Keep in mind that there was a Church for 300 years before there was a canon of Scripture. The Church was the source of the canon, and not t’other way around.
Not so, my FRiend. There was a distinct canon of 39 Hebrew manuscripts to which all Jews referred as "Scriptures". Jesus used these and Paul used them...long before there was even such a thing as a Roman Organization (around 300+ years before). And, the NT grouping was well understood and used and circulated long before Rome got its fat fingers into the pie. For goodness sake, they were ALL written by 91AD and Paul's were well circulated before Rome sacked Jerusalem. Your gang comes along 300+ years later and lays claim to having written them? (Oh, yes, most of your friends around here claim the RCC wrote the text, not just approved a compilation...talk about arrogance). But, the believers in the first and second century who knew nothing of Roman dominance used the 66 books we know as the Scriptures and found it "adequate". Then, Rome starts its headstrong push to "re-write" the story. If the Bible is important, why don't they follow it?