This is a 59-page paper that begins by reconsidering the question of whether or not and to which degree an uncompromising stance on full biblical inerrancy (as opposed to limited or partial inerrancy) may be important for those involved in pre-evangelism and evangelism. It proceeds to consider the concern raised by some that inerrancy may be a catalyst for apostasy from the faith. Other challenges posed to full-inerrantists by limited-inerrantists that are examined. How helpful are the illustrations of concentric circles for showing which docrines are more important than others? Is the reliance on "outdated" Scottish Realism philosophy by paleo-inerrantists a good reason for the neo-inerrantists to dismiss their conclusions? Is there really no overlap between interpretation and inerrancy? There is a particular focus given to the challenges raised by genre (apocalyptic) studies. The problem of "Jewish zombies" in Matthew 27:51-53 is used as a case study.
