Mad Dawg's quote is from this:
http://www.tektonics.org/books/ehrqurvw.html
This is a proper critique which the author of the above references!:
http://bible.org/article/gospel-according-bart
Quite lengthy but an interesting read if you're into scholarly stuff lol!
Personally, I think this quote from Wallace's conclusion (in the second link) rings true for me:
Second, what I tell my students every year is that it is imperative that they pursue truth rather than protect their presuppositions. And they need to have a doctrinal taxonomy that distinguishes core beliefs from peripheral beliefs. When they place more peripheral doctrines such as inerrancy and verbal inspiration at the core, then when belief in these doctrines starts to erode, it creates a domino effect: One falls down, they all fall down.
The first time I tried proper theological study of the Bible, I couldn't accept what I was hearing because I believed that the Bible was literal and the books were written by the 'historical' authors - the first whiff of Documentary Hypothesis and JEDP sent me absolutely crazy with my tutors! I gave up the course after a couple of semesters!
The second time was in recent years as I studied for my theology degree. I'm now not so literal with the Bible and I find my faith is much stronger, strangely because it is more flexible.
I dunno, maybe this is exactly what Jesus was trying to say when he taught about not putting new wine into old wineskins - a life of faith needs flexibility not rigid rules
We simply cannot rely on a literal reading of the Bible alone as the entire basis of our faith, faith requires some thinking and insight - hopefully Holy Spirit guided!