In struggling with the inportance of the doctrine of inerancy as claim to by Scriptures, I don’t think that any ministry can make this doctrine optional. A person with some definite knowledge Scripture’s own claim to inerrancy, cannot explicitly reject this doctrine and still be a Christian because then their faith is not in God but in a their own authority. In other words, it is impossible to profess Christ as Lord and liar at the same time, so that an explicit affirmation of Christ as Lord is also an implicit affirmation of biblical inerrancy, and an explicit denial of biblical inerrancy is also an implicit denial of Christ as Lord.
I am not saying that a person must explicitly affirm biblical inerrancy to be a Christian.
What I am trying to say is summed up by Vincent Chang in his article “Biblical Inerrancy not Optional” by stating: “But once a person knows that the Scripture claims to be inspired, inerrant, and infallible, if he rejects the doctrine of inerrancy, but still claims to believe the gospel, then this can only mean that his faith rests on his own opinion and judgment, and not on the promise of God as revealed in Scripture. Rather than trusting God’s revelation, this person stands in judgment over it, affirming portions of it while rejecting other parts, so that his faith ultimately rests in himself, not God’s power and wisdom.” (Vincent Cheung, )