholic] letters in number seven: of the apostle Peter two letters, of the apostle James one letter, of the apostle John one letter, of the other John the elder two letters, of the apostle Judas the Zealot one letter.

HERE ENDS THE CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
- Council of Rome [Simplified slightly due to formatting]

~390 AD: Gregory of Nazianzus

  • Includes 26 of the 27 NT books in his list.
  • Excludes Revelation
  • Attributes 14 letters to Paul (thus counts Hebrews as a letter from Paul)
Now count also those of the new mystery. Matthew wrote the miracles of Christ for the Hebrews, Mark for Italy, Luke for Greece; John for all, the great herald, who walked in the heavens. Then the acts of the wise apostles. Of Paul there are fourteen epistles. And the seven catholic, [which include] one of James, two of Peter, three of John also; and Jude is the seventh. You have them all. And if there are any beyond these, they are not genuine.
- Concerning the Genuine Books of Divinely Inspired Scripture (poem)

393 AD: Council of Hippo

  • Includes all 27 New Testament texts (and Septuagint version of OT list)
Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture.

But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows: Genesis. Exodus. Leviticus. Numbers. Deuteronomy. Joshua the Son of Nun. The Judges. Ruth. The Kings, iv. books. 

The Chronicles, ij. books. Job. The Psalter. The Five books of Solomon. The Twelve Books of the Prophets. Isaiah. Jeremiah. Ezechiel. Daniel. Tobit. Judith. Esther. Ezra, ij. books. Macchabees, ij. books.

The New Testament. The Gospels, iv. books. The Acts of the Apostles, j. book. The Epistles of Paul, xiv. The Epistles of Peter, the Apostle, ij. The Epistles of John the Apostle, iij. The Epistles of James the Apostle, j. The Epistle of Jude the Apostle, j. The Revelation of John, j. book.
- Council of Hippo [Simplified slightly due to formatting]

397 AD: Council of Carthage

  • Includes all 27 New Testament texts (and Septuagint version of OT list)
It was also determined that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in the Church under the title of divine Scriptures. The Canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two books of Paraleipomena, Job, the Psalter, five books of Solomon, the books of the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees. Of the New Testament: four books of the Gospels, one book of the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of the Apostle Paul, one epistle of the same [writer] to the Hebrews, two Epistles of the Apostle Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude, one book of the Apocalypse of John.
- Synod of 397

OT Canon Formation

~80 AD: Clement of Rome

  • Quotes from Book of Wisdom
By the word of his might [God] established all things, and by his word he can overthrow them. 'Who shall say to him, "What have you done?" or who shall resist the power of his strength?' [Wis. 12:12 / Wis. 11:21]
- Letter to the Corinthians 27:5

~135 AD: Polycarp of Smyrna

  • Quotes from: Tobit
Stand fast, therefore, in these things, and follow the example of the Lord, being firm and unchangeable in the faith, loving the brotherhood [1 Pet. 2:17]. [...] When you can do good, defer it not, because 'alms delivers from death' [Tob. 4:10, 12:9]. Be all of you subject to one another [1 Pet. 5:5], having your conduct blameless among the Gentiles [1 Pet. 2:12], and the Lord may not be blasphemed through you. But woe to him by whom the name of the Lord is blasphemed [Is. 52:5]!
- Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, Chapter 10

~160 AD: Justin Martyr

Identifies that believers of Christ use the Septuagint (which includes the Deuterocanon), but Jews have started using a smaller set of passages of Scripture (the Hebrew texts) in which they have removed many Scriptures.

But I am far from putting reliance in your teachers, who refuse to admit that the interpretation made by the seventy elders who were with Ptolemy [king] of the Egyptians is a correct one; and they attempt to frame another. And I wish you to observe, that they have altogether taken away many Scriptures from the translations effected by those seventy elders who were with Ptolemy, and by which this very man who was crucified is proved to have been set forth expressly as God, and man, and as being crucified, and as dying; but since I am aware that this is denied by all of your nation, I do not address myself to these points, but I proceed to carry on my discussions by means of those passages which are still admitted by you. For you assent to those which I have brought before your attention, except that you contradict the statement, 'Behold, the virgin shall conceive,' and say it ought to be read, 'Behold, the young woman shall conceive.'
- Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 71

~170 AD: Melito of Sardis

  • OT LIST: excludes Lamentations, Nehemiah, Esther and Deuterocanon [Secondary source from ~324 AD]
Accordingly when I went East and came to the place where these things were preached and done, I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send them to you as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books: Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth; of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Wisdom also, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job; of Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book ; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras. From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books. Such are the words of Melito.
- Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, Book IV, Chapter 26, Section 14

~170 AD: Muratorian Fragment

  • NT LIST: Excludes James, 1 & 2 Peter, Hebrews, and 3 John - but includes Book of Wisdom
Moreover, the epistle of Jude and two of the above-mentioned (or, bearing the name of) John are counted (or, used) in the catholic [Church]; and [the book of] Wisdom, written by the friends of Solomon in his honour. We receive only the apocalypses of John and Peter, though some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church.
- The Muratorian Fragment, 68-72

~189 AD: Irenaeus

  • Quotes from: Baruch and Daniel 13 (additions to Daniel)
Quote from additions to Daniel
Those... who are believed to be presbyters by many, but serve their own lusts and do not place the fear of God supreme in their hearts, but conduct themselves with contempt toward others and are puffed up with the pride of holding the chief seat [Matt. 23:6] and work evil deeds in secret, saying 'No man sees us,' shall be convicted by the Word, who does not judge after outward appearance, nor looks upon the countenance, but the heart; and they shall hear those words to be found in Daniel the prophet: 'O you seed of Canaan and not of Judah, beauty has deceived you and lust perverted your heart' [Dan. 13:56]. You that have grown old in wicked days, now your sins which you have committed before have come to light, for you have pronounced false judgments and have been accustomed to condemn the innocent and to let the guilty go free, although the Lord says, 'You shall not slay the innocent and the righteous' [Dan. 13:52, citing Ex. 23:7] 
- Against Heresies 4:26:3; [Daniel 13 is not in the Protestant Bible]
Quote from Baruch
Jeremiah the prophet has pointed out that as many believers as God has prepared for this purpose, to multiply those left on the earth, should both be under the rule of the saints and to minister to this [new] Jerusalem and that [his] kingdom shall be in it, saying, 'Look around Jerusalem toward the east and behold the joy which comes to you from God himself. Behold, your sons whom you have sent forth shall come: They shall come in a band from the east to the west... God shall go before with you in the light of his splendor, with the mercy and righteousness which proceed from him' [Baruch 4:36 - 5:9]
- Against Heresies 5:35:1; [Baruch was often considered part of Jeremiah, as it is here]

~198 AD: Clement of Alexandria

  • Quotes explicitly as Scripture: Sirach and Tobit
  • Quotes from: Wisdom and Baruch
Quote from Sirach as Scripture
At this stage some rise up, saying that the Lord, by reason of the rod, and threatening, and fear, is not good; misapprehending, as appears, the Scripture which says, “And he that feareth the Lord will turn to his heart;” [Sirach 21:6] and most of all, oblivious of His love, in that for us He became man.
- The Paedagogus (The Instructor), Book I, Chapter 8, Section 1
Quote from Tobit as Scripture
[...] having heard the Scripture which says, “Fasting with prayer is a good thing.” [Tobit 12:8]
- The Stromata, Book VI, Chapter 12, Section 7
Quote from Book of Wisdom
For it is said, "Let the children whom You have loved, O Lord, learn that it is not the products of fruits that nourish man; but it is Your word which preserves those who believe in You." [Wisdom 16:26]
- The Paedagogus (The Instructor), Book II, Chapter 1, Section 4
Quote from Baruch
He invites us to knowledge also, when He says by Jeremiah, "Had you walked in the way of God, you would have dwelt for ever in peace" [Baruch 3:13]
- The Paedagogus (The Instructor), Book I, Chapter 10, Section 3

