Comment: what of the other 100's of letters?

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: To your statement (see in situ)

what of the other 100's of letters?

I concede that is certainly a point of NT scripture sighting NT scripture, but it still does not establish that either was inspired.

Suppose the Shepard of Hermias sites the Gospel of Thomas, only be somehow determining if the Gospel of Thomas is or is not inspired can we determine if the writing it sites is inspired.

So by 2nd Peter mentioning epistles from Paul it 1st needs to be validated, then the epistles it references could then be likewise considered inspired....however, there is then the issue of determining which letters of Paul it means because there were a slew of other epistles that were said to be written by Paul. Such as 3rd Corinthians, Laodiceans, Alexandrians, Apocalypse of Paul, Prayer of the Apostle Paul, etc... So how does one determine from 2nd Peter that the exact ones we have accepted into the Canon were validated and these others were not?

It was thru the Church of the day gathering their leaders and having God guide them to select correctly. In this act the Church was certianly infallible, for if they were not and inculded even 1 of the 100's of letters out there that were not truly inspired then the Bible contains lies and is false.