Why Should We Trust the Gospels When Eyewitness Testimony Is So Unreliable?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

138I often receive emails (or posts) from skeptics who contest my trust in the gospel eyewitness accounts given recent studies and articles that challenge the reliability of eyewitness testimony. Eyewitness testimony, they argue, is “the least reliable form of evidence in a criminal trial”. If this is the case, why should we trust the gospel authors? It’s true that there are several examples of court cases in which jurors trusted a witness for his or her testimony, convicted a defendant, and then later discovered that the witness was mistaken about the testimony. It’s also true that witnesses occasionally lie about their observations! But this has little impact on my decision to trust the gospel writers, because I understand the need that juries have to test eyewitnesses.

In Cold-Case Christianity, I begin by providing readers with ten principles of cold-case investigations. The fourth chapter is simply entitled, “Test Your Witnesses”. In this chapter, I offer the template that is used in the State of California by judges who instruct juries in criminal trials. It includes a series of fourteen questions that jurors can ask themselves as they examine the reliability of any witness on the stand. The important probative questions can be divided into four large categories. In essence, it’s important to find out if an eyewitness was actually present at the time of the crime, can be corroborated by outside evidence, has been accurate and consistent in the past, and is free of bias that might prejudice his or her testimony or motivate him or her to tell a lie.

I’m not foolish enough to suggest that every witness should be trusted without vetting. Heck, I don’t even trust my own teenagers without vetting! But once these four areas have been examined and an eyewitness is found to pass the test in these important categories, it’s reasonable to accept their testimony as reliable. In fact, if an eyewitness measures up in these four areas, Jurors have a duty to assume the best in them until they have a reason to do otherwise. Section 105 of the Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instruction (2006) instructs jurors to set aside “any bias or prejudice [they] may have,” including any based on the witness’s gender, race, religion, or national origin. In addition, jurors are instructed: “If the evidence establishes that a witness’s character for truthfulness has not been discussed among the people who know him or her, you may conclude from the lack of discussion that the witness’s character for truthfulness is good”. In essence, witnesses are to be trusted unless you’ve got a specific reason not to.

In the second section of Cold-Case Christianity, I spend four chapters looking at the gospel eyewitness accounts and testing them with the template used by jurors in criminal trials. It’s true that there are occasions when the testimony of a false witness can slip through a trial because the witness is not properly vetted. I try not to let that happen with the gospel writers. It’s critical that we test witnesses before accepting what they say, and I take a rather vigorous approach with this courtroom template. Many who’ve now read the book (it was just released last week), tell me that this second section of the book was incredibly helpful to them. I am hopeful objective readers will see how well the gospel writers measure up. Yes, witnesses can be unreliable. That’s why I wrote a book about how we can determine who is to be trusted and who is not. I don’t trust the gospel writers simply because they are eyewitnesses. I trust them because they can be vetted and determined to be reliable eyewitnesses.

For more information about the reliability of the New Testament gospels and the case for Christianity, please read Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels. This book teaches readers ten principles of cold-case investigations and applies these strategies to investigate the claims of the gospel authors. The book is accompanied by an eight-session Cold-Case Christianity DVD Set (and Participant’s Guide) to help individuals or small groups examine the evidence and make the case.

J. Warner Wallace is a Dateline featured Cold-Case Detective, Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview, Adj. Professor of Christian Apologetics at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University, author of Cold-Case ChristianityGod’s Crime Scene, and Forensic Faith, and creator of the Case Makers Academy for kids.

Subscribe to J. Warner’s Daily Email

Check Also

Why “Closure” Requires A Christian Worldview

In my career as a cold-case detective, i frequently celebrated when a jury came back …

18 comments

  1. Pingback: Why Should We Trust the Gospels When Eyewitness Testimony Is So Unreliable? by J. Warner Wallace | Current Events in Light of the Kingdom of God

  2. Pingback: Historical Epistemology: What Can We Know About Jesus? « Ratio Christi- At The Ohio State University

  3. Pingback: What Can We Know About Jesus? Resources on the Historical Jesus and Historicity of the New Testament « Ratio Christi- At The Ohio State University

  4. Pingback: google

  5. Pingback: Does the "Unreasonable" Nature of the Virgin Conception Invalidate the Story of Jesus? | Cold Case Christianity

  6. Pingback: Does the “Unreasonable” Nature of the Virgin Conception Invalidate the Story of Jesus? | Apologetics ForumApologetics Forum

  7. Pingback: A Brief Sample of Old Testament Archaeological Corroboration - Cross Examined - Christian Apologetics | Frank Turek

  8. Pingback: A Brief Sample of Old Testament Archaeological Corroboration | Cold Case Christianity

  9. Pingback: A Brief Sample of Old Testament Archaeological Corroboration | Apologetics ForumApologetics Forum

  10. Pingback: Why Didn’t Jesus Reveal Scientific Facts to Demonstrate His Deity? | Christian Apologetics

  11. Pingback: Real Clear Apologetics | Two Hidden Science Facts in the Passion Week

  12. Pingback: Two Hidden Science Facts in the Passion Week | Apologetics ForumApologetics Forum

  13. Pingback: Why Didn’t Jesus Reveal Scientific Facts to Demonstrate His Deity? | Cold Case Christianity

  14. Pingback: Handling an Objection: We Can’t Trust Eyewitness Testimony! | THINKAPOLOGETICS.COM

  15. Pingback: “What does it mean to say the New Testament is ‘Historically Reliable?’” – THINKAPOLOGETICS.COM

  16. Pingback: How Ancient Eyewitness Testimony Became the New Testament Gospel Record - The Poached Egg Christian Worldview and Apologetics Network

  17. Pingback: Why Should We Trust the Gospels When Eyewitness Testimony Is So Unreliable? | Cold Case Christianity – Elders Scrolls

  18. Pingback: Handling an Objection: We Can’t Trust Eyewitness Testimony! – Tabernacle of David

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *