Walden wrote:It only stands to reason that the Church could not accept every writing which claimed to be Holy Scripture. Only such as were truly inspired could be allowed in the canon.
Walden, Jim, Monster, Jerry, and all, I didn't have time to fully consider all the points made in this thread in detail, so please consider this a general statement with regard to "divine inspiration," a term the religious tradition from which I come, eagerly accept.
Some readily accept that the authors of the books were divinely inspired by God to write them, presumably as guidance for all future people. Regarding the NT specifically: If one accepts the books were, in the original writings, divinely inspired and that he directly intervened to ensure accuracy, then, it’s no stretch to believe he also ensured only inspired works were included in his guidance, and also that future translations were accurate. If one believes in the existence of an omnipotent creator, there’s virtually nothing in theological discussion that remotely compares to that degree of faith.
But, did the writers of the adopted books know they were inspired?
If so, how?
Were they told?
By whom?
They didn’t claim to be divinely inspired.
The authors provided accounts of many miraculous events to demonstrate that this savior was real, fulfilled prophesy, and that they personally witnessed it. But none of the writers, save Paul who spent no time with Christ (and even he doesn’t say he was told to write the books he did), tell of an experience or vision in which the creator appeared to them regarding their writings The omission of monumental testimony about interaction with the creator, from personal experience - universally withheld by all those who now are said to be “inspired” - is not insignificant.
The true beauty of faith is that it doesn’t require proof of everything. But, in New Testament times it wasn’t void of the element of proof either. The accounts we have include Christ proving himself by performing super-natural deeds. Who, what, when , where, how, and why, are elements of miraculous accounts recorded, but no mention of how Mark or John, or any of these writers knew they were ‘inspired.’ The writers didn’t claim to be inspired, that was a claim that came later.
It often appears that vested intersts play a part. One thing we certainly learn from the principled exercise of dissuasion is that not having the sharpest knives around kitchen is usually not the problem in these kind of culinary discussions. So chew your food well, and do the research for them with patience, kindness, and understanding. 
