Protestants are right in claiming that the Catholic Bible is false... however they are wrong in their reasons as to why

 Protestants are right in claiming that the Catholic Bible is false... however they are wrong in their reasons as to why 

Let me tell you some history that sadly most Christians do not know 

Roughly 280 years before the birth of Christ, the Jews created the Greek Old Testament which is called the Greek Septuagint or LXX (70 named after the number of translators who made it).

This Greek Translation was said to be extremely accurate to the Hebrew Manuscripts 

Then Christ our Messiah was born and sometime around 30-33 A.D. Christ died and rose from the grave

The Apostles went on to witness to Gentiles and in doing so they used the Greek Old Testament because Gentiles spoke Greek not Hebrew and because this Greek Translation was very accurate.

Then in 70 A.D. Rome invaded Isreal and destroyed the Temple. All Biblical literature was forced to be relocated to a place called Jamnia. Because of the war and the spread of Christianity, the Pharisees became dominant among the Jews.

In 100 A.D. a man named Rabbi Akiba gained control of Jamnia. As stated (in a previous comment sadly not included in this post) he was the one who corrupted the Hebrew Manuscripts removing and changing passages that pertained to Christ. Akiba was also the one who helped influence the standardization of the Hebrew Canon choosing only the books of the Pharisees 

Remember the Sadducees accepted only the 5 books of Moses, the Essenes accepted Enoch as Scripture, the Hellenistic Jews used the Greek Septuagint and accepted as many as 70-72 books. This means we have no proof of a closed Hebrew canon prior to the 2nd century.

However...

The earliest Christians all gave testimony claiming that the Jews had corrupted their Hebrew Scriptures

Justin Martyr (100-165 AD) Dialogue with Trypho chapter 71: "But I am far from putting reliance in your teachers (JEWS) who refuse to admit that the interpretation made by the seventy elders who were with Ptolemy [king] of the Egyptians is a correct one (GREEK SEPTUAGINT)

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"

Christians for centuries all testified of this. But around the 4th century Latin became popular among Rome and Christians forgot what the Jews had done

Pope Damusis noticed that other Christians were making their own Bible's so he then issued a man named Jerome to make a Latin Bible to unite all Latin speaking Christians 

Jerome shown in pic below, moved to Bethlehem where he was convinced by some Jew's that their later Hebrew Manuscripts were more accurate than the Greek

So Jerome made what was called the Latin Vulgate. Any book not found in these later Hebrew Manuscripts he then called Apocrypha (Tobit, Maccabees, Ruth ect...) 

However, because these books had been Scripture in the West (books based on the decisions from the council of Hippo 393 A.D.) he still included them in his Bible 

Jerome's Bible eventually became the official Bible of the Catholic Church 

When Protestants separated from the Catholic Church they didn't just magically have knowledge that the Catholics didn't have. Protestants just believed that since Jerome's Bible was the official Bible of the Catholic Church that they had been using, they believes that we should only support 66 books as Scripture (although they did use those extra books for a time)

Anyways the problem is, should we have used later Hebrew Manuscripts? Was Jerome correct in believing these later Hebrew Manuscripts were more accurate than the Greek?

And whats worse in all of this, is Jerome even later admitted that he was wrong and that we should continue using the Greek Septuagint like the Apostles 

Jerome (404 AD) Augustine Letter 75 chapter 6: "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"

So again the issue with the Catholic Bible isn't those extra book's that the Catholics have in their Bible (those remaining Greek Septuagint book's) the issue is should we have strayed from the entire Greek that the Apostles established the early church with?

[Please note this post was simplified meaning there are greater things which should be explained. However for simplified reasons the goal is to help from a more beginner perspective. Any questions or concerns I will be happy to go into those missing details]

Thank you for your time and I pray for further growth in our Lord