~204 AD: Hippolytus

  • Quotes from: Baruch, Book of Wisdom
  • References: Tobit, Susannah (additions to Daniel), and Maccabees
Quote from Baruch
Thus it is written: "This is our God, and there shall none other be accounted of in comparison of Him. He has found out all the way of knowledge, and has given it unto Jacob His servant (son), and to Israel His beloved. Afterward did He show Himself upon earth, and conversed with men." [Baruch 3:35-37]
- Against Noetus, Section 2
Quote from Book of Wisdom
I produce now the prophecy of Solomon, [...] for the prophet says, "The ungodly said, reasoning with themselves, but not aright," that is, about Christ, "Let us lie in wait for the righteous, because he is not for our turn, and he is clean contrary to our doings and words, and upbraids us with our offending the law, and professes to have knowledge of God; and he calls himself the Child of God." [Wisd. 2:1,12,13] And then he says, "He is grievous to us even to behold; for his life is not like other men's, and his ways are of another fashion. We are esteemed of him as counterfeits, and he abstains from our ways as from filthiness, and pronounces the end of the just to be blessed." [Wisd. 2:15,16]
- Expository Treatise Against the Jews, Section 9
Reference to Tobit
"For even now the angel of God." He shows also, that when Susannah prayed to God, and was heard, the angel was sent then to help her, just as was the case in the instance of Tobias and Sara. For when they prayed, the supplication of both of them was heard in the same day and the same hour, and the angel Raphael was sent to heal them both.
- Commentary on Daniel, 6, section 55
Reference to Susannah
"What is narrated here [in the story of Susannah] happened at a later time, although it is placed at the front of the book [of Daniel], for it was a custom with the writers to narrate many things in an inverted order in their writings... Therefore, always watchful in heart and pure in life, let us imitate Susannah" 
- Commentary on Daniel, 6 (beginning at section 61)
Reference to Maccabees
But they said, "We will not come forth: neither will we do the king's commandment; we will die in our innocency: and he slew of them a thousand souls." The things, therefore, which were spoken to the blessed Daniel are fulfilled: "And my servants shall be afflicted, and shall fall by famine, and by sword, and by captivity." Daniel, however, adds: "And they shall be helped with a little help." For at that time Matthias arose, and Judas Maccabaeus, and helped them, and delivered them from the hand of the Greeks.
- Commentary on Daniel, Second Fragment, section 32

~240 AD: Origen

  • Quotes explicitly as Scripture: 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Sirach, Susanna (additions to Daniel)
  • Quotes from: Baruch, Wisdom
  • Notes that the "Greek copy" of the Old Testament (the Septuagint) "is found in every Church of Christ". He refers to this copy as "our Scriptures."
  • Also makes a point to know exactly what is (and isn't) in the Hebrew version of the Old Testament the Jews of his time used, so in his controversies with them he doesn’t quote something not in their Hebrew copy. Implies Jews established Canon by this time.
  • OT Hebrew (Jewish) Canon List: In this list for the Jews of his day, Origen identifies Maccabees as "beside" the rest of the canon. He also appears to exclude the 12 minor prophets (transcription error?) and the Deuterocanon, but does include part of Baruch (Letter of Jeremiah) [Secondary source from ~324 AD, recorded by Eusebius]
Hebrew (Jewish) Canon List
It should be stated that the canonical books, as the Hebrews have handed them down, are twenty-two; corresponding with the number of their letters. [...] The twenty-two books of the Hebrews are the following: That which is called by us Genesis, but by the Hebrews, from the beginning of the book, Bresith, which means, 'In the beginning'; Exodus, Welesmoth, that is, 'These are the names'; Leviticus, Wikra, 'And he called'; Numbers, Ammesphekodeim; Deuteronomy, Eleaddebareim, 'These are the words'; Jesus, the son of Nave, Josoue ben Noun; Judges and Ruth, among them in one book, Saphateim; the First and Second of Kings, among them one, Samouel, that is, 'The called of God'; the Third and Fourth of Kings in one, Wammelch David, that is, 'The kingdom of David'; of the Chronicles, the First and Second in one, Dabreïamein, that is, 'Records of days'; Esdras, First and Second in one, Ezra, that is, 'An assistant'; the book of Psalms, Spharthelleim; the Proverbs of Solomon, Meloth; Ecclesiastes, Koelth; the Song of Songs (not, as some suppose, Songs of Songs), Sir Hassirim; Isaiah, Jessia; Jeremiah, with Lamentations and the epistle in one, Jeremia; Daniel, Daniel; Ezekiel, Jezekiel; Job, Job; Esther, Esther. And besides these there are the Maccabees, which are entitled Sarbeth Sabanaiel.
- Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, Book VI, Chapter 25, Section 1-2
Quote from Maccabees as Scripture
But that we may believe in the authority of holy Scripture that such is the case, hear how in the book of Maccabees, where [...] she says, “I ask of you, my son, to look at the heaven and the earth, and at all things which are in them, and beholding these, to know that God made all these things when they did not exist.” [2 Maccabees 7:28]
- De Principiis, Book II, Chapter 1, Section 5
Quote from Tobit as Scripture
For the Scripture says that after they had prayed, the prayers of them both were heard in the sight of the glory of the great Raphael, and he was sent to heal them both [Tobit 3:16-17].
- On Prayer Chapter 6
Identification of Judith as Scripture
I want to give an example from Scripture of righteous lack of faith in an agreement in order to demonstrate that man can call upon faithlessness in act. Judith made an agreement with Holophernes that though she would leave for certain number of days to pray to God, she also would present herself after these days at the marriage bed of Holophernes.
- Homily 20 on Jeremiah, 7.3
Quote from Sirach as Scripture
But we reproach both those who repent and those who convert, though the Scripture says: 'Do not reproach a man who turns away from sin.' [Sirach 8:5]
- Homily 16 on Jeremiah, 6.2
Susanna (additions to Daniel) is received
...But it is time for us to use the words of holy Susanna against these wicked presbyters, which indeed those who deny the story of Susanna excise from the list of divine books.  But we both receive it and aptly use it against them...
- Homily 1 on Leviticus, 1.3
Quote from Baruch
When someone becomes a worshipper in the land, God has arranged that someone rejected from their own and came to the land about which it is written: Hear Israel.  "Why is it that you are in the land of enemies, that you are counted among those in Hades?  You have forsaken the fountain of life, the Lord.  If you have walked in the way of God, you would have dwelt in peace forever." [Baruch 3:9-13]
- Homily 7 on Jeremiah, 3.3
Quote from Book of Wisdom
For the plan of the world is said to be contained in the clothing of the high priest, as we find in the Wisdom of Solomon, where he says, "For in the long garment was the whole world." [Wisdom 18:24]
- De Principiis, Book II, Chapter 3, Section 6
Excerpts from Letter from Origen to Africanus
    In answer to this, I have to tell you what it behooves us to do in the cases not only of the History of Susanna, which is found in every Church of Christ in that Greek copy which the Greeks use, but is not in the Hebrew, or of the two other passages you mention at the end of the book containing the history of Bel and the Dragon, which likewise are not in the Hebrew copy of Daniel; but of thousands of other passages also which I found in many places when with my little strength I was collating the Hebrew copies with ours. [...]
    And I make it my endeavor not to be ignorant of their various readings, lest in my controversies with the Jews I should quote to them what is not found in their copies, and that I may make some use of what is found there, even although it should not be in our Scriptures. [...]
    Wherefore I think no other supposition is possible, than that they who had the reputation of wisdom, and the rulers and elders, took away from the people every passage which might bring them into discredit among the people. We need not wonder, then, if this history of the evil device of the licentious elders against Susanna is true, but was concealed and removed from the Scriptures by men themselves not very far removed from the counsel of these elders. [...]
    What I have said is, I think, sufficient to prove that it would be nothing wonderful if this history were true, and the licentious and cruel attack was actually made on Susanna by those who were at that time elders, and written down by the wisdom of the Spirit, but removed by these rulers of Sodom, as the Spirit would call them. [...]
    Where you get your lost and won at play, and thrown out unburied on the streets, I know not, unless it is from Tobias; and Tobias (as also Judith), we ought to notice, the Jews do not use. They are not even found in the Hebrew Apocrypha, as I learned from the Jews themselves. However, since the Churches use Tobias, you must know that even in the captivity some of the captives were rich and well to do. Tobias himself says...

