Week 1: Introduction — The Reluctant Detective

1.Wallace describes himself as a "professional skeptic" who came to faith not through an emotional experience but through an investigation. What is your own starting posture toward the claims of Christianity — believer, skeptic, or somewhere in between? How does knowing the author's background affect the way you approach this book?

2.Wallace distinguishes between "faith" as blind belief and faith as "trust based on evidence." Why does this distinction matter for how we engage with Christianity? How have you previously understood the relationship between faith and evidence?

3.The book is built on the analogy of Christianity as a "cold case" — an event from the distant past with no living eyewitnesses available for cross-examination. What makes cold cases uniquely difficult to prosecute? What tools does a detective still have available, and how might those tools apply to evaluating historical claims about Jesus?

4.Wallace says he resisted Christianity for years partly because he assumed it required abandoning reason. Have you ever felt that tension — that being intellectually honest and being a Christian were somehow in conflict? Where did that impression come from?

5.The introduction frames the entire book as an exercise in "abductive reasoning" — inferring the best explanation from available evidence. How is this different from either deductive proof or mere speculation? Can you think of everyday decisions you make using this kind of reasoning?

6.What do you hope to gain from this study? Write down one honest question or doubt you are bringing into the investigation, and share it with your group if you feel comfortable doing so.