The basic flaw in what you are saying is "the bishops who determined the canon". The bishops recognized the writings that were inspired and the inerrant Word of God. Christians during the preceding 275 years had already done the same. A group of Christians making a pronouncement did not all of a sudden change these writings from uninspired to inspired.
Also, where was your sister congregation from Rome during this process? How did Jerome know which books to include in his Latin Vulgate? He started his translation before any council had met.
This is why history is anathema for Protestants. Without it, you can make up anything you want. The Christians did nothing. The Christians went to Church and the various books were read in different churches. The bishops, who hold the apostolic authority as the "elders" in the Church, were the ones determining which book is what.
But I understand why Protestants must reject this historical fact (and it also explains the vehement anti-historical attitude of the same): historical facts totally destroy their superstition otherwise known as the "sola scriptura."
Your statement can be proven wrong simply by the fact that the oldest extant Christian Bible, Codex Sinaiticus, dating back to the middle of the 4th century, contains two books that are no longer considered canonical: the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermes.
At some point, after apparently more than 300 years, someone decided these were no longer "inspired."