That would seem to make sense (although to me there is a difference between being an inspired author of Scripture, and of having authority through a separate and lesser charism to recognize inspired Scripture already written). If you follow your logic through, however, you have to arrive at the conclusion that NOBODY has the authority to define what books are inspired and which aren't. Everyone, in theory, could make their own canon. If I don't like what's in your canon or you don't like what's in mine, we can legitimately and without sin ignore each other when we cite "Scripture" on any issue. In short, if there is no person or persons that at some point could have the authority to define the canon, then God did not--could not-- give to man a definitive body of inspired writing.
Fine then, arise to the level of Absoluteness and send down a note telling us what scriptures are authoritative then.
God gave authority to the Original Apostles but they did not leave us a note telling us by AD 100(The death of John) what was to go in the canon and what was to be left out.” And a person telling another person telling another person stretching back supposedly to the Apostles apparently didn’t work out too well, as the Clermont List, The Muratorian fragment, the three most ancient Codices we have left to us today are all different from each other.
In the end, there are indeed many Bibles (Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Ethiopic and Protestant) but as long as one puts their faith in Jesus, it really doesn’t matter which of the aforementioned Bibles one adheres to.
As the scriptures say “One Lord [Jesus Christ], one faith [in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord] ... one God and Father of all.”
Many Bibles, but one Lord and one faith... Put your faith in Jesus and you’ll make it.