Andrew McGowan has recently written ‘The Divine Spiration of Scripture’, largely written against the inerrancy of Scripture, and in favour of a particular view of infallibility. I’ve written a response. I dubb his position (not that it is ‘his’ position – it is not new) ‘hypothetical errancy’ (which is a little bit more accurate than ‘limited inerrancy’). It has definite characteristics of Bavinck read through a Barthian lens (ie Berkhouwer). I have addressed my critique only to the most problemmatic part of the book. There is more in the book than I speak to here.