As is typical of most RCAs, you continue to show your commitment to Rome by continuing to assert refuted arguments, here it the being that 382 settled the canon, even though the historical value of the document it depends upon is highly suspect, as i showed you, while i also showed you that it was not exactly the same as Trent’s, which it must be if the canon was authoritatively settled in 382, and it is only of Divinely inspired writings.
I wish I had more time to do your posts justice, but I have to work for a living!
And since you could not your efforts only made a negative contention for Rome. Other have had more time and could not establish an infallible or an identical canon from 382, or that dissent did not continue right into Trent. Thus many often resort to name calling and misrepresentation as a substitute for an argument I also think many of them wish they could regain Rome’s unScriptural secular power and her sanctioned Inquisitions.
As for life and labor, i have both by the grace of God, and hope it all counts for him.
1Jn. 4:9: In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.
Gal. 4:11: I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.
I believe the Church has a guarantee by the Holy Spirit that it cannot teach error regarding faith and morals. You believe in... your own infallibility?
I posted the canons from 382, 419, and 1542 and they all included the deuterocanonical books. Here are a few more quotes that disagree with your experts:
“The council of Hippo in 393, and the third (according to another reckoning the sixth) council of Carthage in 397, under the influence of Augustine, who attended both, fixed the catholic canon of the Holy Scriptures, including the Apocrypha of the Old Testament.... The New Testament canon is the same as ours. This decision of the transmarine church however, was subject to ratification; and the concurrence of the Roman see it received when Innocent I and Gelasius I a.d. 414) repeated the same index of biblical books. This canon remained undisturbed till the sixteenth century, and was sanctioned by the council of Trent at its fourth session.”
(Schaff, Philip, History of the Christian Church, Vol. III, Ch 9)
“A council probably held at Rome in 382 under St. Damasus gave a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament (also known as the ‘Gelasian Decree’ because it was reproduced by Gelasius in 495), which is identical with the list given at Trent.”
The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (2nd ed., edited by F.L. Cross & E.A. Livingstone, Oxford Univ. Press, 1983, p.232
And again, from the Catholic Encyclopedia: “the essential part of which is now generally attributed to a synod convoked by Pope Damasus in the year 382. The other is the Canon of Innocent I, sent in 405 to a Gallican bishop in answer to an inquiry. Both contain all the deuterocanonicals, without any distinction, and are identical with the catalogue of Trent.”
You made the "negative contention" for Rome- history speaks for Rome. For the umpteenth time, the only thing I misspoke about was incorrectly stating that Luther was the first to challenge it- I should have phrased it that Luther's challenge was serious enough that the Church infallibly defined it's canon.
I have not resorted to calling you any names and I resent the implication. You have your interpretation of scripture and history, and I have mine, as does everyone else.