I am comfortable making the assumption that the Holy Spirit conveyed exactly what the Lord wanted conveyed in the Bible. . . .
_______________________________________________________________
God did not write a Bible.
A bible is not really just a book but a compilation of books.
A committee of men simply compiled books they thought God had written through inspiration to His prophets. Men chose and compiled the Holy Bible from those books they then had and made a Bible.
A book that is a compilation of Holy books is no less holy than the individual books, just pointing out that there is much that could have been lost. The Apocrypha for instance, are they holy? If they are why do Protestants not have them in their Bible? If the same group that compiled the Holy Bible that Protestants use compiled the Apocrypha why is it now not accepted? What committee is it now that is better inspired than the original committee?
And from your earlier post:
There are many Scriptures that we do not have....many previously approved scriptures were burned....
So these earlier burned works were nothing more than works of men that a "committee of men... thought God had written through inspiration to His prophets." The committee post-facto confers the retroactive status of "inspired" on the work, and it becomes "scripture"?
So God inspired prophets to write books, but not inspire what was compiled?
Did He lose intrest or what?
I think the Lord who created the universe can get a book put together the way He wishes. That which is truly lost, God let go. We have all the rest available to us with the various arguments for and against. It would seem that the Sovereign Lord is leaving it to us to wrestle with.
Peter already considered Pauls writings to be scripture along with the Old Testament which had been long established by that time.
2 Peter 3:15b. As also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you, according to the wisdom given him, [16] as in all his letters, speaking concerning these matters, in which some things are hard to understand, which those who are untaught and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also THE OTHER SCRIPTURES. [17] You then, beloved ones, being forewarned, watch lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being let away with the delusion of the lawless.
The Apocrypha had already been excluded by the time of the apostles.
Ask the early church, since it began in dissent from those unto whom "were committed the oracles of God;" "Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen." (Romans 9:4-5)
And contrary to your premise, Christianity did not begin under the premise of a perpetual infallible magisterium, but by Christ and the church establishing truth claims upon Scripture substantiation in word and in power. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)
In reality, the Bible is not the work of a committee of men, but wholly divinely writings were commonly established as being so (like as men of God were) due to their unique and enduring Heavenly qualities and attestation.
And as written, it became the transcendent standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims, as is is abundantly evidenced. .
. NT writings themselves became established as being Scripture in the light of their conformity and complementarity in word and in power to what was prior established.
The problem with the BOM and other like contenders is the same problem J. Smith has with the Lord Jesus, that being the the BOM and other Mormonic literature is contrary to Scripture, as Smith is to Christ. The only way the LDS can deal with this is to assert only they can authoritatively interpret Scripture, history and their "tradition correctly.
Which is the same recourse of Rome, but their claims are unwarranted and self-proclaimed.