Reading Time: 7 minutes

It is common for a person to experience grief hallucinations following the death of a loved one. This theory enjoyed popularity over 100 years ago, very few still try it today as the theory suffers from a number of problems

1a. We know hallucinations are private occurrences, not collective

Clinical psychologist Gary R. Collins in a personal conversation recorded in Gary R. Habermas and J. P. Moreland said,  

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 in somebody else. Since a hallucination exists only in this objective, personal sense, it is obvious that others cannot witness it.

Gary R. Habermas and J. P. Moreland, Beyond Death

Dr Gary Sibcy said to Mike Licona in a private email

I have surveyed the professional literature (peer-reviewed journal articles and books) written by psychologists, psychiatrists, and other relevant healthcare professionals during the past two decades and have yet to find a single documented case of a group hallucination, an event for which more than one person purportedly shared in a visual or other sensory perception where there was clearly no referent.”

Dr Gary Sibcy to Mike Licona in a private email

Example 1

The best comparison to understand this is dreamstates. Imagine you wake up from your dream, tell your partner “I had a dream we were on a beach in Hawaii, come join me in the dream now!” There is no phenomena that this is at all possible to be in the same moment declared in any encyclopedia of psychology.

Example 2

Imagine you’re out at sea and your ship sinks. You and your buddies have barely slept and not eaten for days, then you have a strong desire for rescue.

On the horizon one of them sees a ship on the horizon, a hallucination, but the others don’t see it so you know it’s false. What if three of your buddies hallucinate and see a ship with the common causal goal. When that ship comes close enough will you be able to verify the hull number in each hallucination?

No, there are no such thing as group hallucinations.

1b. The disciples would have to require multiple group hallucinations

The disciples claimed, as a group they saw the risen Jesus. This is stated in the earliest tradition of the church in an early creed: “He appeared to Cephas(Peter), then to the twelve” (1 Cor 15:5). Since Cephas is one of the 12, the creed is certainly referring to a group appearance to the twelve otherwise it would of said “He appeared to Cephas, then to the rest of the twelve”. Paul reports that he appeared to 500 at one time and that the witnesses were still alive to be asked (1 Cor 15:6) . Then reports he appeared to all apostles (1 Cor 15:7). We have multiple group appearances in books critical scholars accept as genuine historical writings (7 of 11 of the letters of Paul). These appearances are also recorded in the Gospels and Acts, not just by Paul.

Peer reviewed work on hallucinations also reports that they most often manifest in one sensory mode such as auditory or visual and then multimode. Hallucinations of both kinds are exceptionally rare. The appearances to Jesus contain both of these elements, making the hallucination theory exceptionally improbable. In order to explain this, you would have to say the disciples were all having a multi-mode hallucination at the same time and that they are all agreeing Jesus is doing certain things like eating and drinking and giving specific instructions and this would of had to happen multiple times. The Jesus appearances appear in group settings, (1 cor 15:3-7; Acts 2:32; 13:30-32)

Multi-sensory and over a period of time (Acts 10:34-43; 22:7-9; 26:12-18). Hallucinations with these elements are so improbable it would have to be a miracle to cause one, let alone several.

Appearances chart

2nd. Hallucinations do not account for the empty tomb.

Even if they had hallucinated, his body would still be in the tomb, the Romans and Jews could’ve easily put to bed their experience by showing them the body.

3rd. Hallucinations do not account for the conversion of persecutor Paul. 

He hated Christians and Jesus and was persecuting him. Grief hallucinations make no sense to Paul’s frame of mind.

4th. Hallucinations do not account for the sceptic James

Although our information on James is more minimal than Paul, there is no evidence to suggest James was stricken by grief over the death of his brother. James did not believe Jesus was the Messiah, he thought Jesus was deluded in fact. James was a pious Jew, Jesus was challenging the Jewish system. He would have seen his brother crucified as a false Messiah who had been cursed by God. It’s not the frame of mind that psychologists align to grief hallucinations, you don’t get them over matters of this description. Importantly, to more than just James, there was no Jewish expectation of a dying and rising Messiah

5th. There are too many variances

Imagine loads of people ring the police claiming to see a UFO and all the callers don’t know each other, but describe a similar scene, even those sceptical to aliens. We may not conclude that there are UFO’s, but we can know they were not hallucinating. Likewise, countless people over 40 days, men, women and children all report seeing Jesus multiple times, people from different areas all claiming the same thing. Christian philosopher Tim McGrew says it like this, (and I’m paraphrasing), “

A hallucination of Jesus to just one disciple would represent a very serious mental illness. And once we take into account that each disciple experienced appearances, we’re talking about several people all coming down with a serious mental illness all at one time. But then it didn’t just happen once, Jesus appeared the disciples over the course of 40 days. So this mental illness left everyone as suddenly as it came.

