Were the Apostles Insane?

 

Did the Apostles experience a Hallucination of the Resurrection?

Or were they simply insane?

First, the insanity question.

First, we can establish that they couldn’t simply be insane in a normal way. When persecution arose, they would “crazy” their way out of it. They would simply come up with some other craziness. Instead, they had to be what psychiatrists call “delusional.” This is when a person holds a crazy belief and will not let it go.

Second, we can say that they were united in a commonly held crazy idea, if they were crazy. There had to be something to unify them. Insanity is like lying to yourself and believing it. It’s unlikely that multiple independent sources would invent the same exact lie. So something had to unify their delusions.

Third, we can say that they were not simply committed to the Resurrection. They were committed primarily to their own personal experiences of the risen Jesus.

Whatever drove them insane was “insanely” important to them. It was something external for them. And this is key. It would not have been erased from their records of the story. For them, this is the most important part of the story. This is what deluded them to the point of being willing to die. This is what changed them, this is what transformed them. Whatever it was, it would be in the story. Likewise, the fact that it changed them would also be in the story. They wouldn’t mention it but leave out the fact of how important it was for them.

So let’s be as clear as possible. It makes no sense for there to be some unknown apostle who convinced everyone that Jesus rose. That apostle would have been by far the most important of all. Whatever drove them to this level of insanity would have been incredibly important to them. Second, they would not leave out the part of the story where whatever it was convinces them. If they are insane, they are honest. They really believe it. And being convinced about a risen Jesus would have been the most important thing that ever happened to them.

We are left with three options then.

1)Jesus predicted His own death and Resurrection. Did that prediction delude them?

Probably it did not. They record it specifically as not changing them.

2)Was it perhaps Jesus’ prediction in combination with his death?

Probably not, they record this specifically as not changing them.

3)Was it His appearance to them?

Bingo! They report this as exactly what changed them. Remember, we are asking whether the Apostles were delusional but also true believers. Whatever deluded them, that they had in common, was most important to them. This is why hallucination theory is much more of a serious debate in the academic discussion. They saw something.

Did they hallucinate?

ONE: Hallucinations are uncommon

First, let’s establish what type of hallucination we are talking about because this is a issue of the human brain which science knows a lot about. A hallucination occurs when someone’s brain literally malfunctions. You actually see something that isn’t there. It can be an event that you experience, then never happens again. This works better as an alternative to the Resurrection.

Paul attests that he both heard and saw Jesus in Galatians 1. He was both blinded in the Acts account and taught his Gospel message in his report to the Galatians.

The church historian Eusebius quotes a letter from Irenaus to Florinius in the 300’s. Since this is a quotation and probably from the library at Cesarea, it’s unlikely that he faked the quote. It’s basically a cited source. (Eusebius Church History bk 5 ch 20 v4)

Irenaus writes in roughly 180 AD to Florinius about how Polycarp told them he was taught by John. Since Florinius would instantly know if they had not been taught by Polycarp, it’s safe to say they were taught by Polycarp. And we have a lot of the letters of Ignatius showing he corresponded in writing with Polycarp. Thus, we can say that even if Polycarp was lying about knowing John, he was still close enough to the apostles for it to be believable. Ignatius tells Polycarp’s church (Smyrna) that the apostles heard, saw, and touched Jesus. He specifically mentions Peter and “those with him” (Ignatius to Smyrneans 3). So does that mean at least Paul, Peter and at least one more person? At a minimum, we have three people who heard and saw the risen Christ and were martyred.

Furthermore, Ignatius was martyred in Rome which could probably be researched. Using the modern tools over at orbis.standford.edu we can do some work. Ignatius went on a sort of Martyr walk from Antioch to be executed in Rome. He wrote letters to Christian churches in various cities along the way. We get this list:

Philadelphia to Rome: 30.8 days

Philippi to Rome: 20.4 days

Ephesus to Rome: 16.2 days

Magnesia to Rome: 16.9 days

Smyrna to Rome: 17.6 days

Tralles to Rome: 17.9 days

He wrote letters to various churches along the way asking them not to prevent him from being martyred. He honestly believed in Christianity. Polycarp was also martyred which we know from later Christian historians and is generally accepted. Remember that the earlier Christians had also been martyred. Thus they were not the type to lie about these issues.