~240 AD: Tertullian

  • Quotes from: Baruch & Book of Wisdom
Quote from Baruch
For they remembered also the words of Jeremias writing to those over whom that captivity was impending: "And now you shall see borne upon (men's) shoulders the gods of the Babylonians, of gold and silver and wood, causing fear to the Gentiles. Beware, therefore, that you also do not be altogether like the foreigners, and be seized with fear while you behold crowds worshipping those gods before and behind, but say in your mind, Our duty is to worship You, O Lord." [Baruch 6:3]
- Scorpiace, Chapter 8
Quote from Book of Wisdom
Our instruction comes from "the porch of Solomon," who had himself taught that "the Lord should be sought in simplicity of heart." [Wisdom 1:1]
- Prescription against Heretics, Chapter 7

~250 AD: Cyprian of Carthage

  • Quotes explicitly as Scripture: Wisdom, Sirach, and Tobit
  • Quotes from: 1 Maccabees and Daniel 14 (additions to Daniel)
Quote from Book of Wisdom as Inspired
And moreover, also, the Holy Spirit teaches by Solomon, that they who please God are more early taken hence, and are more quickly set free, lest while they are delaying longer in this world they should be polluted with the contagions of the world. "He was taken away," says he, "lest wickedness should change his understanding. For his soul was pleasing to God; wherefore hasted He to take him away from the midst of wickedness." [Wisdom 4:11]
- Treatise 7, Section 23
Quote from Sirach as Holy Scripture
Holy Scripture teaches and forewarns, saying, "My son, when you come to the service of God, stand in righteousness and fear, and prepare your soul for temptation." And again: "In pain endure, and in your humility have patience; for gold and silver is tried in the fire, but acceptable men in the furnace of humiliation." [Sirach 2:1,4-5]
- Treatise 7, Section 9
Quote from Tobit as Holy Scripture
And thus Holy Scripture instructs us, saying, "Prayer is good with fasting and almsgiving." [Tobit 12:8]
- Treatise 4, Section 32
Quote from 1 Maccabees
Of this same thing in the Maccabees: "Was not Abraham found faithful in temptation, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness?" [1 Maccabees 2:52]
- Treatise 12, Third Book, Section 15
Quote from additions to Daniel
So Daniel, too, when he was required to worship the idol Bel, [...]  broke forth with full faith and freedom, saying, 'I worship nothing but the Lord my God, who created the heaven and the earth' [Dan. 14:5]
- Letters 55:5

~325 AD: Council of Nicaea

  • Voltaire (1700s) popularised a fictitious anecdote that the canon was determined at this council by placing all the competing books on an altar during the council, and then keeping the ones that did not fall off.
  • Nothing we have from the Council of Nicaea indicates they gave any rulings on canon, contrary to popular belief
  • Except... Jerome (~382 AD) noted the Council of Nicaea counted Judith (one of the Deuterocanon) among the number of the Sacred Scriptures.
Judith as Sacred Scripture
Among the Hebrews the Book of Judith is found among the Hagiographa, the authority of which toward confirming those which have come into contention is judged less appropriate. Yet having been written in Chaldean words, it is counted among the histories. But because this book is found by the Nicene Council to have been counted among the number of the Sacred Scriptures, I have acquiesced to your request...
- Jerome's Preface to Judith

~326 AD: Alexander of Alexandria

  • Quotes from: Sirach
Not that the Son of God is unbegotten, for the Father alone is unbegotten; but that the ineffable personality of the only-begotten God is beyond the keenest conception of the evangelists and perhaps even of angels. Therefore, I do not think men ought to be considered pious who presume to investigate this subject, in disobedience to the injunction, 'Seek not what is too difficult for you, neither enquire into what is too high for you.' [Sirach 3:21]
- Ecclesiastical History (Theodoret), Book I, Chapter 3, Paragraph 5
- Also attributed to Epistles on Arianism and the Deposition of Arius, Sections 4-5

~350 AD: Cyril of Jerusalem

  • OT LIST: Includes Baruch
  • Quotes from: Sirach, Book of Wisdom, Susanna (additions to Daniel)
OT List
Of these read the two and twenty books, but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far wiser and more pious than yourself were the Apostles, and the bishops of old time, the presidents of the Church who handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench thou not upon its statutes. And of the Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which, if you are desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them. For of the Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next, Joshua the son of Nave, and the book of Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and second books of the Kings are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and fourth one book. And in like manner, the first and second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second of Esdras are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these are the Historical writings. But those which are written in verses are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth book. And after these come the five Prophetic books: of the Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including Baruch and Lamentations and the Epistle ; then Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel, the twenty-second of the Old Testament.
- Catechetical Lecture 4, Section 35
Quote from Sirach
If any man attempt to speak of God, let him first describe the bounds of the earth. You dwell on the earth, and the limit of this earth which is your dwelling you know not: how then shall you be able to form a worthy thought of its Creator? You behold the stars, but their Maker you behold not: count these which are visible, and then describe Him who is invisible, Who tells the number of the stars, and calls them all by their names. Violent rains lately came pouring down upon us, and nearly destroyed us: number the drops in this city alone: nay, I say not in the city, but number the drops on your own house for one single hour, if you can, but you can not. Learn then your own weakness; learn from this instance the mightiness of God: for He has numbered the drops of rain, which have been poured down on all the earth, not only now but in all time. The sun is a work of God, which, great though it be, is but a spot in comparison with the whole heaven; first gaze steadfastly upon the sun, and then curiously scan the Lord of the sun. "Seek not the things that are too deep for you, neither search out the things that are above your strength: what is commanded you, think thereupon" [Sirach 3:21-22]
- Catechetical Lecture 6, Section 4
Quote from Book of Wisdom
The Divine Nature then it is impossible to see with eyes of flesh: but from the works, which are Divine, it is possible to attain to some conception of His power, according to Solomon, who says, "For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures proportionably the Maker of them is seen." [Book of Wisdom 13:5] 
- Catechetical Lecture 9, Section 2
Refers to Susanna (Additions to Daniel)
He endued with wisdom the soul of Daniel, that young as he was he should become a judge of Elders. The chaste Susanna was condemned as a wanton; there was none to plead her cause; for who was to deliver her from the rulers? She was led away to death, she was now in the hands of the executioners. But her Helper was at hand, the Comforter, the Spirit who sanctifies every rational nature. Come hither to me, He says to Daniel; young though thou be, convict old men infected with the sins of youth; for it is written, God raised up the Holy Spirit upon a young stripling ; and nevertheless, (to pass on quickly,) by the sentence of Daniel that chaste lady was saved.
- Catechetical Lecture 16, Section 31

