Cold-Case Christianity
by J. Warner Wallace.
David C. Cook, publisher.
Colorado Springs, 2013
Paperback, 288 pp
Let’s
start with a conclusion: This is a great book! Everyone, Christian and
non-Christian alike, should read it and digest every principle Wallace defines.
The Christian will be better able to defend his faith, both in his own soul and
to others. The non-Christian—he or she can never discount the fact that,
however small they may rate the probability, there is still some possibility
that there is a God—Pascal’s Wager, all over again.
I looked
at this book when it first came out in 2013 but set it aside because I thought
(wrongly, as it turned out) that it was another gimmick. Farmers, fishermen,
shepherds, metalworkers—everybody seemed to have their own angle on
Christianity. The closest I can come with a parallel work now is Who Moved the Stone? by Albert Henry
Ross, aka Frank Morison. Morison’s book is an attempt to put the gospel and the
resurrection into a logical sequence and work the facts all together. Wallace’s
book takes a rigidly scientific or technical approach to the same target—how do
the facts fit together, and how reliable are they?
But to
get back to Cold-Case Christianity—
Note the sub-title: A homicide detective
investigates the claims of the gospels. The book is in two main sections,
each taking up about half of the volume. Firstly, ten chapters on “Learn to be
a Detective”, then four more on “Examine the Evidence”.
The
“learning” section covers such topics as resisting
the influence of dangerous presuppositions; respecting the nature of circumstantial evidence; evaluating the reliability of witnesses;
determining what’s important evidentially;
and more. As Wallace goes through each of these “tools for the call-out bag”,
as he terms them, he gives real-life examples that he has been involved with,
and brings us in as co-investigators with him.
After
this inside look at the procedures, we move on to examining the evidence and “applying the principles of
investigation to the claims of the New Testament”: Were the writers true eyewitnesses? Was the testimony corroborated?
Were the writers accurate? Was there motivation to lie?
A few
more comments about the mechanics and style of the book: The grammar is
refreshingly good. The content itself stretches the mind. From the outset we
know where Wallace is going, we follow him logically all the way, and at the
end we know that he has arrived effectively. A treat to follow his progress
technically as well as spiritually.
Several
items do come into the “con” category, though. Firstly, the book flows well in
its own right, but returning to check on details really calls for an index.
Secondly, I’m very uneasy with the procedure of lying to the suspect to
make him reveal things. See Wallace’s statement under “Resist Conspiracy
Theories”, p.112: “I had just enough true information to make my lies sound
believable.” And thirdly, that word “incredibly”—I dislike that word! To
me, and to Merriam-Webster, the primary meaning is “unbelievable”. Three
examples in 24 pages, are: p.210—“incredibly reliable”; p.232—“incredibly
trustworthy”; and p.233—“incredibly important”…all are self-contradictory to my
mind and, in fact, “unbelievable”.
My over-all
evaluation of Wallace’s book is very positive—a good job, well-done, thorough,
logical, educational, Scripture-proving, and God-honouring. He shepherds all
his arguments toward a few key lines on page 257. After being convinced of the
truth of all the Scriptures he has studied, he moves from “belief that” to
“belief in”. “All changed when I put my faith in Jesus.” May God greatly bless Wallace’s efforts and bring many
to faith in Him.
