According to non-inerrantist Christians, what are the strongest arguments against the inerrancy of the Protestant Bible?

The [Protestant Bible](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Bible) consists of 66 books. Some believe this set of books is inerrant. Others do not. **Question**: According to non-inerrantist Christians, what are the strongest arguments for the belief that **at least one of these 66 books contains at least one error**? ___ **Addendum - What do I mean by error?** I'm borrowing the meaning of 'error' from the definition of Biblical inerrancy: > Biblical inerrancy is the belief that the Bible "is without **error or fault** in all its teaching"; or, at least, that "Scripture in the original manuscripts does not affirm anything that is **contrary to fact**". Some equate inerrancy with biblical infallibility; others do not. > > The belief in Biblical inerrancy is of particular significance within parts of evangelicalism, where it is formulated in the "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy". A formal statement in favor of biblical inerrancy was published in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society in 1978. The signatories to the "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy" admit that, "Inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture." However, even though there may be no extant original manuscripts of the Bible, those that exist can be considered inerrant, because, as the statement reads: "The autographic text of Scripture, ... in the providence of God can be ascertained from available manuscripts **with great accuracy**." > > ([source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_inerrancy))