Citing Bart Ehrman does nothing for your argument. He has an obvious athiest agenda and is not well respected in the academic community. You might as well source E.A. Wallis Budge.
I responded on the other thread about this but will post it again here (since it is the same link):
God being in control does not interfere with free will. However, if we conclude that the Bible is ‘incomplete’, when God tells us His word is sufficient, or that ‘traditions of men’ corrupted the Bible, THEN we are saying that God does NOT have the power to keep His Word together or keep His Church together.
Either God is all powerful, or He is not. If He is, then we can trust that His word (the Bible) is complete and infallible in matters of faith and doctrine. If He is not all powerful, then He is not God.
To say that there is ‘extra’ scripture is to demean God and suggest He is not capable of preserving His truth.
Just because other books are mentioned in the Bible, does not mean they are to be considered Scripture.
Paul quotes pagan philosophers, we don’t include those in scripture.
The Bible is complete.
“The Bible is complete.”
Uh oh. Which Bible? Which version? The Catholic Bible has extra chapters in it. What about that?