There are plenty of lists of claimed Bible contradictions and errors out there. A common criticism of these lists is that they don’t discriminate between good and bad claims of error, they just throw everything that they’ve got at the Bible in the hope that something will stick. A weakness of this approach is that inerrantist apologists are able to pick out the weakest claims of error on the list, refute those, and leave the impression that the whole list could be refuted if there were only time to go through it all.
There are also plenty of lists of inerrantist responses to alleged biblical errors. These defences of biblical inerrancy tend to be similarly one-sided, treating every claim of error as equally baseless, obscuring the fact that some have more substance than others. Apart from anything else, this can leave those with genuine questions unsatisfied, feeling that their doubts haven’t been taken seriously.
This website tries to take a more balanced approach. To make it a reasonably comprehensive repository of claimed biblical errors (and inerrantist responses to them), both good and bad claims of error will be explored on it. However, in recognition of the fact that some claims of error don’t stand up, and to sort the good from the bad, the site uses a ratings system.
Users are able to rate claims of error on a scale of 1 to 10 depending on how much of a problem they think that they pose for biblical inerrancy. A rating of 1 suggests that there’s no case to answer; a rating of 10 suggests that it’s case closed for inerrancy. The raw numbers don’t matter so much, it’s the relative numbers that are interesting. As long as inerrantist users don’t rate every claimed error as a 1, and errantist users don’t rate every claimed error as a 10, then the overall ratings will indicate which claims of errors people generally find most convincing.
The more people cast their votes, the better, so if you haven’t yet done so then please register and get rating!