Chapter 4: Test Your Witnesses: Don’t Get Fooled by Your Witnesses!
“I’ve seen it before,” says Lacey as she examines the skateboard. “At least I think I have.”
Lacey is Daniel’s big sister; she’s ten years older than he is. Daniel remembered that she attended Livingston School many years ago, so he decided to show her the skateboard.
“Lincoln Singleton,” she recalls. “He was three years older than me, and I think he had a board with big wheels like this one. He was very tall and always wore black board shorts. He moved away about five years ago.”
Excited, you and Daniel pay another visit to Mr. Martin at Great Skates.
“Lincoln?” he says, grinning from ear to ear. “I didn’t know they had skateboards back when Abraham Lincoln was president!” You laugh as your mind fills with an image of Abraham Lincoln wearing board shorts in the year 1861 when men wore three-piece suits and women wore long, full skirts.
Mr. Martin stops joking around. “I’m just kidding with you guys. I think I know the boy you are talking about. He wore black shorts and his board had big wheels—except he wasn’t tall. I don’t remember him that way.”
You and Daniel are perplexed as you update Jeffries in the briefing room on Tuesday. “Our witnesses don’t seem to agree entirely,” says Daniel. “Mr. Martin’s description of Lincoln seems to be different than Lacey’s. We’re not sure what to think.”
Jeffries rubs his chin for a moment, then says, “Let’s talk about witness testimony today. I’ve been working with eyewitnesses for over twenty years, and if there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s this: eyewitnesses never agree entirely. That doesn’t mean they’re wrong or lying. Here’s a question for you: How tall was your sister nine years ago, Daniel?”
Witness Disagreement
In real jury trials, jurors are told that witnesses won’t always agree:
“Oh, much shorter. She always says she got her growth spurt after—” Daniel stops as he realizes something. “Wow. I didn’t think of that. Lincoln might have seemed tall to her back then because she was shorter.”
“And to Mr. Martin,” adds Jeffries, “Lincoln might not have seemed tall at all. It really comes down to the way people see things. Everyone is different, so they sometimes see the same thing differently. It’s our job, as detectives, to put all the statements together to get the total truth.”
Detective Jeffries turns to the whiteboard. “There are four questions we need to ask to find out if a witness can be trusted. Let’s see if Lacey and Mr. Martin pass the test.”
Hannah already thinks so: “Well, they both were old enough to have contact with Lincoln, so we know they were actually there. And Mr. Martin’s description of Lincoln’s shorts seems to match the description given by Lacey.”
Jason adds to the case, “And there’s no reason to think they’ve changed their story over time or have any reason to lie to us.”
“Good,” says Jeffries. “Now let’s return to the case for Jesus. Jason, I asked you to do some research last week. What did you find?”
“Well,” starts Jason, standing up from his seat, “I read the four Gospels and I see there are places where the stories don’t seem to be entirely the same. But now that I understand what eyewitnesses are like, I guess that’s not all that surprising.”
“Exactly,” responds Jeffries. “Now let’s ask our four questions to see if the witnesses mentioned in the Gospels pass the test. What’s the first question?”
“Were they actually there?” says Jason. “But how would we answer that question?”
“Well,” says Detective Jeffries, “let’s use our detective minds again.” He returns to the whiteboard. “If I asked you to write a short summary of your skateboard investigation yesterday, would it include the information from Lacey or Mr. Martin?”
“No,” says Daniel. “We didn’t get that information until today.”
“That’s right,” Jeffries says. “So if I got your summary yesterday, I would know when you wrote it based on what was missing, right?”
The cadets nod their heads.
“Now, let’s look at some evidence in the Bible,” says Jeffries as he draws a timeline on the whiteboard. “The apostle Luke wrote about the lives of the disciples after Jesus rose to heaven. Does anyone know the name of that writing?”
Investigative Timelines
Detectives draw timelines to help them organize the events that occur prior to and following crimes.
“I know!” says Hannah. “It’s called the book of Acts.”
“Correct,” Jeffries congratulates Hannah. “Well, it’s missing some important information. For example, Luke never describes the destruction of Jerusalem. That was an important city and he should have mentioned how it was destroyed by the Roman army. Luke also says nothing about the death of the three most important characters in his book: the apostles Paul, Peter, and James. He mentions how other people die, but not these three incredibly important leaders.”
