Dr. W Graham Scroggie of the Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, a prestigious Christian evangelical mission, says: "..Yes, the Bible is human, although some out of zeal which is not according to knowledge, have denied this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in the language of men, were penned by the hands of men and bear in their style the characteristics of men...."
"It is Human, Yet Divine," W Graham Scroggie, p. 1
Another Christian scholar, Kenneth Cragg, the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, says: "...Not so the New testament...There is condensation and editing; there is choice reproduction and witness. The Gospels have come through the mind of the church behind the authors. They represent experience and history..."
"The Call of the Minaret," Kenneth Cragg, p 277
The easiest trap to fall into in comparing religions is to assume that if anything is different to "my" religion, it is automatically bad.
The Muslim doctrine of the Qur'an is that God (via the angel Gabriel) dictated, word-for-word, the Qur'an to Mohammmad.
This is not how Christians understand the inspiration of the Bible. The Christian understanding is that the human authors were inspired and guided, but that the authors' personalities are also reflected in the writing. They were not merely "human typewriters". This is what the quoted authors (Scroggie and Cragg) are getting at.
Now, just because this is different to how the Muslim understands the inspiration of scripture, this does not automatically make it bad. Christians claim that the Bible is inspired by God, but still is human words. So it must be evaluated on that basis. Muslims claim the Qur'an is God's actual words, so it must be evaluated on that basis. Traces of obvious human influence (e.g. grammatical errors, borrowing from other sources, reacting to heresies of author's present situation) are therefore an embarassment to the Qur'an, but not to the Bible.
An additional observation on the topic of checking quotations for accuracy:
Al-Kadhi plainly states for this section
Since Al-Kadhi basically copies from Ahmed Deedat, the critique regarding Deedat's out-of-context quotation of Kenneth Cragg applies likewise to Mr. Al-Kadhi.
Also note the title of W Graham Scroggie's book: "It is Human, Yet Divine". Al-Kadhi only quotes a couple of sentences from the part of the book stating its human elements. He does neither quote nor respond to the reasons why Mr. Scroggie considers the Bible divinely inspired. Al-Kadhi is not interested to interact with those arguments. That is the sign of a polemicist, not a scholar.