Is the Hallucination Theory for Jesus's Resurrection valid?

[AgnosticBoy]

Here's the theory in a nutshell:

While most of these naturalistic explanations have been rejected as implausible by contemporary critics of Jesus’ bodily resurrection, one particular theory has begun to gain traction in skeptical circles. This hypothesis is known as the “hallucination theory.” The hallucination theory attempts to account for the testimony to the resurrection of Jesus by claiming both auditory and visual hallucinations on the part of Jesus’ disciples. Proponents of this view claim that Jesus’ disciples really did “see” Jesus, but that these sightings were merely hallucinations in the minds of Christ’s followers, not genuine encounters with a resurrected man. The hallucinations, or sightings, are claimed to have happened repeatedly and are said to have been so vivid as to convince Christ’s followers that Jesus actually had risen from the dead.

The advantage of this proposal is two-fold. First, the proponents of this theory need not engage the impressive evidence for the life-changing transformation of the disciples based on their newfound belief in Christ’s resurrection. Rather, the skeptic can grant that there were “appearances” of some sort without conceding the occurrence of a miracle. The second move is to then explain these “appearances” as subjective hallucinations, events that took place only in the minds of the disciples.

Source: https://www.gotquestions.org/hallucination-theory.html

My personal position is that from a scientific standpoint, no one knows what the disciples saw. I can understand that hallucinations would have the best chances of being correct or more likely, but that's only based on background knowledge from what we know can or has happened. I don't see that theory as definitive unless there was evidence that applied to the resurrection itself (as opposed to going off prior events/observations of the world). But I'll put it up for debate.

For Debate:
1. Is there any evidence for the hallucination theory regarding Jesus's post-mortem appearances?
2. If there is no evidence for it, then why should anyone believe it?
3. Is there evidence against such a theory?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

To tackle this issue, I first wanted to learn how mass hallucinations, also called 'collective hallucinations', work. So far, I've come across one source but it's from biblical scholars. This part stood out to me regarding group hallucinations:

However, the hypothesis has not gone uncriticised, with the strongest argument against it being that the fact of group resurrection appearances is incompatible with hallucinations because group hallucinations are impossible.3

Footnote 3 says this:

. Habermas and Licona (Case, 303) give the following quotation from clinical psychologist Gary Collins on the supposed impossibility of collective hallucinations: ‘Hallucinations are individual occurrences. By their very nature only one person can see any given hallucination at a time. They certainly are not something which can be seen by a group of people. Neither is it possible that one person could somehow induce a hallucination

Source: https://www.tyndalebulletin.org/article/29267-jesus-resurrection-and-collective-hallucinations.pdf

Edit to add... Oops.. kept reading a found this:

Yet, when accounts of modern-day religious visions are examined, it becomes clear that there actually are well-documented cases of group religious visions which possess characteristics indicating that these visions are very likely hallucinatory. Recognising that religiously inspired group hallucinations do occur requires that the hallucination hypothesis can no longer be dismissed by appealing to the impossibility of group hallucinations. If a satisfactory argument against the hallucination hypothesis is to be made, that argument must take into account the fact of collective hallucinations.

reading in progress...

Feel free anyone to post any academic/scientific journals that actually document collective hallucinations.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Alright, just finished the article I linked to earlier, and I'll highlight the main points...

Characteristics of collective or group hallucinations (From pg. 84-86 - JESUS’ RESURRECTION AND COLLECTIVE HALLUCINATIONS by Jake O'Connell):
- The Visions Are Expected
- Extreme stress
- Not everyone sees the vision
- Those Who Do See the Vision See It Differently
In case 1, Walker mentions a wide variety of different things being seen. In case 3, different miracles were seen in the Eucharist: some seeing only the child Jesus, some Jesus with his heart bleeding, some Jesus holding his hand to stop the bleeding, others the monstrance illuminated.
- The Vision Never Carries on a Conversation
It is also significant that in no case does the vision ever carry on a conversation with the recipients. This is important because a group conversation would be impossible if the vision was a hallucination.

cont'd

Second, that actual examples of group hallucinations are now available to examine, means that the question of whether or not the group resurrection appearances should be considered hallucinations largely depends on whether the appearances can be shown to be similar to, or different from, these collective hallucinations. By examining the cases above, we can deduce what the resurrection appearances would have looked like if the hallucination hypothesis is correct. The group appearances (although not necessarily the individual appearances): 1) would have been expected; 2) would probably have involved some external signs of extreme stress (e.g.fainting); 3) would have involved Jesus being seen only by some members of the group; 4) would have involved Jesus being seen differently by those who did see him; 5) would not have involved Jesus conducting group conversations. It is clear that in their present form the resurrection narratives do not characterise the appearances in these ways.

In the resurrection narratives, Jesus’ appearances are not typically expected, there is little to indicate extreme stress, there is no indication that not everyone saw Jesus nor that different people saw him differently, and Jesus often conducts group conversations. However, since there is significant disagreement among scholars regarding the historical reliability of the resurrection narratives, the mere fact that the narratives are inconsistent with collective hallucinations is unlikely to convince many that the original appearances were likewise inconsistent with collective hallucinations.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

1. Is there any evidence for the hallucination theory regarding Jesus's post-mortem appearances?

There is evidence that collective hallucinations do occur, but I see no evidence that the apostles were hallucinating. I asked myself, what evidence would there need to be? For instance, if a physical Jesus walks in front of a group of people, then you would expect all of them to see him. If only one or a few in the group saw Jesus walking by, then I would say that is consistent with hallucinations. As it stands, at least according to the Gospels, many people saw Jesus, some times all at once. They had conversations with him, even. Hek, the guy was even eating. How do you hallucinate someone eating? I'd think you would notice the food is still there.

2. If there is no evidence for it, then why should anyone believe it?

The only reasonable grounds for believing that the apostles were going through some grief hallucinations of some sort is our knowledge of the world. To date, our knowledge shows that dead bodies don't come back to life. So based on what we do know, it is unlikely that Jesus came back to life. There's more chances than not that he remains dead. BUT, that's where evidence for the resurrection can come in and change that probability, or at least we can say something improbable occurred.

3. Is there evidence against such a theory?

I believe the strongest evidence against the hallucination theory is in the details of what the witnesses, including apostles, reported. They talked, walked, and ate with Jesus. If all of those actions, which involve more than just seeing some glimpse of something, can be considered hallucinations, then you may as well just say that your reading my post here could also be an hallucination!