Visions as Proof of the Almighty

What makes an experience a vision?

A vision is a religious experience in which someone believes they see or hear something divine or spiritual. It often carries a message: reassurance, guidance or a call to act. In Judaism, a vision may be understood as special revelation, meaning that the Almighty makes himself or his will known through a particular communication.

Visions need not all take the same form. In an objective vision, the person believes they encounter something external to themselves, such as an angel. This describes how the experience appears to them; it does not mean that an independent observer has confirmed it. A subjective vision is inward, such as a deeply felt awareness of God’s presence or a message received within the mind. Dreams can also be interpreted as visions.

This distinction helps explain the debate about visions. The person may be certain that they have encountered the Almighty, while someone else may accept that they had a powerful experience but question its divine origin.

Genesis 15: a vision that establishes a covenant

In Genesis 15, Abraham receives a vision in which God promises him many descendants and the land of Canaan. The promises concern not just Abraham’s own life but the future of the people descended from him.

The vision is important because it establishes the covenant between God and Abraham: a binding relationship involving divine promises and human responsibilities. For Jews who accept the account as divine revelation, it shows that their relationship with the Almighty is rooted in God’s initiative and commitment.

It can therefore support belief in more than the existence of a distant creator. The Almighty is presented as someone who communicates, makes promises and takes an interest in the future of his people. Trust in those promises can encourage Jews to remain faithful to the covenant.

Other scriptural visions: reassurance and prophetic calling

In Genesis 28, Jacob dreams of a ladder reaching from earth to heaven, with angels ascending and descending. The vision reaffirms God’s covenant with Jacob. The connection between heaven and earth can be understood as reassurance that God is not cut off from human life: he guides and protects his people.

In Isaiah 6, Isaiah sees God enthroned and surrounded by seraphim, heavenly beings. The vision marks his call to become a prophet—a person who communicates God’s message. Its majestic imagery conveys God’s holiness and authority. A vision can therefore give someone a responsibility, rather than merely providing a comforting personal experience.

In Ezekiel 1, Ezekiel’s vision includes four living creatures, wheels within wheels and a chariot-like throne associated with divine glory. The extraordinary imagery expresses God’s power and transcendence: the Almighty exceeds ordinary human experience and understanding.

Together, these accounts explain why visions matter in Judaism. They communicate God’s will, reaffirm promises and authorise prophetic messages. Their importance extends beyond the individual visionary because their messages can guide the wider community.

A non-scriptural example: Karo’s Shavuot experience

Visions are not confined to accounts in the Tenakh, the Jewish scriptures. In his Shavuot Epistle, written in the 1530s, Solomon ha-Levi Alkabetz described a mystical experience involving his teacher, Joseph Karo, and their circle in Ottoman-controlled southeastern Europe. Jewish mysticism seeks a deeper experience and understanding of the divine.

The group stayed awake studying Jewish religious texts through the night of Shavuot. Alkabetz reported that, while they studied the Mishnah, they heard a voice speaking through Karo’s mouth which they understood as divine. This is an auditory religious experience—hearing a message—rather than an account of seeing God. The voice urged them to continue studying and to move to the land of Israel, promising provision and peace.

Alkabetz also described the distress of the Shekhinah, meaning the divine presence, as being in exile and suffering because of their sins. The group responded with tears, joy and renewed commitment to study, repeating their overnight study on the second night. For those accepting the experience as revelation, it showed that God responded to religious devotion and called people to act. Its significance lay in the guidance and commitment it inspired, not simply in its unusual character.

This is a non-scriptural example because it is a later Jewish account, not a passage from the Tenakh. Alkabetz’s report records what the participants believed they experienced; it does not independently establish that the voice had a divine origin.

Why visions might lead to belief

A vision may feel like direct contact with the Almighty. For the person experiencing it, this can be more convincing than an abstract argument: they believe that God has communicated with them personally.

Scriptural visions may also strengthen the faith of people who have not experienced one themselves. Jews who recognise the Torah and prophetic writings as sources of religious authority can regard these accounts as testimony to God’s activity. Genesis 15, for example, connects belief in the Almighty with the covenant that shapes Jewish identity.

Visions may also encourage moral commitment and faithfulness. A believer can argue that an experience which guides people towards God and a better life has genuine spiritual significance. However, a beneficial effect does not by itself establish that the cause was supernatural. This is an important distinction when evaluating visions as proof.

Hallucination arguments and Jewish responses

A hallucination is a sensory experience without a corresponding external stimulus. An atheist might argue that a vision results from natural psychological processes, such as imagination, stress or brain activity, rather than communication from God. If such an explanation is sufficient, the vision provides no necessary proof that the Almighty exists.

Humanists emphasise reason and evidence rather than supernatural explanations. They may argue that people interpret dreams and unusual experiences through their existing beliefs and culture. A person familiar with Jewish teachings might therefore understand an experience using Jewish religious imagery. Its vividness or sincerity does not establish its divine origin.

Karo’s Shavuot experience gives this debate a concrete focus. A sceptic could point to the group’s lack of sleep and intense religious concentration as reasons to consider a natural explanation. A believer could emphasise that several participants reportedly heard the voice and that its message encouraged study and religious commitment. Yet hearing a voice through Karo’s mouth is not the same as independently verifying that God spoke: the disagreement concerns the origin and meaning of the experience.

A Jewish believer may respond that describing the psychological features of an experience does not settle whether God communicated through it. An experience occurring within the mind is not automatically meaningless or false. Believers may also appeal to the authority of scripture, the vision’s religious message and its place within the relationship between God and his people.

These responses explain why a vision can remain convincing within faith. Nevertheless, someone who does not already accept scriptural authority may find them less persuasive. A balanced judgement distinguishes evidence that supports a believer’s faith from conclusive proof that everyone must accept. Neither the visionary’s certainty nor the sceptic’s proposed natural explanation automatically settles every case.

What do visions reveal about the Almighty?

Different interpretations emphasise different aspects of God’s nature. Isaiah’s throne vision highlights holiness and sovereignty, while Ezekiel’s overwhelming imagery highlights power and transcendence. The Almighty is greater than human beings and cannot be fully grasped by them.

By contrast, the visions of Abraham and Jacob emphasise a personal, involved God who communicates, promises and protects. Karo’s reported experience similarly presents divine guidance as connected with people’s study and actions. These emphases need not contradict one another: Jews can understand the Almighty as beyond the world while still active in human lives.

There is also a distinction between treating visionary imagery as a direct encounter with divine reality and understanding it as symbolic language conveying religious truths. A throne can express authority without requiring every feature of the vision to be read as an ordinary physical description. Similarly, Alkabetz’s description of the Shekhinah’s distress can be understood as expressing the spiritual seriousness of sin and exile rather than describing an ordinary bodily illness. A non-religious interpretation instead sees the imagery as revealing human beliefs and hopes, rather than God’s nature.

A justified conclusion should explain which interpretation is most convincing and why. Visions have considerable importance within Judaism, but their force as proof depends partly on whether the person evaluating them accepts divine revelation as a possible explanation.