Not in the first century.
The books from the OT were the same as the protestant Bibles of today. All 1st century evidence supports that claim.
Your 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th century only demonstrate certain men tried to introduce new books into the canon, but they were disputed.
Origen (225) rejected all the deuteros (Baruch, Eccl., Wisdom, Tobit, Judith and Macc)
Council of Laodicea (363) This council rejected all but Baruch
Epiphanius (385) rejected all Deuteros
Jerome also rejected all the deuteros
Even after Jerome translated the Vulgate:
Synopsis of Sac. Scrip. (550) rejected all the deuteros
Leontius (590) rejected all the deuteros
Anastasius of Sinai (c. 650) rejected all the deuteros
(List of the Sixty Books)
John of Damascus (730) rejected all the deuteros
It appears to me there was a consensus from the beginning, until Trent decided to canonize the deuteros to support and solidify doctrines not found in the inspired Scriptures.
For everyone’s edification:
“In Jesus’ time, the Samaritans and Sadducees accepted the law but rejected the prophets and writings. The Pharisees accepted all three. Other Jews used a Greek version (the Septuagint) that included the seven disputed books, known as the deuterocanonicals. Still other Jews used a version of the canon that is reflected in the Septaguint and included versions of the seven books in question in their original Hebrew or Aramaic.”
"3. But the seven deuterocanonical books were added at the Council of Trent (1546) in order to justify Catholic doctrinal inventions.
This is a myth that always comes up but is simple to answer. At the Council of Rome in 382, the Church decided upon a canon of 46 Old Testament books and 27 in the New Testament. This decision was ratified by the councils at Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).
Further, if Catholics added the deuterocanonical books in 1546, then Martin Luther beat us to the punch: He included them in his first German translation, published the Council of Trent. They can also be found in the first King James Version (1611) and in the first Bible ever printed, the Guttenberg Bible (a century before Trent). In fact, these books were included in almost every Bible until the Edinburgh Committee of the British Foreign Bible Society excised them in 1825. Until then, they had been included at least in an appendix of Protestant Bibles. It is historically demonstrable that Catholics did not add the books, Protestants took them out.
Luther had a tendency to grade the Bible according to his preferences. In his writings on the New Testament, he noted that the books of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation were inferior to the rest, and they followed “the certain, main books of the New Testament.” In 1519, this same attitude fueled his debate against Johannes Eck on the topic of purgatory. Luther undermined Eck’s proof text of 2 Maccabees 12 by devaluing the deuterocanonical books as a whole. **He argued that the New Testament authors had **
never quoted from the seven books, so they were in a different class than the rest of the Bible."
"6. Which translation did the first Christians use?
Early Christians read the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint. It included the seven deuterocanonical books. For this reason, the Protestant historian J.N.D. Kelly writes, “It should be observed that the Old Testament thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more comprehensive [than the Protestant Bible]. . . . It always included, though with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called apocrypha or deuterocanonical books” (, 53).
The authors of the New Testament quoted freely from the Septuagint—over 300 times."
Taken from Catholic Answers Jason Evert.
Please note portions bolded.
