Analyzed automatically. Assessed 2026-10-04 from 424 user reviews, the store listing and its privacy label. We have not scanned the app's package, so nothing on this page was read from inside the app itself.
This analysis describes version 21 of the app, analyzed 2026-10-04 . The app may have changed since.
The store currently lists version 21, updated 2026-09-16.
What the analysis found
One source only — shown, not confirmed 3
A single kind of evidence. We publish these because withholding them would be the bigger distortion, and we do not treat any of them as a finding we stand behind.
What reviewers said
Verbatim excerpts from public store reviews, shown as corroborating user reports. They are not Appworthy audit evidence, and a quotation is not proof of the finding it sits under.
Paywall blocks the basics
I shouldn't have to pay to hear gods word, everything in this app requires a payment. That's a red flag. God didn't charge anyone to hear his word and neither did Jesus. I've never had to pay to hear God's word and I'm not going to start…
you have to pay to read the bible I think if the app is so good that it should let you at least give it a chance before you pay $6.99 a week for something you might hate. I would recommend this app it does not glich and you dont have to…
I hate that I have to pay for EVERYTHING , like it's a really cool concept and I was super exited to try the chat, and as a 14 year old girl I probably dont read my Bible enough so I really thought it would be a great help... then I open…
Hard to cancel
Unable to cancel the subscription!
Hard to Cancel — The cancellation process is too difficult. You have to go to the contact us page in the app then go to cancel subscriptions, then manage subscription, then you have to enter your email address, then they send you an email…
Difficult to cancel — I downloaded this app on the 3 day trial. And although I was enjoying it I wasn’t able to afford the yearly subscription so I attempted to cancel the subscription and delete the account. I was still charged the…
What this app sells
How the automated analysis works
This assessment is produced automatically. Three independent signals are read — user reviews, the store listing and the store privacy disclosure — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Several measurements above say “Not assessed” because no artefact we hold can answer them. A human review is what resolves those — and it can remove a favourable band as easily as add one.
Hands-on inspections are not yet open.