Bruce Gourley wrote:As to the other quotes, you follow Woodbridge in conflating inspiration with inerrancy. The traditional historical position concerning scripture is that the scripture is inspired, but not textually inerrant.
Inerrantists do not conflate inspiration and inerrancy. They believe that if the Bible is inspired by God, then one result is that it is true. Inerrancy is a result of inspiration. Toy and most liberals held that inspiration secured the truth of the spiritual meaning of the text but did not result in the reliability of the historical level of meaning. So a text could be both spiritually true and historically false. So many liberals held for example that Jesus did not literally and historically walk on water or curse the fig tree, but that these texts nevertheless had spiritual value. They are historically false but spiritually true.