Errancy Wiki is the first wiki-style site dedicated to arguments about errors in the Bible

http://www.errancywiki.com/

One friend’s response:

Might be a fun site. But nothing useful is likely to come of it.

There are errors in the Bible – provided you define “error” correctly. Or there are no errors in the Bible – provided you define “error” correctly.

Since there is no authoritive definition of “error” (or any other word for that matter) there is no hope of either proving the Bible has errors or proving the Bible has no errors.

On the whole the errancy people have the easier side of the argument because they can just point to any passage at random and say – here is an error. Then the inerrancy people have to demonstrate that whatever is pointed at is NOT an error.

For example, I look at Luke 1.5 and I read “In the days of Herod, King of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah of the priestly division of Abijah.” “Aha”, I say, “An error. There was no such priest.” So far as I know there is no evidence, apart from Luke, that Zechariah ever lived. Now, according to the generally agreed-upon principles, the people who believe in Bibical inerrancy must prove that Zechariah really lived.

This is a silly game and I find it hard to believe that people take it seriously.

As nearly as I can tell the game started because two, or more, people got into an argument about something that really mattered. Say, for example, whether or not divorce was permitted by the church and started quoting Mark 10.2-12, Matthew 19.3-9, Luke 16.18 and Matthew 5.31-32 at each other. After a while the argument got tedious and practical people said that the Bible is not definitive about this. Then the Biblically-minded said “You have just accused the Bible of having errors” and so on.

IMHO it doesn’t matter whether or not the Bible is inerrant. You can get into just as many argument either way.