Introduction

Traditionally, Christians hold that Jesus of Nazareth was bodily raised from the dead three days after His crucifixion. The Hallucination Theory, however, questions this traditional understanding. According to the Hallucination Theory, the disciples merely hallucinated the risen Christ. Thus, Jesus never bodily rose from the dead and the resurrection stories in the Gospels are a record of hallucinogenic experiences.

Consequently, if the Hallucination Theory is true, Christianity is false. As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:17, “And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!” Therefore, this issue is important because it attacks the very foundation of Christianity. This paper presents a positive case for why the Hallucination Theory fails as an explanation for the resurrection of Jesus because it cannot account for the empty tomb, group experiences, and the sincere belief of the disciples.  

Definitions

Before delving into the arguments, it is important to first define terms. When talking about hallucinations, one must distinguish between illusions, delusions, and hallucinations. Illusions are “misrepresentations of reality, which… can generally be ‘worked around’ without great difficulty from the moment one becomes aware of the faulty processing that underpins them.”[1] An example of an illusion would be when, in the dark, someone mistakenly thinks they see a person when, in reality; it is a coat hanger with a hat. Delusions, on the other hand, are “false beliefs held with conviction despite evidence to the contrary.”[2] An example of a delusion would be if someone believes he has $500 in his bank account, yet, multiple bank tellers and the man’s own family show him sufficient evidence that he only has $100 in his account. Despite the evidence, the man still strongly asserts that he has $500 in the bank. Lastly, hallucinations are defined as “perceptions that occur in the absence of corresponding external stimuli.”[3] An example of this would be when a person, who has been lost at sea several days, thinks he sees a ship when, in reality; no object is there. It is important to keep these definitions in mind as this topic is engaged.

While there are many good reasons to reject the Hallucination Theory, due to brevity, this paper presents three of the strongest arguments against this theory.

The Empty Tomb

If the hallucination theory were true, Christ’s body would still be in the tomb. Yet, the tomb of Christ was discovered empty.[4] In response to this claim, New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman argues that Jesus was not buried in a tomb. Instead, Ehrman believes Jesus was left on the cross “to decompose and serve as food for scavenging animals.”[5] Christ’s body was afterward “tossed into a common grave,” as was customary for crucified victims.[6] Although Ehrman is correct that the Romans generally placed crucified victims in common graves,[7] there are three reasons to think Jesus’ body was given a proper burial as the Gospels describe.

The first reason to believe that Jesus’ body was given a proper burial is the archaeological evidence that some crucified victims did receive a proper burial. Perhaps the most famous case is that of Jehohanan, a crucifixion victim in the first century AD who was discovered with a 4.5 inch long nail through his heel bone.[8] Jehohanan had been buried in an ossuary; thus, providing evidence that crucified victims could receive a proper burial.[9]

The second reason to believe that Jesus’ body was given a proper burial is that, according to New Testament scholar Maurice Casey, it was against Jewish law to leave a body “on a cross overnight because [it] defiled the land.”[10] Pilate would have been willing to concede to Joseph of Arimathea’s request to allow Christ’s body to receive a proper burial. This is because, as atheist historian Richard Carrier notes, “Judea at that time was still under treaty with Rome…. That treaty explicitly said the Roman government would respect the Jewish laws. The Jewish laws mandated proper burial before sundown of any who died—including, and indeed explicitly, executed criminals.”[11] This provides strong correspondence to the request made by Joseph of Arimathea.

The third reason to believe that Jesus’ body was given a proper burial is that, if Jesus’ body were not buried in a tomb, His enemies would not have needed to invent a theory about what happened to His body. In Matthew 28:13, Jesus’ enemies claimed that the body of Jesus was stolen. This implies Jesus received a proper burial and that the tomb was later discovered empty.[12]

Another way skeptics attempt to address the empty tomb is to introduce an additional theory. For example, Bible scholar Stephen H. Smith believes it is possible that the women, “in their state of grief and confusion,” went to the wrong tomb.[13] This explanation, however, only complicates the matter more because it adds to the improbability. If, for example, there is a 1 in 4 chance that the disciples hallucinated and an equally 1 in 4 chance that the women went to the wrong tomb; when you put the two theories together, you now have a 1 in 16 chance of both being true.[14] Thus, adding a new theory also adds to the event’s improbability.