~364 AD: Basil of Caesarea

  • Quotes explicitly as Scripture: Sirach
  • Quotes from: 2 Maccabees, Baruch, Judith, Wisdom
Quote from Sirach as Scripture
What Scripture says is very true, "As for a fool he changes as the moon." [Sirach 27:11]
- Hexaemeron, Homily 6, Section 10
Reference to Maccabees
The mother of the Maccabees saw the death of seven sons without a sigh, without even shedding one unworthy tear.
- Letter 6, Section 2
Quote from Book of Wisdom
The Lord orders "all things in measure and weight," [Wisdom 11:20] and brings on us the temptations which do not exceed our power to endure them…
- Letter 219, Section 1
Quote from Baruch
Standing and sitting, I apprehend, indicate the fixity and entire stability of the nature, as Baruch, when he wishes to exhibit the immutability and immobility of the Divine mode of existence, says, "For you sit for ever and we perish utterly." [Baruch 3:3]
- De Spiritu Sancto, Chapter 6, Section 15
Quote from Judith
So as Judith says, "You have thought, and what things you determined were ready at hand." [Judith 9:5-6]
- De Spiritu Sancto, Chapter 8, Section 19

~367 AD: Hilary of Poitiers

  • OT LIST: Includes Epistle of Jeremiah (part of Baruch), and says "to this some add Tobit and Judith"
  • Quotes explicitly as Scripture: 2 Maccabees
  • Quotes from: Wisdom, Baruch, and additions to Daniel
OT List
The reason for reckoning twenty-two books of the Old Testament is that this corresponds with the number of the [Hebrew] letters. They are counted thus according to old tradition: the books of Moses are five, Joshua son of Nun the sixth, Judges and Ruth the seventh, first and second Kings the eighth, third and fourth [Kings] the ninth, the two of Chronicles make ten, the words of the days of Ezra the eleventh, the book of Psalms twelfth, of Solomon the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs are thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth, the Twelve Prophets sixteenth, then Isaiah and Jeremiah (with Lamentations and the Epistle) and Daniel and Ezekiel and Job and Esther complete the number of the books at twenty-two. To this some add Tobit and Judith to make twenty-four books, according to the number of the Greek letters, which is the language used among Hebrews and Greeks gathered in Rome.
- Expositions of the Psalms (Tractatus super Psalmos), 15
Quote from 2 Maccabees as Scripture
Such suggestions are inconsistent with the clear sense of Scripture. "For all things", as the Prophet says [2 Maccabees 7:28], "were made out of nothing"
- On the Trinity, Book IV, Section 16
Quote from Book of Wisdom
Then, while the devout soul was baffled and astray through its own feebleness, it caught from the prophet's voice this scale of comparison for God, admirably expressed, "By the greatness of His works and the beauty of the things that He has made the Creator of worlds is rightly discerned." [Wisdom 13:5]
- On the Trinity, Book I, Section 7
Quote from Baruch
As you have listened already to Moses and Isaiah, so listen now to Jeremiah inculcating the same truth as they: "This is our God, and there shall be none other likened unto Him, Who has found out all the way of knowledge, and has given it unto Jacob His servant and to Israel His beloved. Afterward did He show Himself upon earth and dwelt among men." [Baruch 3:35-37]
- On the Trinity, Book IV, Section 42
Quote from Susanna, additions to Daniel
They say that the Father has prescience of all things, as the blessed Susanna says, "O eternal God, that know secrets, and know all things before they be" [Daniel 13:42, deuterocanonical additions to Daniel]
- On the Trinity, Book IV, Section 8

~367 AD: Athanasius

  • OT LIST: Includes Baruch & excludes Esther. Says Esther & the rest of the Deuterocanon were called non-Canon but profitable for instruction in the word of godliness
  • Quotes explicitly as Scripture: Book of Wisdom
  • Quotes from: Sirach, Tobit
OT List
There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua, the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the twelve being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and the epistle, one book; afterwards, Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament.
- Letter 39, Section 4
Esther & Deuterocanon (minus Baruch)
But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being [merely] read
- Letter 39, Section 7
Quote from Book of Wisdom as Holy Scripture
...they are still insensible to shame, are again acting insolently against the Church and Athanasius; and from indignation at his deliverance venture on still more atrocious schemes against him, and are ready with an accusation, fearless of the words in holy Scripture; 'A false witness shall not be unpunished' [Proverbs 19:5] and 'The mouth that belies slays the soul' [Wisdom 1:11]
- Apologia Contra Arianos (Part I), Chapter 1, Section 3
Quote from Tobit
Let your Majesty ask the opinion of such: for it is written of the other, 'The foolish person will speak foolishness ;' but of these, 'Ask counsel of all that are wise.' [Tobit 4:18]
- Apologia ad Constantium, Section 17
Quote from Sirach
And they are memorials and records against the Arian heresy, and the wickedness of false accusers, and afford a pattern and model for those who come after, to contend for the truth unto death [Sirach 4:28]
- Apologia Contra Arianos (Part II), Chapter 6, Section 90

382 AD: Council of Rome

  • OT LIST: Included Deuterocanon
THIS IS THE ORDER OF THE OLD TESTAMENT: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Kings four books, Chronicles two books, 150 Psalms, proverbs, ecclesiastes, song of songs, The same of Wisdom, ecclesiasticus

LIKEWISE THE ORDER OF THE PROPHETS: Isaiah, Jeremiah, with Cinoth i.e. his lamentations , Ezechiel, Daniel, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habbakuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi

LIKEWISE THE ORDER OF THE HISTORIES: Job, Tobit, Esdras two books, Ester, Judith, Maccabees two books

- Decretum Gelasianum, Damasine List, Section II

~385 AD: Epiphanius of Salamis

  • OT LIST: Includes Baruch as canon, and notes “two more books of disputed canonicity”, Sirach and the Book of Wisdom. Later on he calls Sirach and the Book of Wisdom 'divine writings'.
By the time of the captives' return from Babylon these Jews had acquired the following books and prophets, and the following books of the prophets: 1. Genesis. 2. Exodus. 3. Leviticus. 4. Numbers. 5. Deuteronomy. 6. The Book of Joshua the son of Nun. 7. The Book of the Judges. 8. Ruth. 9. Job. 10. The Psalter. 11. The Proverbs of Solomon. 12. Ecclesiastes. 13. The Song of Songs. 14. The First Book of Kings. 15. The Second Book of Kings. 16. The Third Book of Kings. 17. The Fourth Book of Kings. 1 18. The First Book of Chronicles. 19. The Second Book of Chronicles. 20. The Book of the Twelve Prophets. 21. The Prophet Isaiah. 22. The Prophet Jeremiah, with the Lamentations and the Epistles of Jeremiah and Baruch. 23. The Prophet Ezekiel. 24. The Prophet Daniel. 25. I Ezra. 26. II Ezra. 2 27. Esther. These are the twenty-seven books given the Jews by God. They are counted as twenty-two, however, like the letters of their Hebrew alphabet, because ten books which (Jews) reckon as five are double. But I have explained this clearly elsewhere. And they have two more books of disputed canonicity, the Wisdom of Sirach and the Wisdom of Solomon, apart from certain other apocrypha. All these sacred books taught (them) Judaism and Law's observances till the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
- Panarion (also called Against Heresies) viii. 6
If you had been begotten by the Holy Spirit and instructed in the prophets and apostles, you must have gone through (the record) from the beginning of the genesis of the world until the times of Esther in twenty-seven books of the Old Testament, which are (also) numbered as twenty-two, also in the four holy Gospels, and in fourteen epistles of the holy apostle Paul, and in the writings which come before these, including the Acts of the Apostles in their times and the catholic epistles of James, Peter, John and Jude, and in the Revelation of John, and in the Wisdom books, I mean those of Solomon and of the son of Sirach — in short, all the divine writings...
- Panarion (also called Against Heresies) lxxvi. 5

