Last time, we began to explore what a hallucination theory concerning the apostle Peter’s experiences would look like. From that exploration, we concluded that Peter neither had the “anticipating spirit” nor the “hopeful expectancy” to have hallucinated a risen Jesus. Much of the same can be said of hallucination theories concerning Paul’s experience as well.
Similar to Peter, critics often theorize that Paul’s experience was a hallucination of the risen Jesus. However, it is postulated in Paul’s case that his hallucination was not driven by bereavement over Jesus’ death but by his own internal mental tension. Recently, skeptical scholars like Michael Goulder have suggested that Paul had “secret doubts about the Christian teachings and the Jewish faith.” And Paul may have had doubts brought about by a “growing distaste for Judaism.”
Goulder further postulates that Paul had a secret Gentile friend from childhood that also influenced his cognitive dissonance. And that ultimately led to his hallucination and conversion. Based on these theories, Paul’s internal conflict became too great, and he hallucinated Jesus on the road to Damascus. However, it seems to me that to claim that Paul hallucinates Jesus in response to intense internal tension is to argue from both silence and extreme distance. Hallucination researcher Michael Licona rightly notes, “Psychoanalyzing persons who are not only absent but who lived in an ancient foreign culture involves a great deal of speculation and is a challenging and chancy practice.”
Additionally, there is no evidence of any internal tension that influenced Paul’s decision between Judaism and Christianity. We find no indication in any of Paul’s later writings that he suffered from any internal conflict whatsoever. On the contrary, Paul seems to have been wholly committed to Judaism, all the while loathing Christianity (cf Phil 3:5ff). Nor is Paul in a state of expectancy for the risen Jesus to appear to him. Remember, such a mental disposition is necessary to conjure a hallucination from the content of their own mind. Paul would later refer to himself as a “Hebrew of Hebrews” (Phil 3:5). Like all Pharisaical Hebrews, Paul looked forward to a general resurrection later, not the resurrection of a single person in the present time. Finally, like Peter, Paul was utterly convinced the risen Jesus had appeared to him. Contemplating his own fate, Paul wrote the words “For me to live is Christ, and to die is gain” (Phil 1:21). Paul did die. In fact, it is historically “very certain” that Paul died specifically for holding fast to his conviction that the risen Jesus had appeared to him. Paul writes to his associate Timothy just before his death; “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith (2 Tim 4:6).
Now, in presenting hallucination theories as untenable, this does not mean that the Christian resurrection narrative merely wins by default. On the contrary, the Christian resurrection claim nicely accounts for our three historical bedrock facts and has greater power to explain the available evidence with the least amount of ambiguity. This means that the Christian resurrection hypothesis enjoys greater simplicity (and best satisfies Ockham’s Razor) thereby surpassing naturalistic hallucination theories.
Having investigated the phenomena of hallucinations and having considered the cases of Peter and Paul specifically, I am compelled to close this section where I began, and in doing so, I feel justified and secure in taking resurrection critic Bart Ehrman at his word when he says; “Either Jesus really appeared to his disciples after the crucifixion, or they were seeing things.” From what has been presented, it seems to me naturalistic theories involving both group and individual hallucinations attempting to explain what happened to Jesus after the crucifixion are implausible. If the disciples weren’t “seeing things,” then one can only conclude that they actually beheld the physical, risen Jesus. Otherwise, Jesus’ body should have been found “safely and securely in his grave.”
“Wait a minute! Wait just one minute!” Michael, the Bible skeptic, cries foul. But does he have a case? Over the last several weeks, I have repeatedly used the Bible and Bible verses as evidence to help determine what happened to Jesus after the crucifixion. It seems to me before we can move ahead, perhaps we need to spend a bit more time considering our sources. Join us next time as we begin to do just that. Until then, ask a close friend: is God dead?
Gloria in excelsis Deo!