Group Hallucinations

            After His death, Jesus appeared to many different groups of people at many different times. The Hallucination Theory cannot account for these group appearances because hallucinations, like dreams, are individual experiences. Carrier disputes this claim by citing the apparition appearances of Mary to mass crowds.[15] The most popular of these Marian apparitions is the appearance at Fatima.[16] According to Carrier, a large multitude of people gathered at Fatima, Portugal and witnessed “some unusual light phenomena associated with the sun.”[17] The witnesses claimed to have observed a miracle of Mary, when in reality they had only seen “an ambiguous dance of light” and interpreted it as the form in which Mary appeared to them.[18] Thus, Carrier concludes that mass hallucinations of this sort can explain the experiences found in the Gospels.[19]

            Carrier’s hypothesis fails as a sufficient explanation for two main reasons. The first reason is that Carrier’s use of the word “hallucination” is imprecise. Remember that a hallucination is when a person sees something when nothing is actually present. This does not describe the events that took place at Fatima. The crowd truly did see light but misinterpreted that light as coming from Mary. Some of the people at Fatima claimed to have seen the sun “dancing over the heads” of people before returning to its normal position.[20] This phenomenon is better explained as an illusion since the people truly did see a light, but it appeared to perform an action that was not actually taking place.

            The second reason Carrier’s hypothesis fails as a sufficient explanation is that Carrier assumes all of these experiences with Mary are hallucinations.[21] He does so due to his belief in naturalism. Yet, if one does not begin with naturalistic assumptions, there are other possible explanations for why people have experiences with Mary. In their book, The Cult of the Virgin, Elliot Miller and Kenneth Samples investigate many of the acclaimed Marian apparitions. In the months leading up to the occurrence at Fatima, three little children had experiences and received messages from an apparition of Mary. They received prophecies of future events and even the title of a book to read.[22] Based on their investigation of many different events, Miller and Samples concluded that some of these experiences involved people coming into contact with demonic entities who portrayed themselves as Mary.[23] This should come as no surprise since the Bible warns us that “Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness…” (2 Cor. 11:14-15). Carrier, however, cannot allow this as an explanation since he excludes the spiritual realm from the outset.

            Stephen Smith and Gerd Ludemann offer an alternative view to explain the occurrence of mass hysteria. According to Smith, there are numerous examples of one person experiencing a hallucination or some similar type of experience, which then results in others having similar encounters due to their excitement upon hearing the first person’s experience.[24] Smith and Ludemann believe it is probable that Peter hallucinated the risen Christ; he then told the other disciples, who in turn became excited and began to have their own experiences with Christ.[25] Ludemann says that Peter caused a “chain reaction” by telling the other disciples.[26]

            This hypothesis is inadequate for several reasons. First, it does not align with what is portrayed in the Gospels. When the women tell the disciples that Jesus had risen from the grave, “their words seemed to them like idle tales, and they did not believe them” (Luke 24:11). Rather than being excited and easily convinced of Christ’s resurrection, the disciples doubted. Even after Christ had appeared to the disciples the first time, Thomas still did not believe because he had not experienced it for himself (John 20:24-29). Additionally, when Jesus does appear to the disciples, they first believe they are seeing “a spirit” (Luke 24:37). Jesus had to prove that He was in a physical body before His disciples were convinced of their experience (Luke 24:38-42). Thus, what is found in the Gospels is the opposite of what one would expect if Smith and Ludemann’s hypothesis were true.

            Second, the disciples were not in the correct frame of mind for this to occur. Smith and Ludemann’s hypothesis requires a state of excitement. However, after Christ’s death, the disciples were devastated. As noted in the previous paragraph, instead of getting excited, the disciples consistently disbelieved the reports of Christ’s resurrection. Therefore, “the prerequisite of emotional excitement is… missing.”[27]

            Third, mass hallucinations do not alter physical reality.[28] In His appearances to the disciples, Jesus “broke bread in their presence,” “ate fish in front of all the disciples,” and “started a fire, cooked fish, and ate breakfast.”[29] Hallucinations cannot account for such physical phenomena.

