Will you just state your name and experience for the record
My name is James Warner Wallace I'm retired homicide detective in Los Angeles county
And are you the author of the book cold-case christianity? Yes I am
Can you share the subtitle of the book of the court please
A homicide detective investigates the claims of the Gospels
Would I be correct in saying that you're, your duties as a homicide detective
include investigating cold-case homicides?
Yes that is and was my expertise. Don't most of those cases get solved with DNA evidence?
Objection leading and counsel is testifying again your honor
I'll rephrase how many of your cold cases were solved through the use of DNA evidence?
None. Not one that's a often popular on TV but our departments never had the
good fortune of solving a cold case with DNA
Well how do most of these cases get solved?
Often by examining eyewitness claims that witness claims that were made many years earlier
even though often our witnesses are now deceased.
Forgive my ignorance Mr. Wallace but how's that possible?
We have a number of techniques we can use to test the reliability of an
eyewitness including something called forensics statement analysis that's a
discipline but we scrutinized that statements of eyewitnesses, and looking
at what they choose to minimize, what they choose to emphasize, what they admit
all together how they expand time or contract time and when we examine these
kinds of eyewitness accounts we can usually tell who's lying and who's
telling the truth and even who the guilty parties is.
And did you apply this skill said anytime outside of your official capacity?
Yes I applied my expertise to the death of Jesus at the hands of the Romans and
I actually looked at the Gospels as I would any other set of forensic
statements within a matter of months I determined that the four Gospels written
from different perspectives contain the eyewitness accounts about the life
ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus.
And did you consider that the four accounts might be part of a
conspiracy designed to promote belief in the fledgling faith you have to consider
conspiracies when assessing eyewitness accounts but successful conspiracies
typically involve the fewest number of people it's a lot easier for two people
to lie keep a secret than it is for 20 and that's where the problem with the
conspiracy theories related to the Apostles in the first century.
They're just far too many of them trying to hold this conspiracy for far too long a
period of time and far worse they're experiencing pressure like no other
unimaginable pressure every one of these folks was tortured and died what they
claim to see and none of them ever recanted their story so the idea that
this is a conspiracy the first century is just really unreasonable
instead what I see in the Gospels something I call
"Unintended eyewitness support statements"
What's an unintended eye witness support statement?
If i can borrow your Bible.
let me go to the Gospel of Matthew for example of this I'll start with the
passage where Jesus is in front of Caiaphas at a hearing it says here then
they spit in his face and struck him with their fists others slapped him and said
prophesy to us Christ who hit you?
That seems like a very simple request given that the people who hit him or
standing right in front of them what does make no sense what-- Why would it be
prophecy to be able to tell you who hit you? But it's not until you read Luke
that you get an answer to this.
He says the men who were guarding Jesus began mocking and beating him.
They blindfolded him and demanded prophesy who hit you.
So now we know why this was a challenge because Luke tells us the thing that
Matthew left out that he was actually blindfolded the time it took place this
is very common this kind of unintentional eyewitness support that
fills in a detail that the first book has left out after years of scrutinizing
his Gospels using the example that I used to determine if I witnesses is reliable
I concluded the Four Gospels in this book contain the reliable accounts of the
actual words of Jesus.
And that's to include the statements quoted by Miss Wesley in her class
Absolutely.
Thank You detective.
Your witness.
Detective Wallace I'm not going to try to match biblical knowledge with you but
isn't it true that these Gospel accounts vary widely and what they say that there
are numerous discrepancies between these accounts?
Absolutely. But that's exactly what we should expect.
-----I don't quite understand that...
Reliable eyewitness accounts always differ slightly in the way they recall the story.
They're coming to it from different geographic perspectives, their history, even where they are located in the room
When I examine the Gospels, I was trying to determine if these were
accurate reliable accounts in spite of any differences that might be between the accounts.
Ahhh. And as a devout Christian, you feel you succeeded?
Mr. Kane. I think misunderstand me when I began this study I was a devout atheist I
began examining the Gospels as a committed skeptic not as a believer.
You see, I wasn't raised in a Christian environment although I do think I have
an unusually high regard for the value of evidence I'm not a Christian because
I was raised that way or because I hope that would satisfy some need or
accomplish some goal. I'm simply a Christian because it's evidentially true
motion to strike, Your honor. Granted. Jury instructed to ignore detective Wallace's last words
no further questions. Witnesses excused.