Quick Facts:
Author: J. Warner Wallace
Publisher/Year: David C Cook,
2013
Pages: 288
Review:
In
Cold-Case Christianity, J. Warner
Wallace, a former atheist and seasoned cold-case homicide detective, takes his
knowledge and expertise gleaned from years of law enforcement experience and
applies important investigative principles in examining the historical
reliability of the gospels. Wallace has been sharing his insights and wisdom
for years through blogging, articles, and podcasts as creator of the PleaseConvinceMe.com website, and
recently has joined with Stand to Reason
as a speaker and contributor.
This
book is not just another typical apologetic arguing for the trustworthiness of
the New Testament. It is unique among its peers, tackling the subject from a
perspective only a homicide cop could provide. Cold-case homicides are historical investigations, and it is his
skill and perspective as an investigator that gives Wallace the essential
talents and qualifications to examine the historical
accuracy of the gospels:
Christianity
makes a claim about an event from the distant past for which there is little or
no forensic evidence. Like cold cases, the truth about what happened can be
discovered by examining the statements of eyewitnesses and comparing them with
what little additional evidence is accessible to us. If the eyewitnesses can be
evaluated (and their statements can be verified by what we have available), an
equally strong circumstantial case can be made for the claims of the New
Testament. But are there any reliable eyewitness statements in existence to
corroborate in the first place? This became the most important question I had
to answer in my personal investigation of Christianity. Were the gospel
narratives eyewitness accounts, or
were they only moralistic mythologies?
Were the Gospels reliable, or were they filled with untrustworthy, supernatural
absurdities? The most important questions I could ask about Christianity just
so happened to fall within my area of expertise.[1]
One
of the things I enjoyed most while reading this book were the personal
recollections and stories as an investigator that Wallace recounts, and how the
principles he learned and applied on the job can then be used apologetically in
investigating and defending the claims of the gospels. The book is an outstanding treatment defending the reliability of these
New Testament texts and serves as an important and exceptional addition to any
apologetic library.
The
book is broken down into two main sections (fourteen chapters) along with a
postscript and appendix:
Section
1:
Learn to Be a Detective: Ten important
principles every aspiring detective needs to master (chapters 1-10)
Section
2:
Examine the Evidence: Applying the
principles of investigation to the claims of the New Testament (chapters
11-14, postscript)
Appendix: Witnesses and
Resources: Compiling the resources
necessary to make the case
Section 1: Learn to Be a Detective
In
section one, Wallace lays a foundation for thinking like a detective that every
Christian apologist should master. Each of these ten chapters focuses on a
different investigative principle that is not only useful for examining the
claims of the gospels but can also be effectively applied in other areas of
apologetic study.
In
chapter one, Wallace warns against
the dangers of beginning an investigation with presuppositions that can affect
the outcome of your search for truth. Investigating Christianity is no
different. If we start with naturalistic presuppositions or confuse science
with scientism, we may only end up begging the question and preventing
ourselves from discovering truth. As much as it is within our power, we need to
take note of personal bias and examine the evidence objectively.
In
chapter two, Wallace introduces the
idea of abductive reasoning: inferring to the most reasonable explanation. Investigators
are primarily concerned with what is most reasonable,
not with what is possible. Christian
apologists would do well to keep this in mind, especially when confronted with
objections such as “Isn’t it possible you’re wrong?” or “Well it’s possible
that…” Just because something is possible
it doesn’t follow that it’s reasonable.
The minimal-facts approach to the resurrection is an example of abductive
reasoning, and Wallace ends this chapter by persuasively arguing that “Jesus
rose bodily from the grave” is the most reasonable explanation given the
historical data.
Chapter three discusses the importance
of circumstantial evidence. Contrary to popular belief, there is no qualitative
distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence in the eyes of the law.
A case built on cumulative, circumstantial evidence can be just as reasonable
and powerful as one containing direct evidence. Withholding judgment is
unwarranted simply because “we only have circumstantial evidence.” Again, this
is important for Christians to remember, given that many arguments employed by
apologists are circumstantial in nature, especially when dealing with
historical events. Wallace ends this chapter by effectively applying this
principle in building a strong, cumulative, circumstantial case for the
existence of God.
In
chapter four, Wallace emphasizes the
importance of evaluating the reliability of witnesses. Whether or not a witness
is reliable will determine whether or not you can trust their testimony. Critical
to this discussion is realizing that disagreement among witnesses is not license
to automatically disqualify their testimony. Christians and skeptics alike
should be careful not to confuse
inerrancy or infallibility with reliability. Witnesses should be given
the benefit of the doubt and apparent contradictions can often be explained by
differing perspectives. This is just as true for the biblical eyewitnesses. The
writers of the gospels claim to be eyewitnesses and were recognized as such
from the very beginning. Whether or not they can be trusted will be the topic
of section two.
I
found chapter five to be very
interesting as Wallace applies the art and science of Forensic Statement Analysis
to help evaluate statements within the gospels. In particular, he looks at the
gospel of Mark and builds a strong case that Mark is documenting the eyewitness
testimony of the apostle Peter. The internal evidence of language within this
text corroborates the testimony of the early church fathers, giving us good
reason to trust this historical account of Jesus’ life and ministry.
