Cold-Case Christianity (Updated & Expanded Edition): A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels

by J. Warner Wallace

Those who oppose the claims of Christianity often take a very similar approach. Like defense attorneys, they sometimes ignore the larger connected nature of the case for Christianity and focus on possibilities and claims either untrue or without detrimental impact.

Let’s hold ourselves to a high standard, even as we require our opponents to recognize their own reasonable responsibilities. It’s well known the “burden of proof” in criminal trials rests upon the prosecution.

Skeptics have long claimed the burden of proof for the truth of the Christian worldview (e.g., the existence of God or the deity of Jesus) falls on Christians; naturalism is their assumed “default” position.

The burden of proof shifts, however, once they declare an alternative possibility (e.g., Jesus is a re-creation of Mithras). Possible alternatives are not reasonable refutations. If they’re not offering a declaration supported by evidence, they’re probably attempting to destroy or distract.

Destruction tactics that try to disqualify the Gospels would also disqualify other historical texts. If skeptics applied an equal standard to other documents of antiquity, they would be hard...

any efforts to distract from the cumulative case for Christianity by redefining truth or vilifying Christians, while potentially effective, do nothin...

I have skeptical friends who are in a similar position. Some reject Christianity because they believe it is evidentially false, and they are prepared to declare (and argue) an alternative case.

some reject Christianity for another reason (perhaps some past personal experience or a desire to live their life without religious restrictions).

For some Christians, their first encounter with atheistic opposition occurs at the university level, either as a student or the parent of a student.

While we are often willing to spend time reading the Bible, praying, or participating in church programs and services, few of us recognize the importance of becoming good Christian case makers.

We need to master the facts and evidence supporting the claims of Christianity and anticipate the tactics of those who oppose us. This kind of preparation is a form of worship. When we devote ourselves to this rational preparation and study, we are worshipping God with our mind, the very thing He has called us to do

If I had good reasons to believe the Gospels were reliable eyewitness accounts, it was time to confront much of what I resisted as a skeptic.

The initial step in my journey toward Christianity was an evaluation of the Gospels.

The first criterion of eyewitness reliability requires us to answer the question: “Were the alleged eyewitnesses present in the first place?”

There are many pieces of circumstantial evidence forming a compelling case for the early dating of the Gospels.

The more I examined this evidence, the more I came to believe the Gospels were written early enough in history to be taken seriously as eyewitness accounts.

Let’s look at this evidence before we locate each piece on the timeline.

THE NEW TESTAMENT FAILS TO DESCRIBE THE DESTRUCTION OF THE TEMPLE

We begin with perhaps the most significant Jewish historical event of the first century: the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in AD 70.

Masada was under siege 72-73 AD

THE NEW TESTAMENT FAILS TO DESCRIBE THE SIEGE OF JERUSALEM

Even before the temple was destroyed, the city of Jerusalem was under assault.

LUKE SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE DEATHS OF PAUL AND PETER

Years before the siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, another pair of events occurred, both significant to the Christian community.

The apostle Paul was martyred in the city of Rome in AD 64, and Peter was martyred sh...

LUKE SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE DEATH OF JAMES

Luke featured another important figure from Christian history in the book of Acts.

James (the brother of Jesus) became the leader of the Jerusalem church and was described in a position of prominence in Acts 15. James was mar...

LUKE’S GOSPEL PREDATES THE BOOK OF ACTS

Luke wrote both the book of Acts and the gospel of Luke. These two texts contain introductions tying them together in history.

PAUL QUOTED LUKE’S GOSPEL IN HIS LETTER TO TIMOTHY

Paul appeared to be aware of Luke’s gospel and wrote as though it was common knowledge in about AD 63–64, when Paul penned his first letter to Timothy.

It’s clear Luke’s gospel was already common knowledge and accepted as Scripture by the time this letter was written.

PAUL ECHOED THE CLAIMS OF THE GOSPEL WRITERS

even the most skeptical scholars agree Paul is the author of the letters written to the Romans, the Corinthians, and the Galatians. These letters are dated between AD 48 and AD 60.

The letter to the Romans

b...

by proclaiming Jesus is the resurrected “Son of God.” Throughout the letter, Paul accepted the view of Jesus the gospel eyewitnesses described in their own accounts. Just seventeen years after the resurrection, Jesus was described as divine. He is God incarn...

In his letter to the Galatians

Paul described his interaction with

(Peter and James) and said their meeting occurred at least fourteen years prior to t...

PAUL QUOTED LUKE’S GOSPEL IN HIS LETTER TO THE CORINTHIANS

Paul also seems to have been familiar with the gospel of Luke when he wrote to the Corinthian church (nearly ten years earlier than his letter to Timothy).

Paul appears to be quoting Luke’s gospel—the only gospel in which Jesus says the disciples are to “do this in remembrance of me.” If Paul is trying to use a description of the meal already well known at the time, this account must have been circulating for a period prior to Paul’s letter.

LUKE QUOTED MARK (AND MATTHEW) REPEATEDLY

Luke, when writing his own gospel, readily admitted he was not an eyewitness to the life and ministry of Jesus. Instead, Luke described himself as a historian, collecting the statements from the eyewitnesses who were present at the time:

As a result, Luke often repeated or quoted entire passages offered previously by either Mark

or Matthew

These passages were inserted into Luke’s gospel as though they were simply copied over from the other accounts. It’s reasonable, therefore, to concluded Mark’s account was already recognized, accepted, and available to Luke prior to his authorship of the gospel.

MARK’S GOSPEL APPEARS TO BE AN EARLY “CRIME BROADCAST”

Mark’s gospel bears a striking resemblance to a “crime broadcast.” When first-responding officers arrive at the scene of a crime, they quickly gather the details related to the crime and the description of the suspect, then “clear the air” with the radio dispatchers so they can broadcast these details to other officers who may be in the area.