In recent years, debate has resumed regarding whether or not the post-resurrection appearances may have been hallucinations or delusions on the part of the disciples. A sub-category of this debate is the question of bereavement hallucinations. Was the disciples’ bereaved state in the wake of the crucifixion responsible for their ‘seeing’ Jesus? A few years ago, Gerald O’Collins, in this journal, argued, on the basis of a comparison between the two, that, despite a few similarities, the differences between them are too great to justify the so-called ‘hallucination hypothesis.’ The question remains problematic, however, partly because biblical scholars do not take the contributions of professional psychologists and psychiatrists seriously enough. In the present article I examine O’Collins’s arguments, reaching a different, though undogmatic conclusion from his own.

中文翻译：

---

作为丧亲经历的耶稣复活后显现：与杰拉尔德·奥柯林斯的互动

近年来，关于复活后的显现是否是门徒的幻觉或错觉的争论又开始了。这场辩论的一个子类别是丧亲幻觉问题。门徒在被钉十字架后失去亲人的状态是否是他们“看到”耶稣的原因？几年前，杰拉尔德·奥柯林斯在本刊中，在比较两者的基础上认为，尽管有一些相似之处，但它们之间的差异太大，无法证明所谓的“幻觉假说”是正确的。 ' 然而，这个问题仍然存在问题，部分原因是圣经学者没有足够认真地对待专业心理学家和精神病学家的贡献。在这篇文章中，我检查了奥柯林斯的论点，得出了一个不同的，