I am a skeptic by nature. I am especially skeptical of religious groups or individuals who have special access to the divine realms. Whether they be fundamentalist preachers or new age gurus, anyone whose views are predicated upon divine revelation is simply full of _______. Muhammed is said to have channeled the revelations in the Qur'an. Many believe the biblical writers "channeled" the Holy Spirit. Many spiritualist groups claim their revelation is a channeling of someone or some thing on the other side.
I have two criticisms of the whole "channeling" enterprise.
1) If what you say (or what has been said) is not good enough on its own merit--that it needs divine authorship to be true--then it is likely not worth the time it takes to read it. If you want to say something that is pretty lame, then just say, "God said it."
2) If something is quite good, then claiming divine authorship for it cheapens humanity. Give Shakespeare credit for writing well. Give the Apostle Paul credit for the things he wrote that were good and true. Give him the blame as well for his bonehead comments.
The dogma of the divine inspiration of the Bible is nothing more than channeling God. It is unbelievable and unnecessary.