In antiquity it was common knowledge that all Gods, including the Christian/Jewish God, communicated by means of visions. As the word suggests, a vision is “seen” in the mind’s eye (so to speak). The ancients also saw apparitions, which, they claimed, were actually “something out there” that registered on their retinas. For example, Saul had the medium of Endor conjure up the spirit of the dead Hebrew prophet, Samuel (1 Sam 28:6-14). From these perspectives the resurrection “appearances” of Jesus in the gospels were either hallucinations (seen in the mind’s eye) or apparitions (something out there). Both “experiences” were commonplace in antiquity and still persist in modern society: people still claim to see visions and apparitions. Dreams, however, are different. A dream is clearly something “seen” in the mind since the receiver is asleep. All the ancient Gods were thought to communicate through dreams, as did the Christian/Jewish God (see for example Matt 1:20; 2:12, 13, 19).

     The Greeks and Romans considered many things to be “visitations” or signs from the Gods. The flights of birds across certain quadrants of the sky portended success or failure. The Gods communicated through the entrails of animals, the croak of a raven, the song of a bird, or the fall of a tree across a road. Even the crowing of a rooster was thought to convey prophecies from the Gods, a view shared by the author of Mark’s Gospel, where a crowing rooster confirms a prophecy of Jesus (Mark 14:30, 72).

     We post-Enlightenment moderns might well be skeptical of finding messages from the Gods or divine visitations in such natural occurrences, since it is in the nature of birds to sing and roosters to crow, whenever the notion strikes them. Nevertheless, ancient human beings conducted their lives on the basis of such commonplace occurrences they took to be divine messages—as well as the uncommon, such as an eclipse of the moon, or supposed astrological signs in the sky (like the star of Bethlehem, Matt 2:2, 9-10). But at least with natural occurrences something material was available, so a dubious person could challenge the interpretation of the event, suggest a new one, or deny altogether that it was a sign.

     But claims of seeing visions, apparitions, or communing with the deity “in spirit” are a different matter. There was nothing “material” to see (even apparitions are not technically “material”). Voices in the head, apparitions, visions, visitations, and dreams are impossible to verify. In such cases skepticism seems the better part of wisdom. The receiver may be absolutely certain of the experience, but for the rest of us there are other options to explain it: the “receiver” of the “divine message” may just be impressionable to suggestion, a charlatan, or emotionally disturbed. If there seems to be substance to the claim, the receiver may simply have misunderstood the “phenomena” (if such there were). Even the saints of old did not always “see” correctly, and hence entertained “angels unawares” (Heb 13:2). Perhaps God, for whatever reason, has deceived the receiver, as when the Jewish/Christian God sent lying spirits to deceive his own prophets (1 Kgs 22:20-23). There is always the possibility that the receiver has been duped, not by the Gods, but by the forces of evil; for early Christians believed that Satan could transform himself into an “angel of light” (2 Cor 11:14). It is also entirely possible that purported receivers of such phenomena dupe themselves by wanting to “believe” something so strongly that they “see” or “hear” what they want. How can one with confidence objectively discriminate among these numerous possibilities for explaining claims of an extra-sensory experience?

     The biggest problem, however, lies in the fact that receivers of supposed divine messages are limited by their humanity. The Gods may be perfect (or nearly so) but human beings are not. So the Gods may deliver their messages, but not even they can ensure that the message is accurately received, since overcoming a receiver’s natural abilities would violate human “free will.” The Gods may “speak” clearly enough but we humans, by virtue of our humanity, always “hear” imperfectly. It must be so, since our spiritual leaders tell us different things on God’s authority, and thereby we know their “free will” is fully operative and that the message is as much the purported receiver’s as the God’s. Even the Bible must be considered imperfect because the ancient “revelations” (if such they were) were communicated through receivers who were clearly conditioned by their ancient culture and society.

     So how evaluate these claims of extra-sensory divine visitation? There is no way to be certain of the source of messages or visitations we think we receive. But if one assumes that God “is out there,” or “hereabouts,” or even communicating within us, the same caution and common sense we otherwise exercise in our daily lives is called for. Believing it to be so doesn’t make it so!

Posted by Charles Hedrick at 10:26am