Nope.. there was no OFFICIAL canon until Trent..
Luther did not remove james from the canon .... Even up to the late 4th century, the book of James had not even been quoted in the west. Luther was not the only one that questioned it as inspired. but he never remove it
.Rome added to the OT at Trent..something they had NO AUTHORITY to do..
The OT belongs to the jews ... not Rome
The books Rome added
1) are not Christocentric and they do not claim for themselves what Rome claims for them
2) They were accepted as inspired by the jewish people to whom God entrusted them and with whom they originated
3) The jews reject them as part of their canon
4) They contain teachings that are inconsistent with the rest of the Bible and often contradict themselves
5)Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which is the language of the OT
6)They were not placed with the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the church
BTW Athanasios rejecter the North African provincial councils which added the books FOR LOCAL use..
Any such reputable objective historical tome, notwithstanding some self serving protestant revisionist source, would debunk your theory. Note the operative word is “Objective” a term that perhaps need further explanation.
The 27 books of the New Testament were first authoritatively by St. Athanasios in 367:
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.The Athanasius NT canon was officially recognized in the Council of Rome (382) and the Council of Trent (1545-1563).39'th Letter of Holy Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, on the Paschal festival
Luther did not remove james from the canon
Okay. I was mistaken about Luther removing James, but
Luther placed the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation at the end of his translation and failed to note their page numbers in the index. He wrote a preface to James claiming it "contradicts Paul by teaching justification by worksThe OT belongs to the jews ... not Rome
The First Century Jewish council of Jamnia rejected Ester, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon, but Protestants as well as Rome include these books.
The seven deuterocanonical books in the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox OT canons come from the Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament. The Septuagint was used by the Apostles and Evangelists for the OT passages in the New Testament.
The King James Bible uses the Septuagint as the source for OT books, such as Isaiah, that include prophesies of Christ. Also, the original King James Bible includes the deuterocanonicals but American publishers took out these books to save on printing costs. The King James version published in England includes the deuterocanonicals from the Greek Septuagint.
There were previous councils that listed all the books that had been in use by the Church. This includes the Council of Florence which occurred a hundred years before Trent. Usually, the only time a council makes an "OFFICIAL" proclamation is when a teaching is challenged. Trent had to make the canon an "OFFICIAL" proclamation because of the so called Reformation trying to change the canon accepted by the Church for centuries.
Claiming that there was no unified canon in the Church until Trent's proclamation is simply a distortion of historical fact, at the best.
And yet you don't realise that the Jewish canon was not closed until the Council of Jamnia in AD 90. Prior to that the Jews and then the Christians used the Septuagint, which guess what, contained these books
Besides, the Samaritans and the Sadducees both kept ONLY the Pentateuch and rejected the books of the Prophets etc. --> so do you reject Isiaih, Ezekiel etc. because it was rejected by these Jews?
Ethiopian Jews -- arguably the oldest untouched form of Jewry use the same canon with these 7 books
Even the earliest Christian books refer to these books:
The Didache (AD 70): "You shall not waver with regard to your decisions [Sir. 1:28]. Do not be someone who stretches out his hands to receive but withdraws them when it comes to giving [Sir. 4:31]"
And there are others, many other references.