~390 AD: Gregory of Nazianzus

  • OT LIST: Excludes Esther and the Deuterocanon (as well as Revelation from his NT list)
  • Quotes explicitly as Scripture: Judith
  • Quotes from: Wisdom, 2 Maccabees
OT List
The divine oracles should always on the tongue and in the mind be rehearsed. For God will indeed give a reward for this labor, so that you may obtain light from anything hidden, or, what is far better, that you may be spurred by God to greater purity, and thirdly, be called away from the cares of the world by such study. But let not extraneous books seduce your mind. For many malignant writings have been disseminated. Accept, o friend, this my approved number. These are all twelve of the historical books, of the most ancient Hebrew wisdom: First there is Genesis, then Exodus, Leviticus too. Then Numbers, and the Second Law. Then Joshua and Judges. Ruth is eighth. The ninth and tenth books [are] the acts of Kings, and [the eleventh is] Chronicles. Last you have Ezra. The poetic books are five: Job being first, then [the Psalms of] David; and three of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Canticles and Proverbs. And similarly five of prophetic inspiration. There are the Twelve written in one book: Hosea and Amos, and Micah the third; then Joel, and Jonah, Obadiah, Nahum also, and Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, Haggai, then Zechariah, and Malachi. All these are one. The second is of Isaiah. Then the one called as an infant, Jeremiah, Then Ezekiel, and the gift of Daniel. I count therefore, twenty-two of the ancient books, corresponding to the number of the Hebrew letters. 
- Concerning the Genuine Books of Divinely Inspired Scripture (poem)
Quote from Judith as Scripture
Then the last and gravest plague upon the persecutors, truly worthy of the night; and Egypt mourns the first-born of her own reasonings and actions which are also called in the Scripture the Seed of the Chaldeans [Judith 5:6] removed...
- Oration 45, Section XV
Quote from Wisdom
And how shall we preserve the truth that God pervades all things and fills all, as it is written "Do not I fill heaven and earth? Says the Lord," [Jeremiah 23:24] and "The Spirit of the Lord fills the world." [Wisdom 1:7]
- Second Theological Oration (Oration 28), Section VIII
Quote from 2 Maccabees
...the just man in the den, restraining the lions' rage, [Daniel 6:22] and the struggle of the seven Maccabees, [2 Maccabees 7:1] who were perfected with their father and mother in blood, and in all kinds of tortures.
- Oration 43, Section 74

~390 AD: Augustine

  • OT LIST: Included Deuterocanon
  • Identified the Septuagint as that Old Testament that the Church has received
OT List
Now the whole canon of Scripture on which we say this judgment is to be exercised, is contained in the following books:— Five books of Moses, that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; one book of Joshua the son of Nun; one of Judges; one short book called Ruth, which seems rather to belong to the beginning of Kings; next, four books of Kings, and two of Chronicles— these last not following one another, but running parallel, so to speak, and going over the same ground. The books now mentioned are history, which contains a connected narrative of the times, and follows the order of the events. There are other books which seem to follow no regular order, and are connected neither with the order of the preceding books nor with one another, such as Job, and Tobias, and Esther, and Judith, and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Ezra, which last look more like a sequel to the continuous regular history which terminates with the books of Kings and Chronicles. Next are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David; and three books of Solomon, viz., Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they were written by Jesus the son of Sirach. Still they are to be reckoned among the prophetical books, since they have attained recognition as being authoritative. The remainder are the books which are strictly called the Prophets: twelve separate books of the prophets which are connected with one another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one book; the names of these prophets are as follows:— Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; then there are the four greater prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel. The authority of the Old Testament is contained within the limits of these forty-four books.
- On Christian Doctrine, Book II, Chapter 8, Section 13
Septuagint received by Church
...yet the Church has received this Septuagint translation just as if it were the only one; and it has been used by the Greek Christian people, most of whom are not aware that there is any other.
- The City of God, Book 18, Chapter 43

~390 AD: Jerome

  • In his infamous helmeted preface, Jerome says that Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Tobias, and 2 Maccabees should be placed among the Apocryphal writings, as he did not have a Hebrew version of them to translate into his Latin Vulgate. Note that Baruch is missing from that list, as are the additions to Daniel and Esther.
  • And yet, we see him quote from the Deuterocanon, calling Wisdom “Holy Scripture”, quoting from Sirach as scripture, citing the words of Baruch as from a "prophet", and referring to a story in additions to Daniel.
  • So what's going on?
  • Jerome, at great pain and cost, obtained the Hebrew scriptures from the Jews
  • He notes that in the Church, the Seventy (Septuagint, Greek translation of OT) has achieved inspired-level status among the Early Church, so his going back to the Hebrew is interpreted as an attack on the validity of the Septuagint.
  • To counter this zealous devotion to the Septuagint, he argues that Jesus (and the apostles/evangelists) quote from the Hebrew, not the Septuagint. Particularly, he posits that wherever the Septuagint disagrees with the Hebrew, the Apostles of Christ quote from the Hebrew - and their authority is superior to that of the seventy translators.
  • He then issues a challenge - let his accuser show anything in the New Testament which comes from the Septuagint, but which is not found in the Hebrew, and he will end the controversy (the implication being he will cease pushing for the superiority of the Hebrew texts)
  • As proven elsewhere here, the New Testament actually quotes from the Septuagint (against the Masoteric) many times!
  • So... Jerome personally preferred the Hebrew text & canon over the Septuagint, primarily because he believed that the Apostles and Christ quoted from the Hebrew (and their quotes are mangled in the Septuagint).
  • Even with Jerome’s personal preference, he notes that he does not condemn the Septuagint, and submits himself to the church.
  • In his Latin Vulgate (latin translation of Old & New Testaments), he both translated and included the deuterocanon as part of the Canon
  • In the prefaces to his translation, he included his personal reservations - but the prefaces were written not so much as prologues than as cover letters to specific individuals to accompany copies of his translations, and were not intended for a general audience.


