Quote from mammothwoolly : I think a definition of terms is the problem then. The holy scriptures were written by people under inspiration of God, and they inerrantly communicated God's message to a particular people at a particular place in time. Our job reading them is to take from them the timeless truths that appear, and apply them to our lives. The scripture is inerrant in that it allows man a valid picture of God as applied in the answer to the question: "how shall I live?".

I believe you are correct and it is a matter of definition. Biblical inerrancy is typically defined as totally without error, and free from all contradiction; "referring to the complete accuracy of Scripture, including the historical and scientific parts"
I think you may be referring to Biblical infallibility (or limited inerrancy), which holds that the Bible is inerrant on issues of faith and practice but not history or science.
There is also Biblical literalism, the adherence to the explicit and literal sense of the Bible. In its purest form such a belief would deny the existence of allegory, parable and metaphor in the Bible. Biblical literalism is not synonymous with biblical inerrancy. Whereas inerrancy doctrine deals with the truthfulness of the author's intended message, biblical literalism deals with the interpretation of certain passages being literal.

Quote from superdan54 : Even if Ezra were a redactor, I think that the written material he theoretically would have compiled from is far more vast and intricate than what you seem to be assuming. And I doubt that the edits were that severe, if there were any at all.

Superdan, I don't believe that I was claiming that Ezra added much, merely that he weaved together the various versions of oral and written histories that were around during his time. Approximately 450 BC - as the Redactor emerges on the scene. He sees the need for religious revival and renewal, for strengthening and centralization. Remember, The southern kingdom of Judah is conquered by Babylon in 587 BC. The people are exiled for 50 years, then return to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple and restore their religion. There is no longer a king of the line of David, but a high priest.
Ezra was an Aaronid priest empowered by the Persian emperor to arbitrate and assert the state religion. Ezra was instructed to uphold the religious text that he carried back with him from the Babylonian exile. According to the Biblical Book of Nehemiah, when Ezra read it out to the assembled people returning from exile, many thought that certain things were new and had not been read before. In particular, a law, usually ascribed to R, concerning the Festival of Booths, is reported as never having been carried out before.
The process is not easy. Other exiled peoples were assimilated by their conquerors and disappeared; the Israelites remained faithful to their homeland and their God. But the religion had been weakened by the exile, and needed to be strengthened and consolidated. So he combines the three documents (JE, P, and D) into one smooth flowing narrative--the five books of Moses.

The Redactor did lots of cutting and pasting. Genealogies that probably started all together in a P-text were interspersed throughout JE, acting as bridging material or section dividers. Materials that told the same story from pro-Aaron and anti-Aaron viewpoints (for example) were neatly woven together.

The Redactor was respectful of his sources and kept them largely intact. These were all sacred and ancient texts/traditions, so the Redactor presumably didn't drop material--duplication was preferable to omission. Sometimes he combined the different texts; sometimes he left the two stories side by side.

The single document became the center of the Israelite religion, under the prophets Ezra and Nehemiah. Authorship was ascribed to Moses. This wasn't deception. The Redactor in all likelihood knew nothing of the prior 500 year history of authorship and honestly believed the material he was editing had all been handed down from Moses.

From 450 BC on the document was fixed--no more changes. The oldest existing parchments, the Dead Sea scrolls, date from around 100 BC. They're almost word-for-word identical to the versions we have today (although there are occasional transcription errors, most so small they would be noticed only by an experienced scholar).

Much of this is based on the work of Richard Elliot Friedman and comes closest to representing the consensus among Documentary scholars. If you want a good read, his book, Who Wrote the Bible is very intriguing whether you believe any of it or not.