Importantly, the Greek word for Resurrection was a word that the Jews used for a specific teaching, It specifically meant a bodily Resurrection, not a purely spiritual one. They had another word for that. So the continued use of this particular word means it was the standard teaching. The Jews widely held a belief in a bodily Resurrection of the dead. It was for all people at the end of time. Then came judgment. It was specifically bodily. And that’s what this word, “anastasis” means. The meaning comes from how they use it. “Ana” has a lot of meanings but it’s primarily “upward.” “Stasis” comes from “Histemi” which means “Stand.” Importantly, the key is how the word was used in Jewish literature, often written in Greek. There is ample evidence for the Jewish belief in a general Resurrection from the Bible alone. The Old Testament was an authoritative text for them. In both Isaiah 26, Daniel 12 describe this. The term “anastasis” is used to refer to this future event when the Jews translated Isaiah into Greek.

Oral tradition from 1 Corinthians (not Paul) tells us that James was also a witness to the Resurrection.

So we are talking about Paul having an auditory and visual hallucination. Given the info from Ignatius, Peter’s group probably does not include Paul. Based on Paul’s list in Corinthians (really an oral tradition) then Paul was not yet a Christian. Therefore we get Paul, Peter and at least two others. We combine with the simple use of the term “Resurrection” that was probably the norm for the witnesses. Thus we could probably add in James.

But were all of these people willing to die? Based on what we know, Paul, Peter and at least two other Apostles were. But really, Polycarp tells us it was “the rest of the Apostles.” We can also include James. Importantly, this much death means there was probably other death going on. And don’t forget all the evidence for violent persecution that is endured for years upon years while the victims managed to survive. Thus it is safe to say that these witnesses who were willing to die can at minimum include Peter and two Apostles, Paul and James. And these witnesses also had auditory visual hallucinations. Or they simply saw a Jesus that really Resurrected.

Auditory and Visual Hallucinations have a 0.8% (1/125) chance of occurring in general. Unless other evidence is given to raise the probabilities in this case, we should use this number. With 3 people, we have a 1/2Million chance of this occurring. If go to 4 we get 1/200Million. If we go to 5, we get 1/30Billion. What we are asking is like saying that you bought a lottery ticket and won. But if you bought 3 and all three won, you would have done something much more improbable.

Bereaved spouses are known to be the most prone to hallucinations with 7% having a visual hallucination. For our 5 witnesses, we get a 1.7/1 Million chance of this hallucination occurring. That’s considering this as a purely visual hallucination. And that’s considering the individuals are highly prone to visual hallucinations like bereaved spouses are.

We might ask whether the apostles took a hallucinogenic drug, but that is unlikely. First, the use of this drug to see the Risen Jesus would not have been left out by these true believers. They wouldn’t leave out the magical “See Jesus” drug. Instead, they would have had to take the drug by accident and not known it. Given that we have no evidence of this happening, the odds have to be the same as with a normal person. It’s not rational to consider something likely when you have no reason to do so.

But even if we did consider drug use, wouldn’t they accidentally take it again, and have more visions? Wouldn’t they then figure out that it was this substance that gave them the visions? Or are we expected to believe that they took it by accident and never did so again? Isn’t that also unlikely?

TWO: They had a way of interpreting hallucinations.

They had a way of interpreting hallucinations and dreams in this culture. For example, in Acts 12 Peter is believed to be dead. But then, a little girl named Rhoda says he is at the door in the night. Everyone says, “It is his angel.”

This is a huge point that should not be missed. Visions of the dead were not uncommon in Judea in this period. They literally mistake Peter outside the door for one. If they did hallucinate, concluding that this was not a spirit but rather an actual Resurrection is itself incredibly unlikely.

Repeatedly, they drew a distinction between literally seeing something and seeing it in a “
vision.” Peter has a vision of animal in a sheet. Paul had an experience of heaven what he wasn’t sure was a vision or not. Joseph has a dream where an angel tells him not to divorce Mary.

Furthermore, drug induced hallucinations would probably have been considered a vision.

They also had a belief in a return to normal life. This literally took place in John 11 when Jesus raised Lazarus. It took place in the Old Testament. But the person would still die again. Thus, they may have interpreted a hallucination this way, but probably not.

The Old Testament also describes a living person being taken up into heaven,but this would not apply to a clearly crucified Jesus.

New Testament scholar NT Wright has argued that for the 100 years before and after Jesus, we find multiple Jewish Messiah movements. In all of them except for Jesus, the death of the Messiah ends the movement. Thus, expectation of a Resurrected Messiah was itself weird in the culture. The problem is that hallucinations come from a person’s expectations. Thus the weight of the evidence is that they probably were not expecting a risen Jesus.

In fact, they would expect Jesus to Resurrect eventually. Everyone was at the end of time. Martha expects Lazarus to do this in John 11. But a Resurrection before the end of time is really a redefinition of what Resurrection is for them.

