Editorial Standards
How we check our work
A resource is only as trustworthy as its sources and its honesty. A single wrong verse reference or misattributed quotation undermines the whole — especially with the thoughtful skeptics we most want to reach. So our content is held to a deliberate review standard before it goes live.
The review process
Each long-form Evidence Library essay passes through several independent stages before publication:
- Drafting to a scholarly standard. The argument is stated carefully, its history traced, each premise defended in depth, the strongest objections answered by name, the state of the scholarly debate represented honestly, with numbered footnotes and a bibliography.
- Independent fact-checking. Every quotation, date, statistic, scholar attribution, and Scripture reference is verified against primary and scholarly sources. Quotations are checked for accuracy; citations are checked for existence and correct attribution.
- Scholarly & orthodoxy audit. A separate review checks the essay for rigor, for fair representation of critics (steelmanning rather than strawmanning), and for conformity to historic Christian orthodoxy and our denominational neutrality.
- Source verification & correction. Every flagged issue is corrected before publication. Where a claim cannot be sourced to a real, verifiable work, it is removed or hedged.
- Editorial sign-off. Nothing is published until it has cleared the stages above and been signed off.
This is a genuine, multi-stage editorial review rather than outside academic peer review — we want to be precise about what we do and don't claim. What it guarantees is that our published essays have been independently fact-checked, audited for rigor and orthodoxy, and sourced to real, citable scholarship.
Our standing commitments
- Cite real, verifiable sources. We link to primary texts and peer-reviewed scholarship where possible, and we never fabricate a quotation, source, or figure.
- Steelman the other side. We present objections in their strongest form and name the scholars who hold them.
- Concede what should be conceded. We distinguish what an argument proves from what it merely suggests, and we flag genuinely contested claims as contested.
- Represent Scripture accurately. Verse references are checked to exist and to support the point they are cited for, in context.
- Gentleness and respect. Following 1 Peter 3:15, we make the case without sneering at those who disagree.
- Correct our mistakes. When we get something wrong, we fix it. If you spot an error — a misquotation, a bad citation, an unfair characterization — please tell us, and we will check it and correct it.
Found a problem?
We would genuinely rather hear it than not. Use the Asked & Answered page to flag any inaccuracy, and we will review it. Accuracy is a moving target, and we treat corrections as part of the work, not an embarrassment.