At least according to Pete Enns, in this adaptation of the conclusion from his latest (sure to be very controversial) book. We’re back to wrestling with the implications of the incarnation and scripture and how that affects our readings of Genesis in light of modern science, and he quotes Bavinck as a resource. I’m not sure a modern evangelical would use Bavinck’s language to speak of inspiration:
So also the word [the Bible], the revelation of God, entered the world of creatureliness, the life and history of humanity, in all the human forms of dream and vision, of investigation and reflection, right down into that which is humanly weak and despised and ignoble. . . .