If one tries to argue that Pagan beliefs created this expectation, you run into mountains of problems. Pagan stories of dying and rising gods are radically different. They don’t save you by dying and then complete this by rising. This is a big topic that goes beyond the scope of this article.

The key to understand here is that purely mental visions of a dead person were something they believed in. They considered these an assurance that the person was a spirit in heaven. Messiah movements ended when the guy died. Visions of the dead were not unusual and interpreted in another way. And redefining the Resurrection doctrine was itself strange.

If they really did have a hallucination what’s more likely? Is it more likely that they would have interpreted these hallucinations in the standard way people did or in an incredibly weird way? Or perhaps try to put a number on this? We are saying that something happened here which is more uncommon than hallucinations themselves. Let that sink in for a minute.

 

Some object and say that in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul describes the Resurrection body as spiritual.  Thus, it is argued that this is a claim that Jesus rose only spiritually.  Then this is used as evidence for a hallucination.  In other words, supposedly Paul said it was only a vision of a spirit.  There are numerous problems with this.  First, Paul uses the word "anastasis" which is translated as "Resurrection" over and over in this passage.  The term has clear claims to rising bodily.  Thus, it's a case of using the one word for rising bodily that's weighed against using the term for spiritual.  Obviously the new body is changed somehow so Paul's statements about that don't weigh for either side.

 

So Paul says that the Resurrection body is a spiritual body whereas the old body is natural.  Does that mean that it's somehow ghostly?  The issue is that in 1 Cor 2: 14-15 he contrasts the natural man to the spiritual man.  In this passage, he uses the terms to talk about how a person's thoughts are focused.  The natural ignores the Holy Spirit and the spiritual man does not.  The spiritual man clearly isn't a ghost here!  So the term "spiritual" doesn't necessarily mean ghostly, and we have good reason to think it doesn't.  Thus, it's not going to outweigh the use of the term "Resurrection" which has a clear meaning of rising bodily.

 

THREE: Group Hallucinations?

The list in 1 Corinthians 15 tells us of at least three group appearances of Jesus. If you see something, and another person sees it too, then it’s not just in your mind. This is perhaps the biggest problem for hallucination theory.

The only serious response is to point to group visions reported in the catholic Church throughout the years. But those are in a completely different category. NO ONE has ever gone to their deaths for those. Furthermore, it’s not so impossible for a Christian of different denomination to believe that Mary or Paul appeared to people and encouraged them.

FOUR: The Empty Tomb.

We have good evidence for the empty tomb, which is completely unexplained by any “insane but true believer” theory. Thus, multiple unlikely things have to coincide to make hallucination theory work.

First, Josephus tells us in Antiquities 4.8 a recounting of Jewish laws. He says these laws are in their legal books if anyone wants to double check him. “But let not the testimony of women be admitted, on account of the levity and boldness of their sex”

A lie made up later or legend added to the story wouldn’t have included these women. They would have been an embarrassing fact. The women really did report having found an empty tomb. Thus, the report was present early on.

Matthew 28 tells us that the Jews claimed the disciples stole Jesus’ body. Matthew would not invent such a story himself, given the point of view demonstrated in his book. He believes Jesus rose. He’s not the one who invented a claim that the apostles stole the body by night. Thus the Jews really were saying this. But the Jews would not invent such a story if they could instead say, “Jesus body is lost.” or “Here is Jesus’ dead body.” These are the people who are saying the disciples stole the body after all. Thus, there was an empty tomb. It really was initially reported by Jesus’ female followers. That female detail means that the story goes close to the events. Thus, people were still able to ask around and double check things.

FIVE: Paul’s conversion, plus James.

Whatever would have led the Twelve to see a Risen Christ cannot work for Paul. As we saw in the previous article, Paul was a persecutor of Christians. People hallucinate based on things that are already stored in the mind. Whatever was in Paul must have been very different from the Twelve. So you have to have something independently converging on the same idea in both of them. That’s unlikely. We could also add in that James stands outside of the group as well. The reports state that he rejected Jesus in the Gospel of John, but then we find him in Paul’s list in Corinthians. Perhaps he was in the same mental state as Paul, but that’s still two people on a different page from the Twelve. Given that this is Jesus’ brother, his idea of Jesus may have been quite different from Paul’s as well.

 

So, it's safe to say that the Apostles were not insane and did not hallucinate the Resurrection.   But any miracle should be very improbable too right?  Thus, perhaps a hallucination happened even though it's fantastically improbable.  Or perhaps there was some way Jesus was healed that is purely natural and no miracle occurred?  Those questions are the focus of this next article.

Probability of the Resurrection