[MarkBsnr]

What we know as the "canonized" bible was not assembled in anything like it's present form until the 3rd century by a council of bishops (although it was still debated for centuries after). They chose which books should be included in the bible, which books were inspired by God, by vote, just as we might vote on a law.

Are you sure? Have you read the procedures of the councils in which they ratified the canon?

(Can you imagine that some books missed out on being The Word of God by one vote?) Were they any more qualified to judge which books were divine than anyone living today? Is their judgement and knowledge any better than ours?

1. Which books were not included by one vote?

2. The Church was given the authority by Jesus. Qualifications? As sure as that given to Simon Peter and the rest of the apostles by Jesus. Not by anyone or anything else.

If the bishops at the Council of Laodicea in 365 had voted differently, millions of Christians would have believed differently. The vote of the one is the belief of all the others.

Again, the bishops had the authority. You don't and neither do any and all of the Reformers and their children. What do you mean the vote of the one is the belief of all the others?

[Buggman]

I’d also point out that they didn’t just pick 66 books out of the air. The Old Testament canon was perfectly in agreement with what the Jews already regarded as the canon of the Tanakh (Torah, Prophets, and Writings). As for the New Testament, the “vote” was in substantial agreement with what the vast majority already accepted as canonical. Everyone agreed there were four Gospel accounts, the book of Acts, and most of the epistles. Only 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, Hebrews, and (in a very few eastern churches) Revelation were really up for debate, IIRC.