BioLogos is a large and complex group. Jeff Schloss I’m sure would affirm inerrancy, as would Tremper Longman and Walton, and probably Hardin.
The hostility in referencing was both from the forum but also from staff, and from some of their scholars. Without an official statement like this, inerrancy was seen as a signal of fundamentalism (which it isn’t), which meant open season. I was once reprimanded by a staff member for saying I personally affirmed inerrancy. I think they felt I was rejecting them because they didn’t, but that wasn’t the case.
This position statement is a good move forward from this. They are trying to map out a more inclusive position, that allows for some diversity. They are moving inerrancy from silently tolerated to actually explained and articulated. That is a good thing. Had this been around three years ago, I doubt there would have been so much misunderstandings around this.
I would have probably articulated some things differently but the fact that this was written by the staff is a really good thing. I think it represents a good turn for them.