Helmeted Preface
This preface to the Scriptures may serve as a helmeted [i.e. defensive] introduction to all the books which we turn from Hebrew into Latin, so that we may be assured that what is outside of them must be placed aside among the Apocryphal writings. Wisdom, therefore, which generally bears the name of Solomon, and the book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, and Judith, and Tobias, and the Shepherd [of Hermes?] are not in the canon. The first book of Maccabees is found in Hebrew, but the second is Greek, as can be proved from the very style.
- St. Jerome's Prologue to the Books of the Kings
Quote from Wisdom as Holy Scripture
For in the book of Wisdom, which is inscribed with his name, Solomon says: "God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own eternity." [Wisdom 2:23]... Instead of the three proofs from Holy Scripture which you said would satisfy you if I could produce them, behold I have given you seven.
- Letter 51, Sections 6 & 7
Quote from Sirach as scripture
...for does not the scripture say: "Burden not yourself above your power?" [Sirach 13:2]
- Letter 108, Section 21
Quote from Baruch as prophet
...those of Baruch, "Arise, arise, O Jerusalem," and many other proclamations made by the trumpets of the prophets.
- Letter 77, Section 4
Reference to additions to Daniel
And, as a boy, Daniel judges old men and in the flower of youth condemns the incontinence of age.
- Letter 58, Section 1 [Reference to deuterocanonical additions to Daniel]
Obtained Hebrew Scriptures from the Jews at great cost
...my own familiar friend should frankly accept from a Christian and a friend what he has taken great pains to obtain from the Jews and has written down for him at great cost.
- Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 35
I am forced, through each of the books of Divine Scripture, to respond to the slander of adversaries who accuse my translation of rebuking the Seventy translators...
- Preface to Job
I have received letters... entreating me to put our friends in possession of a translation of the Pentateuch from Hebrew into Latin. The work is certainly hazardous and it is exposed to the attacks of my calumniators, who maintain that it is through contempt of the Seventy that I have set to work to forge a new version to take the place of the old. They thus test ability as they do wine; whereas I have again and again declared that I dutifully offer, in the Tabernacle of God what I can, and have pointed out that the great gifts which one man brings are not marred by the inferior gifts of another...
- Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 25
The Hebrew Scriptures are used by apostolic men; they are used, as is evident, by the apostles and evangelists. Our Lord and Savior himself whenever he refers to the Scriptures, takes his quotations from the Hebrew; as in the instance of the words "He that believes in me, as the Scripture has said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water," and in the words used on the cross itself, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani," which is by interpretation "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" not, as it is given by the Septuagint, "My God, my God, look upon me, why have you forsaken me?" and many similar cases. I do not say this in order to aim a blow at the seventy translators; but I assert that the Apostles of Christ have an authority superior to theirs. Wherever the Seventy agree with the Hebrew, the apostles took their quotations from that translation; but, where they disagree, they set down in Greek what they had found in the Hebrew. 
- Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 34
And further, I give a challenge to my accuser. I have shown that many things are set down in the New Testament as coming from the older books, which are not to be found in the Septuagint; and I have pointed out that these exist in the Hebrew. Now let him show that there is anything in the New Testament which comes from the Septuagint but which is not found in the Hebrew, and our controversy is at an end.
- Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 34
Hear, therefore, O rival; listen, O detractor! I do not condemn, I do not censure the Seventy, but I confidently prefer the Apostles to all of them. Christ speaks to me through their mouth, who I read were placed before the prophets among the Spiritual gifts, among which interpreters hold almost the last place.
- Preface to Pentateuch
By all this it is made clear, first that the version of the Seventy translators which has gained an established position by having been so long in use, was profitable to the churches, because that by its means the Gentiles heard of the coming of Christ before he came; secondly, that the other translators are not to be reproved, since it was not their own works that they published but the divine books which they translated; and, thirdly, that my own familiar friend should frankly accept from a Christian and a friend what he has taken great pains to obtain from the Jews and has written down for him at great cost.
- Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 35

Submitting himself to the Church

Among the Hebrews the Book of Judith is found among the Hagiographa, the authority of which toward confirming those which have come into contention is judged less appropriate. [...] But because this book is found by the Nicene Council to have been counted among the number of the Sacred Scriptures, I have acquiesced to your request...
- Preface to Judith
What sin have I committed in following the judgment of the churches? But when I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible, the man who makes this a charge against me proves himself to be a fool and a slanderer; for I explained not what I thought but what they commonly say against us.
- Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Section 33
...the book of Tobias, which the Hebrews exclude from the catalogue of Divine Scriptures, being mindful of those things which they have titled Hagiographa. I have done enough for your desire, yet not by my study. For the studies of the Hebrews rebuke us and find fault with us, to translate this for the ears of Latins contrary to their canon. But it is better to be judging the opinion of the Pharisees to displease and to be subject to the commands of bishops...
- Preface to Tobit

393 AD: Council of Hippo

  • OT LIST: Included Deuterocanon
  • Noted for being the first time a council of bishops listed and approved a Christian Biblical canon identical to the modern Roman Catholic canon. The canon was later approved at the Council of Carthage (397) pending ratification by the "Church across the sea", that is, the See of Rome.
Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. 

But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows: Genesis. Exodus. Leviticus. Numbers. Deuteronomy. Joshua the Son of Nun. The Judges. Ruth. The Kings, iv. books. The Chronicles, ij. books. Job. The Psalter. The Five books of Solomon. The Twelve Books of the Prophets. Isaiah. Jeremiah. Ezechiel. Daniel. Tobit. Judith. Esther. Ezra, ij. books. Macchabees, ij. Books. [...]

Let this be sent to our brother and fellow bishop, Boniface, and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.

- Canon xxxvi

~395 AD: Gregory of Nyssa

  • Identifies the Book of Wisdom as Scripture
If she were, in some fit of weakness, to admit the defilement to her heart, she would herself have broken the covenant of her spiritual marriage; and, as the Scripture tells us, "into the malicious soul Wisdom cannot come." [Wisdom 1:4]
- On Virginity, Chapter 15

~397 AD: Ambrose

  • Quotes from Sirach and Tobit, explicitly calling them Scripture.
  • Also quotes from Baruch, 2 Maccabees, Judith, Wisdom, and additions to Daniel.
Quote from Sirach as Scripture
Wherefore the Scripture says well: "A wise man will keep silence until there is opportunity." [Sirach 20:7]
- On the Duties of the Clergy, Book I, Chapter 2, Section 5
Quote from Tobit as Scripture
And what safety can there be for us unless we wash away our sins by fasting, since Scripture says that fasting and alms do away sin? [Tobit 12:8-9]
- Letter 63, Section 16
Quote from Baruch
And the Lord bids them lay aside the garments of mourning, and to cease the groanings of repentance, saying: "Put off, O Jerusalem, the garment of your mourning and affliction. and clothe yourself in beauty, the glory which God has given you for ever." [Baruch 5:1]
- Concerning Repentance, Book I, Chapter 9, Section 43
Quote from 2 Maccabees
They who were with holy Nehemiah called it Naphthar, [2 Maccabees 1:36] - which means cleansing - by many it is called Nephi. 
- On the Duties of the Clergy, Book III, Chapter 17, Section 10
Quote from Judith
But in order to learn the dispositions of ripe widowhood, run through the course of the Scriptures. From the time when her [Judith’s] husband died she laid aside the garments of mirth, and took those of mourning… So then, holy Judith, strengthened by lengthened mourning and by daily fasting, sought not the enjoyments of the world regardless of danger, and strong in her contempt for death. In order to accomplish her stratagem she put on that robe of mirth [Judith 10:3]
- Concerning Widows, Chapter 7, Section 38
Quote from Wisdom
Nor do I allege any opinion of my own, but I repeat that which the Holy Spirit spoke by the prophet: "Blessed is the barren that is undefiled." [Wisdom 3:13]
- Concerning Virginity, Book I, Chapter 7, Section 35
Quote from additions to Daniel
For when Susanna, assailed by the conspiracy of the elders, saw that the mind of the people was moved by consideration for the old men, and destitute of all help, alone among men, conscious of her chastity she prayed God to judge; it is written: "The Lord heard her voice, when she was being led to be put to death, and the Lord raised up the Holy Spirit of a young youth, whose name was Daniel." [Daniel 13:44-45]
- On the Holy Spirit, Book III, Chapter 6, Section 39

397 AD: Council of Carthage

  • OT LIST: Included Deuterocanon
It was also determined that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in the Church under the title of divine Scriptures. The Canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two books of Paraleipomena, Job, the Psalter, five books of Solomon, the books of the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two Books of the Maccabees.[...]