Tim McGrew, Analytic Philosopher

Not all these people would be in the same state of mind, the 12 would have maybe had a much greater affection. But this pushes beyond a reasonable doubt that they could not all of hallucinated. There are probably more refutations for this theory than any other anti-resurrection theory

Leonard Zusne’s theory of excitement

Leonard Zusne produced one of the few writings on group hallucinations saying that if there is an expectation, emotional excitement and people informed beforehand, group hallucination maybe possible. Like those on a light boat all thinking they see land in the distance, it is also believed they will vary in what is reported.

1. Expectation and excitement were not present in the disciples

The narratives embarrassingly portray the disciples as cowards and running for their lives (Matthew 26:31-35, 56; Mark 15:50; John 20:19). They even doubted the report of the women (Luke 24:11; John 20:24-28). When the disciples saw Jesus they were frightened (Luke 24:37-38) which shows they weren’t excited and didn’t know what was going on.

2. If the appearances WERE hallucinations, then they do not fit the criteria of varying drastically between reports

All reports of the bodily resurrection of Jesus are where he looks like himself but also looks slightly different and his body has new powers it did not have before.

As William Lane Craig says “The fact remains that there is not a single instance in the casebooks exhibiting the diversity involved in the post mortem appearances of Jesus”.

The biggest problem with the hallucination theory is that even if to discount the gospels as unreliable, you still have to deal with the earliest accounts of Christians preaching bodily resurrection and not a spiritual appearance. 

3. The disciples knew the difference to visions and reality

In Acts 12:14-15 we see signs that the disciples knew what visions were. When the woman claims to hear Peter’s voice, they infer she is out of her mind, that it must’ve been an angel after her insisting. So they knew the difference through their attempted explanations. They also never interpreted the appearances of Christ as a vision (1 cor 15; Mark 16:1-8; Acts 2:22-36; Matthew 28; Luke 24; John 20 & 21). Sceptical scholar Gerd Ludemann confesses “We have no sound way to place the symbolic interpretation of Jesus’ resurrection within the context of earliest. Christian resurrection belief.”

So the appearances were: 

1. Group-settings
2. Multi-sensory
3. Did not vary
4. Were not interpreted to be spiritual early on 
5. No initial expectation
6. No initial excitement

Hallucination cannot account for these.

Structured response

1. Hallucinations are not group occurrences, you cannot join one like a dream, nor have they ever happened in history. Psychology also does not claim such events can happen
2. Hallucinations do not account for the tomb being empty, The Romans could just bring out the body unless you’re claiming the whole of Jerusalem and more hallucinated an empty tomb
3. Paul would not suffer hallucinations with no reason to
4. James saw his brother as a heretic and a proud Jew, it’s highly unlikely that a man not haunted by Jesus’ death likely would not have hallucinated a glorious vision of his brother.
5. There are many variances, many occasions and many different testimonies scattered throughout. Like seeing a crime scene from varying angles
6. Hallucinations were not down to excitement like land on the horizon, the disciples lack prior excitement.

Sources for ‘Hallucinations’

• Gary R. Collins — Beyond Death (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 1998), 119–20
• More references to group appearances — Luke 24: 33–36. Notice that the appearance to Simon Peter (i.e., Cephas) is mentioned here. See 1 Corinthians 15: 5. The other Gospels also record group appearances: Matthew 28: 9, 16–20; Mark 16: 7; John 20: 19–30; 21: 1–22; Acts 1:3-9
• Multi sensory – Hallucinations: The Scientific Idiosyncratic Perception, Andre Aleman and Frank Larøi, p25-46
• Quote from Mike Licona—The Resurrection of Jesus, p484
• Paul’s opposition to the Christians — Galatians 1: 13–14; Philippians 3: 4–8.
• Cursed by God — Deuteronomy 21: 23; Galatians 3: 13.
• More refutations for this theory than many others — Gary R. Habermas, “Explaining Away Jesus’ Resurrection: The Recent Revival of Hallucination Theories,” Christian Research Journal 23.4 (2001): 26–31, 47–49.
• William Lane Craig, Jesus’ Resurrection: Fact or figment?, p190