In
chapter six, Wallace tackles the
topic of textual criticism by making an important distinction between artifacts and evidence. Just as a crime scene will contain evidence related to
the crime as well as incidental artifacts which play no role, so also there
have been textual variants (artifacts) which have crept into the genuine text
of the New Testament (evidential statements) as the text has been transmitted
through the centuries. But the presence of artifacts in no way compromises our
ability to identify the evidence and come to a reasonable conclusion, nor does
it warrant the wholesale rejection of the text, even if some incidental questions
remain unanswered. Through the art and science of textual criticism, textual
critics are able to identify the artifacts (textual variants) and separate them
from the evidence (genuine text of the New Testament), just as a detective does
when processing a crime scene.
Chapter seven is a much
needed antidote to our culture’s preoccupation with conspiracy theories. For a
conspiracy to be successful there are a number of factors which increase its potential
for success (such as a small number of conspirators, thorough and immediate
communication, short time span, significant relational connections, and little
or no pressure), none of which apply to the beginning of Christianity and the
testimony of the apostles. Wallace states,
I can’t imagine
a less favorable set of circumstances for a successful conspiracy than those
that the twelve apostles faced…None of these eyewitnesses ever recanted, none
was ever trotted out by the enemies of Christianity in an effort to expose the
Christian “lie”…These men and women either were involved in the greatest
conspiracy of all time or were simply eyewitnesses who were telling the truth.
The more I learned about conspiracies, the more the latter seemed to be the
most reasonable conclusion.[2]
Chapter eight lays the
groundwork for a very important subject: “chain of custody.” In short, is there
good reason to believe the gospels (1) are the product of eyewitnesses, (2)
truthfully record the life of Jesus, and (3) have been accurately preserved and
transmitted over the centuries? If so, we can have confidence in our knowledge
of the original “crime scene.” Wallace takes up this issue and examines it in greater
detail in section two.
In
chapter nine, Wallace discusses
evidential sufficiency and three reasons people deny the truth: rational,
emotional, and volitional. When it comes to making a decision, requiring
complete knowledge or absolute certainty is unreasonable, and this is no less
true when it comes to spiritual and eternal matters. Unanswered questions and
“possible doubts” are not trump cards against what we do know. Wallace aptly applies this to the problem of evil, arguing
that evil is evidence for God, and showing
that the problem of evil is more emotional
than rational.
Chapter ten is a fitting
close to section one as Wallace helps Christians prepare for an attack by
looking at some common strategies of defense lawyers, how they parallel the tactics
of religious skeptics, and skillfully showing how to intelligently think about
these matters. Christians need to remember that possible alternatives are not reasonable refutations. In other
words, an assertion is not an argument, and an alternative explanation is not a
refutation.
Section 2: Examine the Evidence
In
section two, Wallace now takes the principles of detective work from section
one and specifically applies these principles in examining the gospels. He
argues for their accuracy and their trustworthiness by establishing a
historical chain of custody from the time of the apostles to the fourth
century. Wallace anticipates certain objections and ends each chapter by
addressing some of the most common.
In
chapter eleven, Wallace begins his
chain of custody by looking at the early dating of the gospels, which helps
establish the authors as actual eyewitnesses. He presents numerous lines of evidence,
some of most interesting and unique being Mark’s gospel as an early “crime
broadcast” and his protection of key players. Wallace ends by showing that the
most reasonable conclusion based on the circumstantial evidence is that the
gospels were written early during the time of the eyewitnesses.
Chapter twelve was another of
my favorites, dealing with the topic of internal (“inside out”) and external
(“outside in”) corroboration of the gospels. Internal corroboration includes
the fascinating discovery of undersigned coincidences, and Wallace provides
some great examples. But evidence of authenticity is not only found within the
gospels but outside as well, as Wallace presents the evidence from
non-Christian sources and archaeology. The verdict? The gospels are a reliable
and trustworthy account, consistent with the claims of other contemporary
evidences.
Chapter thirteen is perhaps the
hardest hitting “chain of custody” chapter as Wallace traces the transmission
of the gospels from the apostles and testimony of the early church fathers all
the way to the fourth century. Along the way, Wallace shows that the Jesus
presented in the gospels was “not a late invention or exaggeration; it is the
version of Jesus that existed from the very first telling.”[3]
Not only was the gospel message recorded early and recited to the students of
the apostles, but the texts we have today have been accurately preserved and
are consistent with this early message.
In
chapter fourteen, Wallace ends this
section by looking at the issue of bias. Criminal behavior is often motivated
by one of three things: financial greed, sexual or relational desire, and
pursuit of power. But unlike criminals, the apostles had nothing to gain by
lying and everything to lose due to their testimony of the risen Christ. The
most reasonable conclusion? The apostles reported what they actually observed.
Conclusion:
J.
Warner Wallace embodies what Stand to
Reason constantly emphasizes: knowledge, wisdom, and character. His book is
no different. Wallace takes the knowledge he has gained as a cold-case homicide
detective, wisely applies principles of historical investigation to the claims of
the gospels, and presents all of this material in a winsome and attractive
manner.
Bottom
line:
Cold-Case Christianity is an
outstanding work defending the authenticity and trustworthiness of the four
gospels from the unique perspective of a homicide detective. It deserves to be
read by both Christians and skeptics alike, and especially all of us “one dollar
apologists” who seek to be effective ambassadors for Christ.
1 comment:
My favorite part of the book was his explanation of forensic writing. I had never read about that anywhere else.
Post a Comment