So let the church over the sea be consulted to confirm this canon. Let it also be allowed that the Passions of Martyrs be read when their festivals are kept.

Let this be made known also to our brother and fellow-priest Boniface, or to other bishops of those parts, for the purpose of confirming that Canon. Because we have received from our fathers that those books must be read in the Church.

- Sections 16, 18, 20

~400 AD: Tyrannius Rufinus

  • OT LIST: Excluded Deuterocanon (except Baruch)
  • Called Deuterocanon “Ecclesiastical” but not “Canonical” - they would have been read in the Churches, but not appealed to for the confirmation of doctrine. Separate from Apocrypha, which would not have been read in the Churches.
  • Quotes from Baruch as saying of prophet, may have included it in OT LIST under Jeremiah
  • Explicitly denies that removing the Deuterocanonical parts of Daniel would be a "correction of error" as Protestants claim
OT List
Of the Old Testament, therefore, first of all there have been handed down five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Then Jesus Nave, (Joshua the son of Nun), The Book of Judges together with Ruth; then four books of Kings (Reigns), which the Hebrews reckon two; the Book of Omissions, which is entitled the Book of Days (Chronicles), and two books of Ezra (Ezra and Nehemiah), which the Hebrews reckon one, and Esther; of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; moreover of the twelve (minor) Prophets, one book; Job also and the Psalms of David, each one book. Solomon gave three books to the Churches, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles. These comprise the books of the Old Testament.

But it should be known that there are also other books which our fathers call not Canonical but Ecclesiastical: that is to say, Wisdom, called the Wisdom of Solomon, and another Wisdom, called the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach, which last-mentioned the Latins called by the general title Ecclesiasticus, designating not the author of the book, but the character of the writing. To the same class belong the Book of Tobit, and the Book of Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees. In the New Testament the little book which is called the Book of the Pastor of Hermas, [and that] which is called The Two Ways, or the Judgment of Peter; all of which they would have read in the Churches, but not appealed to for the confirmation of doctrine. The other writings they have named Apocrypha. These they would not have read in the Churches.

- Commentary on the Apostles' Creed / The Creed of Aquileia, Sections 37 & 38
Quote from Baruch as saying of a prophet 
Which also the Prophet foretold when he said, “This is our God: no other shall be accounted of in comparison of Him. He has found out all the way of knowledge, and has given it unto Jacob His servant and to Israel His beloved. Afterward He showed Himself upon the earth, and conversed with men.” [Baruch 3:35-37]
- Commentary on the Apostles' Creed / The Creed of Aquileia, Section 5
Denies that removing the Deuterocanonical parts of Daniel would be a "correction of error"
In all this abundance of learned men, has there been one who has dared to make havoc of the divine record handed down to the Churches by the Apostles and the deposit of the Holy Spirit? For what can we call it but havoc, when some parts of it are transformed, and this is called the correction of an error? For instance, the whole of the history of Susanna, which gave a lesson of chastity to the churches of God, has by him been cut out, thrown aside and dismissed. The hymn of the three children, which is regularly sung on festivals in the Church of God, he has wholly erased from the place where it stood. But why should I enumerate these cases one by one, when their number cannot be estimated?
- Apology Against Jerome, 2.33 as quoted in Gary G. Michuta's "Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger.", original source not available online

~407 AD: John Chrysostom

  • Quotes from Sirach (calling it holy Scripture), and from Wisdom, Tobit, and additions to Daniel
Quote from Sirach as Holy Scripture
Let us then repeat to ourselves soothing charms drawn from the holy Scripture, and say, "You are earth and ashes." "Why is earth and ashes proud?" [Sirach 10:9], and, "The sway of his fury shall be his destruction" [Sirach 1:22]: and, "The wrathful man is not comely." [Proverbs 11:25, Septuagint]
- Homily 48 on the Gospel of John, John 7:8, Section 3
Quote from Wisdom
Wherefore we must cast out all wickedness from our souls, and never more contrive any deceit; for, says one, "To the perverse God sends crooked paths" [Proverbs 21:8, Septuagint]; and, "The holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit, and remove from thoughts that are without understanding." [Wisdom 1:5]
- Homily 41 on the Gospel of John, John 5:45-47
Quote from Tobit
And again; "Do not to another what you hate." [Tobit 4:15]
- Homily 13 on the Statues, Section 7
Quote from additions to Daniel
And again, "I have become old in the midst of all mine enemies." [Psalm 6:7 Septuagint] And again, "O you that are become old in evil days." [Daniel 13:52. Hist. Susan]
- Homily 15 on First Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 5:7-8, Section 10

419 AD: Council of Carthage

  • OT LIST: Included Deuterocanon
Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture.

But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows:

Genesis. Exodus. Leviticus. Numbers. Deuteronomy. Joshua the Son of Nun. The Judges. Ruth. The Kings, iv. books. The Chronicles, ij. books. Job. The Psalter. The Five books of Solomon. The Twelve Books of the Prophets. Isaiah. Jeremiah. Ezechiel. Daniel. Tobit. Judith. Esther. Ezra, ij. books. Macchabees, ij. books. [...]

Let this be sent to our brother and fellow bishop, Boniface, and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.

- Canon 24

~600 AD: Isidore of Seville

  • OT LIST: Included Deuterocanon
 We also have a fourth class: those books of the Old Testament that are not in the Hebrew canon. Of these the first is the Book of Wisdom, the second Ecclesiasticus; the third Tobit; the fourth Judith; the fifth and sixth, the books of Maccabees. The Jews hold these separate among the apocrypha (apocrypha), but the Church of Christ honors and proclaims them among the divine books.
- Etymologiae, Book VI, Section 9 (English) (Latin)

~600-1000 AD: [Judaism] Masoretes publish their text + canon

  • OT LIST: Excluded Deuterocanon
The Masoretic Text is the authoritative Hebrew and Aramaic text of the Tanakh for Rabbinic Judaism. It was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jews known as the Masoretes between the 7th and 10th centuries CE. The Masoretic Text defines the Jewish canon and their precise letter-text, with their vocalization and accentuation known as the Masorah.
- Wikipedia Article

1442 AD: Council of Florence

  • OT LIST: Included Deuterocanon
It professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament — that is, the law and the prophets, and the gospel — since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit. It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows.

Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees; 

- Session 11-4 February 1442

1534 AD: Martin Luther

In 1534, Luther’s Bible translation was published.

  • In it, he moves Deuterocanon to the end of his Old Testament and labels them "Apocrypha"
Luther's preface to his Apocrypha
These books are not held equal to the Scriptures, but are useful and good to read
- Apocrypha (Deuterocanon) introduction, Luther’s Bible
  • In his judgment, Esther deserves to be excluded from OT Canon, more than the rest of the Apocrypha (Deuterocanon)
First of all, we have that of Ecclesiastes (Sirach) 15:15-18 [...] Although I might justly refuse this book [Ecclesiasticus/Sirach], yet, nevertheless, I receive it; lest I should, with loss of time, involve myself in a dispute concerning the books that are received into the canon of the Hebrews: which canon you do not a little reproach and deride, when you compare the Proverbs of Solomon, and the Love-song, (as, with a double-meaning sneer, you call it,) with the two books Esdras and Judith, the History of Susannah, of the Dragon, and the Book of Esther, though they have this last in their canon; although, in my judgment, deserving, more than all the rest, to be excluded. 

