“That Origen has too many books is still not the same as the modern canon. Is my point really that difficult to grasp?”
Except that Origen himself even qualifies his statements when he refers to them, and only speaks securely on the standard New Testament canon which had the most support. If we took your logic seriously that we needed Rome to figure out what is in the scripture, as opposed to what was accepted by the majority, then we would have to believe that the RCC with divine authority kept out the epistle to the Hebrews, and then re-instated it by divine authority at another time. I’d much rather believe that it is God who is the one truly preserving these works, despite fickle Rome and its teachings.
“If we took your logic seriously that we needed Rome to figure out what is in the scripture.”
The conclusion follows from the premises.
Again, Origen considers many books not in the canon today as ‘divinely inspired’, which is the exact same criteria that you use. So by your standards, Origen has too many books.
“then we would have to believe that the RCC with divine authority kept out the epistle to the Hebrews”
[[citation needed]].