            Fourth, Smith and Ludemann’s hypothesis does not account for the non-recognition experiences and new information the disciples received.[30] Mary Magdalene, the Emmaus disciples, and the seven disciples fishing all did not initially recognize Jesus.[31] Yet, this initial non-recognition is always “overturned by the end of the encounter with Jesus.”[32] Since hallucinations come from within a person’s own mind, it makes no sense why they would not recognize Jesus.[33] Along this same line of reasoning, “new information unknown to the hallucinator would not be given because hallucinations are mental projections derived from the content of the hallucinator’s own mind…”[34] In other words, the only information hallucinators can receive is information they already know. Thus, the Hallucination Theory fails to account for the new information given to Christ’s followers.

            One last major argument skeptics propose to account for group hallucinations is the reality of grief or bereavement hallucinations. Grief hallucination is a term used to describe those who hallucinate a deceased loved one during a time of grief following the loved one’s death.[35] These experiences can involve visual, auditory, and even multi-sensory experiences.[36] Smith believes that grief hallucinations are “the most appropriate model to apply to the resurrection accounts, given that the disciples would have been in a state of shock and bereavement in the wake of Jesus’ crucifixion.”[37]

            Although it is true that the disciples were in a state of grief, grief hallucinations are still inadequate to account for the evidence. According to medical doctor Joseph Bergeron, “hallucinatory symptoms during bereavement are… most often experienced by a widowed spouse.”[38] Furthermore, visual apparitions during grief are the least common.[39] Even when visual apparitions do appear, “attempting to interact with an apparition causes it to disappear.”[40] The disciples were not widows and their interaction with Jesus did not cause Jesus to disappear. Therefore, grief hallucinations do not align with the disciples’ experience.

Sincere Belief

            The disciples were willing to die for what they had seen, heard, and touched.[41] The Hallucination Theory does not adequately explain the sincere belief and preaching displayed among the apostles. In response to this view, Stephen Smith argues that hallucinations provide a “sufficient sense of reality.”[42] People often describe themselves as “wide awake” when experiencing a hallucination.[43] These experiences can involve all the senses and even multiple senses at one time, making the experience feel like reality.[44] In fact, those who experience grief hallucinations are often “no longer afraid of death” since they are reassured “they will be reunited with their loved one.”[45] Therefore, hallucinations can account for the sincere belief of the disciples.

            It is first important to note that there is some agreement with Smith’s theory. Hallucinations can result in a sincere belief of certain things. For example, those who saw the “dance of light” at Fatima believed they witnessed a supernatural display of Mary. Or, as discussed previously, those who experience grief hallucinations often experience a real “sense of presence.” Consequently, if the disciples had hallucinated, it could possibly account for their belief that Jesus had risen “spiritually” and that they now had hope of being reunited with Him in the afterlife, resulting in their willingness to die.

However, hallucinations cannot account for the sincere belief in the bodily resurrection of Jesus. The central message of the New Testament is the bodily resurrection of Christ. Both Peter and Paul preached that Christ’s body did not see corruption as David’s body did (Acts 2:31; Acts 13:36-37). This implies a bodily resurrection. Additionally, Peter himself had investigated the tomb to verify the empty tomb account of the women. Experiencing a “sense of presence” does not result in belief that one has been bodily raised from the dead. Smith himself admits: “None of those who experience bereavement hallucinations today are in any doubt that if the graves of the deceased were to be examined, their remains would be found to be present.”[46] Yet, in the Gospel accounts and Acts, the disciples do expect people to find an empty grave. Therefore, hallucinations cannot account for the disciples’ sincere belief that Jesus bodily rose from the dead.

Conclusion

The Hallucination Theory inadequately addresses the evidence surrounding the resurrection of Jesus. In fact, the Hallucination Theory requires adherents to believe the disciples, who were of different ages and different personalities, began having group experiences at many different locations and times. As Gary Habermas points out, “It pushes credulity beyond reason to regard every last one of these appearances as hallucinations.”[47]

Citations

[1] Antoine Panaioti, “Illusion or Delusion? A Re-examination of Buddhist Philosophy of Personal Identity,” Zygon 56, no. 4 (2021): 847, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy.biola.edu/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-9744.

[2] Rachel Gunn and Michael Larkin, “Delusion Formation as an Inevitable Consequence of a Radical Alteration in Lived Experience,” Psychosis 12, no. 2 (June 2020): 151, https://doi.org/10.1080/17522439.2019.1690562.

