Sublime

Gary R. Habermas and Michael R. Licona, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2004); and William Lane Craig, The Son Rises: Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus (1981; repr., Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2000).

I prefer it to traditional inerrancy because it is consistent with what we observe in Scripture—imperfections resulting from the human authors, such as Matthew and Luke improving Mark’s grammar, editorial fatigue, and memory lapse. Moreover, flexible inerrancy applies to both the originals and to our present Bible.