This question suffers from an unfortunate ambiguity. Normally, when one speaks of fallibility, it is the mere capacity for error that is in view. Thus one can be fallible—and thus have the capacity for error—even though on any given occasion one might perform a task without comitting error. In light of this, one should have no trouble with the idea that men who had the capacity to err nevertheless did not do so in their writing of scripture. The difficulty lies with the word infallible. If fallibility refers to the capacity for error, infallibility ought to refer to the lack of such a capacity. Labeling the Bible infallible in this sense, then, would be to claim that it is a book which lacks the capacity for error. In the interest of avoiding confusion, it is better to claim that the Bible is inerrant, and thus that it is actually free of error—irrespective of its capacity for it, or lack thereof, in this regard.