[3] Wei Lin Toh, Mikaela Bere, and Susan L. Rossell, “Distinguishing Multimodal Versus Multisensory Hallucinations in Psychosis: Key Definitions and a Way Forward,” Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 56 (May 2022): 445-450, https://doi.org/10.1177/00048674211031455.

[4] Matthew 28:5-7; Mark 16:6; Luke 24:1-3; John 20:1-2.

[5] Bart Ehrman, How Jesus Became God: the Exaltation of a Jewish Preacher from Galilee (New York, NY: HarperCollins, 2014), 157.

[6] Ibid., 161.

[7] Maurice Casey, Jesus of Nazareth: An Independent Historian’s Account of His Life and Teaching (New York: T&T Clark International, 2010), 448.

[8] Titus Kennedy, Unearthing the Bible: 101 Archaeological Discoveries that Bring the Bible to Life (Eugene, OR: Harvest, 2020), 195.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Casey, Jesus of Nazareth, 449.

[11] Richard Carrier, “Ms. Christian Apologist on Empty Tomb Stuff,” Richard Carrier (blog), September 28, 2017, https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/12786.

[12] Gary Habermas and Michael Licona, The Case for the Resurrection (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2004), 71.

[13] Stephen H. Smith, “Seeing Things: Best Explanations and the Resurrection of Jesus,” The Heythrop Journal 61, no. 4 (July 2020): 691, https://doi.org/10.1111/heyj.13316.

[14] Habermas and Licona, The Case for the Resurrection, 120-121.

[15] Richard Carrier, “Then He Appeared to Over Five Hundred Brethren at Once!” Richard Carrier (blog), June 28, 2018, https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/14255.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Elliot Miller and Kenneth R. Samples, The Cult of the Virgin: Catholic Mariology and the Apparitions of Mary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994), 96.

[21] Carrier, “Then He Appeared.”

[22] Miller and Samples, The Cult of the Virgin, 93-97.

[23] Ibid.

[24] Stephen H. Smith, “He Appeared to Peter: Reconsidering the Hallucination Hypothesis,” Neotestamentica 53, no. 1 (2019): 68-70, https://newtestament.org.za/neotestamentica/.

[25] Smith, “He Appeared to Peter,” 68-70; John J. Johnson, “Were the Resurrection Appearances Hallucinations?: Some Psychiatric and Psychological Considerations,” Churchman 115, no. 3 (August 2001): 228, http://churchsociety.org/churchman/archive/.

[26] The Veritas Forum, “The Possibility of Resurrection – William Lane Craig and Gerd Ludemann at Cal Poly SLO,” June 25, 2012, video, 1:17:50, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MWcFv0ySm0.

[27] Zachary Breitenbach, “A New Argument that Collective Hallucinations Do Not Adequately Account for the Group Appearances of Jesus in the Gospels,“ Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 62, no. 2 (2019): 345, http://www.etsjets.org/.

[28] Ibid., 349.

[29] Ibid.

[30] Ibid.

[31] Ibid., 347.

[32] Ibid., 348.

[33] Ibid., 347-349.

[34] Ibid., 349.

[35] Pablo Sabucedo, Chris Evans, Anastasios Gaitanidis, and Jacqueline Hayes, “When Experiences of Presence Go Awry: A Survey on Psychotherapy Practice with the Ambivalent-to-Distressing ‘Hallucination’ of the Deceased,” Psychology & Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice 94 (April 2021): 465, https://doi.org/10.1111/papt.12285.

[36] Ibid.

[37] Smith, “Seeing Things,” 696-697.

[38] Joseph W. Bergeron, “Do Hallucinations Explain Jesus’s Resurrection?” Crucifixion Doctor (blog), October 8, 2020, https://www.crucifixiondoctor.com/hallucinations-hypothesis-resurrect/.

[39] Ibid.

[40] Ibid.

[41] Breitenbach, “Collective Hallucinations,” 341.

[42] Smith, “He Appeared to Peter,” 65.

[43] Ibid.

[44] Toh, Bere, and Rossell, “Distinguishing Multimodel,” 446.

[45] Worth Kilcrease, “Is it Real, or is it Hallucination?” Psychology Today (blog), August 11, 2008, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-journey-ahead/200808/is-it-real-or-is-it-hallucination.

[46] Smith, “Seeing Things,” 694.

[47] Habermas and Licona, The Case for the Resurrection, 109.