In the following comments, Thom Hobson (Protestant) teaches that God using different modes of transmission of authentic θεοπνευστος tradition than an oracle writing/dictating it:
I am convinced that John 7:53-8:11 is the best example of a floating
piece of historical tradition about Jesus that really and truly happened, which
deserves to be added to our canonical Bible. Think how much we lose without
this scene from the life of Jesus! God made sure that it would find its place
in our Bible. (Thom Hobson, The Historical Jesus and the Historical Joseph
Smith [Nashville, Tenn.: Elm Hill, 2019], 17)
The two oldest Greek manuscripts of Mark end at 16:8. There are two
additions that seem to date to the second century: verses 9-20, and a one-verse
summary that beings “But they reported briefly to Peter . . . “ Verses 9-20 are
also missing from the earliest Syriac and Latin manuscripts. We must ask: if
these endings were actually original, why would they be missing from the
earliest manuscripts? However, if these endings were not original, why would
they be added, and why are there two? The answer seems to be that Mark was never
finished, and his ending seems abrupt. Mark 16:9-20 has details that are
difficult to reconcile with the other Gospels. One example: 16:12-13 seems to
indicate that the men on the Emmaus road were not believed. Another example:
Jesus scolding his followers for their unbelief is found nowhere else in the
canonical resurrection accounts. I concur with Wright (Resurrection,
623-624) that Mark probably wrote a longer ending, which Matthew echoes. I am
guessing that it included reassuring appearances to the women (and possibly Peter?)
and some version of the Great Commission. But God evidently decided that
Mark’s original ending was not necessary for us to have. (Ibid., 26 n. 17;
note: God-breathed revelation is missing!)
Further Reading:
Not By Scripture Alone: A Latter-day Saint Refutation of Sola Scriptura