This is such an uninformed view; I am surprised to see it advanced on this forum.

Any scholar of the NT knows that the apochrypha date very late and the cannon is the legitimately oldest extant texts. There is no evidence that earlier texts were excluded. You do know (you probably don't) that the majority of the Pauline epistles are considered to be authentic, by secular atheist scholars, and date to to the middle of the first century right?

Outside of the pauline works, Hebrews is dated to no later than about 45 AD by secular, non believing scholars.

You're advacing a rather tired late 19th century view that just doesn't wash in the light of modern scholarship but was the darling of many 1800s and early 1900s lutherans.

That's not actually the point I'm making. I'm not speaking to the veracity or authenticity of the selected texts. I've no basis to make that judgement. Thanks for sharing that, however, I find this stuff super interesting will dig into that more!

The point I'm making is that the new testament was curated and texts were picked and chosen to advance the interests of those picking and choosing.

The claim in question is that religion was designed for the sake of mass manipulation. Because some religions have been shaped and curated deliberately does not mean that religion didn't originally emerge organically as a consequence of shared culture.

Is the New Testament cannon the best example? Why not the Old Testament?

Ancient Jews saw the scriptures as possessing different levels of “cannonicity” - the Books of Moses were “very cannon” while books like Maccabees were “new fangled.”

Christians adopted that view as well. The fights over the Old Testament are still ongoing with different religions organically accepting or rejecting other books every now and then.

The logic behind these still ongoing arguments has much to do with traditions, and little with the actual content.

If we were to reevaluate the Old Testament with fresh eyes, I don’t think anyone would include Ecclesiastes or Job. Too depressing and bizarre.

Not even clear what’s going on or when it’s taking place.

But ultimately there’s a certain logic to these debates - and “we’re designing a religion” isn’t part of it.

Edit: Here’s an excellent example of how “non-designed” the Old Testament is: https://orthodoxwiki.org/Old_Testament_Canon

Since both you and sibling comment did it:

"Canon" is what's considered truth in a mythos (also a musical form and an electronics company).

"Cannon" is a type of gun.

From the linked page, it looks like this occurred hundreds of years after Christianity started, and after it was already quite well-established, so it doesn't seem accurate to say that the Christian religion was designed, even if the new testament was.

Without venturing further back, which we can, consider that for most people the New Testament is the religion. The Old Testament is a collection of neo-pagan stories, fables and rules for fair play in olden times.