- Bondage of the Will, Section XLVI
- Note: The 1823 Henry Cole translation reverses this, saying Esther deserved more than all the apocrypha to be included in the canon. All other translations I’ve seen have the original wording with 'excluded' being the concept
  • Similar to his Apocrypha, he was skeptical of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation, and stuck them at the end of his New Testament, saying "Up to this point we have had to do with the true and certain chief books of the New Testament. The four which follow have from ancient times had a different reputation."
Luther's preface to his Antilegomena

Up to this point we have had to do with the true and certain chief books of the New Testament. The four which follow have from ancient times had a different reputation... This seems, as it stands, to be against all the Gospels and St. Paul’s epistles... [The Epistle to the Hebrews] we cannot put it on the same level with the apostolic epistles.
- Preface to the Epistle to the Hebrews

...I do not regard it [the epistle of St. James] as the writing of an apostle; and my reasons follow. In the first place it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works... He mangles the Scriptures and thereby opposes Paul and all Scripture... Therefore, I will not have him in my Bible to be numbered among the true chief books
- Preface to the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude (1522)

Concerning the epistle of St. Jude... it is an epistle that need not be counted among the chief books which are supposed to lay the foundations of faith.
- Preface to the Epistles of St. James and St. Jude (1522)

About this book of the Revelation of John... it makes me consider it to be neither apostolic nor prophetic... I can in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it.
- Preface to the Revelation of St. John (1522)

As Luther noted in his preface to James, the book of James was "flatly against" faith alone. For the books that were problematic to his doctrines, he wrote off their importance - his Apocrypha in the Old Testament and his Antilegomena in the New Testament. Of the books that remained, he saw fit to make their support of his beliefs more explicit, as in his translation of Romans 3:28, in which he added the word "alone" (allein in German) so that it read: "So now we hold, that man is justified without the help of the works of the law, alone through faith."

1546 AD: [Catholic] Council of Trent

  • OT LIST: Included Deuterocanon
(the Synod) following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives and venerates with an equal affection of piety, and reverence, all the books both of the Old and of the New Testament--seeing that one God is the author of both [...] And it has thought it meet that a list of the sacred books be inserted in this decree, lest a doubt may arise in any one's mind, which are the books that are received by this Synod. They are as set down here below: of the Old Testament: the five books of Moses, to wit, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first book of Esdras, and the second which is entitled Nehemias; Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidical Psalter, consisting of a hundred and fifty psalms; the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch; Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, to wit, Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggaeus, Zacharias, Malachias; two books of the Machabees, the first and the second.
- The Fourth Session, DECREE CONCERNING THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES

1547 AD: John Calvin

  • Says Catholics give full authority to the Apocryphal (Deuterocanonical) books, which lets them “prove Purgatory”, “the worship of saints”, and “exorcisms”
  • Identifies the Deuterocanon as “ecclesiastical books, which might indeed be read to the people, but were not entitled to establish doctrine”, as he says Ruffinus and Jerome did.
Add to this, that they provide themselves with new supports when they give full authority to the Apocryphal books. Out of the second of the Maccabees they will prove Purgatory and the worship of saints; out of Tobit satisfactions, exorcisms, and what not. From Ecclesiasticus they will borrow not a little. For from whence could they better draw their dregs? I am not one of those, however, who would entirely disapprove the reading of those books

Of their admitting all the Books promiscuously into the Canon, I say nothing more than it is done against the consent of the primitive Church. It is well known what Jerome states as the common opinion of earlier times. And Ruffinus, speaking of the matter as not at all controverted, declares with Jerome that Ecclesiasticus, the Wisdom of Solomon, Tobit, Judith, and the history of the Maccabees, were called by the Fathers not canonical but ecclesiastical books, which might indeed be read to the people, but were not entitled to establish doctrine. I am not, however, unaware that the same view on which the Fathers of Trent now insist was held in the Council of Carthage. The same, too, was followed by Augustine in his Treatise on Christian Doctrine...

- Acts of the Council of Trent with the Antidote, ON THE FOURTH SESSION

Thus, he concedes the following:

  • If Catholics are right about the Deuterocanon, then they’re also right about Purgatory, praying to (not worshipping) the Saints, exorcisms, and so on.
  • As these books pre-date Christ, those doctrines (i.e. Purgatory) are beliefs thousands of years old
  • While not all the Church Fathers agreed these books were Canonical, NONE of them believed they were heretical.
  • Calvin acknowledges that both St. Augustine and the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D. took the same position on the Deuterocanon that the Council of Trent did.

Note that in his list of “ecclesiastical books”, he lists the Deuterocanon... but leaves off Baruch. Ruffinus and Jerome (whom he quotes) likewise leave off Baruch.

Also, Calvin quotes from Baruch, and calls him a Prophet (again, Ruffinus also quoted from Baruch as a prophet). Calvin even goes so far as to say that it is likely Paul, in his letter 1 Corinthians, borrowed from Baruch.

It is certain from the Prophet Baruch, (4:7,) that "those things that are sacrificed to idols are sacrificed to devils" (Deuteronomy 32:17; Psalm 96:5.) In that passage in the writings of the Prophet, the Greek translation, which was at that time in common use, has δαιμόνια — demons, and this is its common use in Scripture. How much more likely is it then, that Paul borrowed what he says from the Prophet, to express the enormity of the evil, than that, speaking after the manner of the heathen, he extenuated what he was desirous to hold up to utter execration!
- Commentary on Corinthians - Volume 1, 1 Corinthians 10:19-24, Section 20

1571 AD: [Protestant] Church of England's Thirty-Nine Articles

  • OT LIST: Excluded Deuterocanon, said Deuterocanon should be read for example of life and instruction of manners, but not used to establish doctrine.
  • The original King James Bible of 1611 (made for the church of England) included King James Version Apocrypha
In the name of Holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. Of the names and Number of the Canonical Books: Genesis; Exodus; Leviticus; Numbers; Deuteronomy; Joshua; Judges; Ruth; The I Book of Samuel; The II Book of Samuel; The I Book of Kings; The II Book of Kings; The I Book of Chronicles; The II Book of Chronicles; The I Book of Esdras; The II Book of Esdras; The Book of Esther; The Book of Job; The Psalms; The Proverbs; Ecclesiastes, or the Preacher; Cantica, or Songs of Solomon; Four Prophets the Greater; Twelve Prophets the Less. And the other Books (as Heirome [The Old English form of Hieronymus, or Jerome...] saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet it doth not apply them to establish any doctrine. Such are these following: The III Book of Esdras; The IV Book of Esdras; The Book of Tobias; The Book of Judith; The rest of the Book of Esther; The Book of Wisdom; Jesus the Son of Sirach; Baruch the Prophet; The Song of the Three Children; The Story of Suzanna; Of Bel and the Dragon; The Prayer of Manasses; The I Book of Maccabees; The II Book of Maccabees. All the Books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive and account them Canonical. 
- Article 6 of the 1801 American revision, "Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation"

1642-1649 AD: English Civil War and Westminster Confession of Faith

  • The English Civil War broke out in 1642 and lasted till 1649

The Long Parliament of 1644 decreed that only the Hebrew Canon would be read in the Church of England and in 1647 the Westminster Confession of Faith was issued which decreed a 39-book OT and 27-book NT, the others commonly labelled as "Apocrypha" were excluded. Today this decree is a Protestant distinctive, a consensus of Protestant churches, not limited to the Church of Scotland, Presbyterianism, and Calvinism, but shared with Baptist and Anabaptist confessions of faith also.

  • End of Civil War

With the Restoration of the Monarchy to Charles II of England (1660–1685), the Church of England was once again governed by the Thirty-Nine Articles, and thus emphatically maintained that the Apocrypha is part of the Bible and is to be read with respect by her members (but not used to establish any doctrine)