The book gets bogged down too much into the history surrounding inerrancy (particularly the 1978 Chicago Statement) and not enough into clearly presenting different views of inerrancy. The first two views by Mohler and Enns are straightforward and clear, but the remaining three contributions read more like independent essays on inerrancy (without much unifying structure). The three test cases that the authors consider are handled in virtually the same way by all the authors other than Enns which leads to a lot of redundancy. For a clearer discussion of a moderating view between Mohler and Enns, I would recommend the final chapters of Michael Licona's recent book "Jesus, Contradicted."

This book does a good job of laying out the three major approaches. I do have a couple of criticisms. First, the Episcopalian and Single-Elder Congregationalist contributions weren't as good as the Presbyterian and Plural-Elder contributions. Second, I think the Single-Elder and Plural-Elder views should have just been covered together as one Congregationalist view. Overall, this is a solid introduction to the different views of church polity/governance.

One of the most important books in the philosophy of religion of the past generation.