Detective Jeffries starts to place these events on the timeline.
“We know all of these events occurred between 61–70 AD, yet Luke doesn’t describe any of them. Now think about your summary of the skateboard investigation yesterday. You wouldn’t have been able to write about Lacey and Mr. Martin because those interviews hadn’t happened yet. So, why do you think Luke left this information out of his book?”
“Because it hadn’t happened yet?” asks Jason tentatively.
“I think that’s reasonable,” replies Jeffries. “So that means Luke wrote the book of Acts before 61 AD. That would explain why the deaths of Paul, Peter, and James and the destruction of Jerusalem are missing.”
“Okay, but I still don’t get it,” you admit. “How does this help us to know if we can trust what the Bible says?”
Jeffries looks thoughtful. “Luke wrote two books. Before he wrote the book of Acts, he wrote the gospel of Luke. That means Luke’s gospel was written even earlier than 61 AD.” Jeffries finishes his timeline:
How do we know that Luke wrote both the book of Acts and the gospel of Luke? Read Acts 1:1–2 and Luke 1:1-4. One man is mentioned in both passages: _______________.
Then he continues, “So, can you see how close the writing of the gospel of Luke is to the actual lifetime of Jesus? This gospel was written early, while people who really knew Jesus were still alive. If the Gospels contained lies, the people who knew Jesus would have spotted them. It’s hard to fool people who were there and knew the truth.” Jeffries folds his arms and looks out at the cadets for their responses.
“Wow, that was a lot of work just to answer the first question. But is there any evidence to prove what they said was true?” asks Daniel.
“You’re talking about question #2,” Jeffries replies. “Yes, we do have a lot of ‘verifying’ evidence. For example, we’ve been digging around the area described in the Bible for years and we’ve discovered many of the cities mentioned in the Gospels.”
You ask, “Is that what we call archaeology?”
“Yes,” says Jeffries. “There’s more,” he continues. “We’ve even found evidence verifying the words used in the Bible to describe people and events.” The cadets look puzzled.
“Let me give you an example,” says Jeffries. “Imagine if I lived one hundred years from now and wanted to write about your skateboard investigation.”
“You mean in the future when we’re all riding hoverboards?” Jason asks, causing some laughter among the cadets.
Watch your penmanship as you complete your fill-in sheets. If you aren’t neat and disciplined in your notebook, you won’t be organized and disciplined as a detective!
Jeffries keeps going. “Yes, but imagine I’m writing about you from the nation of France. If my writing is historically accurate, I’ll mention you by name, right? I’ll use your correct names: Jason, Daniel, Hannah, and all the rest of you, right?”
“I suppose so,” says Jason. “But I don’t get your point.”
“Well,” continues Jeffries, “if I was making up the story from France one hundred years from now, how would I know what names to use? Think about it. In France the popular names for boys and girls would be different. Maybe Serge, Neville, or Blaise.”
“Hmm, I guess so,” says Jason.
“Well, the writers of the Gospels always used the correct names that were popular in the area where Jesus lived, at the time when Jesus lived, even though the popular names in other parts of the world were very different. Those ancient writers couldn’t research this on the Internet. They wouldn’t know the popular names during Jesus’s lifetime unless they were there. This is another piece of evidence to prove the Gospels were written early and right in the area where people would know if they contained lies.”
“But how do we know they weren’t lying about the stuff that we can’t verify with archaeology or names?” asks Jason again.
Jeffries sits down with the cadets. “Let’s jump down to question #4. Did the authors have a reason to lie? What would they get for their trouble? They ended up dying for their claims and there isn’t any evidence that they got rich or successful, or even popular! Many of them were put to death for teaching about Jesus, but none ever changed his story.”
Remember that witnesses can report things differently yet still tell the truth. Now you know how to test witnesses, and when you apply the four-part test to the witness accounts in the Bible, you’ll find the Gospels are reliable, even though they are slightly different in places.
Jason almost seems convinced, but asks another question. “Okay then. What about the question you skipped? How do you know the story of Jesus wasn’t just changed over time? Maybe the first version didn’t even contain all the miracles I read about last week. What if those parts were added later by people who had something to gain?”
Everyone in the room gets suddenly silent.
“Oooh,” says Jeffries, smiling at Jason. “Now you’re starting to think like a detective! I’ll help you answer that question the next time we meet.”