Before we start diagnosing Noah with seasonal affective disorder during his long voyage (tongue firmly in cheek), we must understand how people in biblical times perceived the mind and mental illness. The concept of “mental health” as we know it did not exist in the ancient world
There were no psychiatrists in Jerusalem, no psychologists in Babylon. Instead, unusual or troubling behavior was usually interpreted through spiritual or moral frameworks. In many ancient cultures, including the biblical era, what we now call mental illness was attributed to supernatural causes or personal failings. For example, someone acting “mad” might be thought to be possessed by an evil spirit, cursed by a deity, or punished for sin. Treatments, accordingly, were not medical but ritual, exorcisms, prayers, or even banishment from the community. Understanding this context is crucial: when we read about King Saul’s dark moods or Nebuchadnezzar’s madness, the original audience would not have thought in terms of serotonin levels or trauma. They would have thought in terms of gods, demons, and divine judgment.
Let’s explore a few key historical perspectives from the biblical world and its neighbors:
Ancient Hebrew (Biblical) Perspective: In the Hebrew Bible, disturbances of mind are often described in spiritual terms. A striking example is King Saul, who, after falling out of God’s favor, is tormented by an “evil spirit from the Lord” that causes episodes of fear and fury (1 Samuel 16:14-23). To us, his symptoms – “intense distress, fear, and irrational behavior” soothed only by music might suggest a depressive or bipolar disorder with melancholic and agitated features. But the text frames it theologically: Saul’s condition is a result of losing divine favor and being afflicted by a spirit. This doesn’t mean the ancient Israelites were ignorant of emotional suffering; rather, they explained it within their belief system. Notably, Saul’s servants don’t call a doctor; they call for David, whose harp playing temporarily relieves the king’s torment. Music therapy, ancient Near East style! Similarly, in the New Testament, many afflictions are described as demon possession – some of which (like epileptic seizures or severe mental disturbance) modern readers might interpret as neurological or psychiatric conditions. Demonology was the language available to describe such phenomena. The Gospel accounts of Jesus healing the Gerasene demoniac, or casting out a spirit that caused muteness in a boy, reflect a world where healing the mind was seen as a spiritual conquest. Importantly, moral judgment was often attached: being afflicted by an evil spirit could imply that the person had fallen out of God’s favor or done something wrong (as people inferred in Saul’s case). The Bible itself does not claim Saul had “mental illness” – that category didn’t exist – and as one scholar cautions, when we retrofit ancient descriptions with modern terms, we risk altering their meaning. Thus, as we analyze biblical figures, we must continually remember how differently their contemporaries would have understood their struggles.
Ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman Views: The biblical lands were not isolated from broader ancient thought. By the time of the New Testament, Greek and Roman ideas were well-known in Judea (Luke, for instance, is called a physician). In the broader ancient world, we see a mix of supernatural and early naturalistic explanations for mental phenomena. Ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian texts often attribute maladies of mind to gods or spirits – for example, an Egyptian papyrus might prescribe a ritual incantation to drive out a spirit causing someone to behave strangely. However, there were also pragmatic treatments; Egyptians recommended calming music and pleasant aromas for those disturbed – a recognition that environment could soothe the mind. Over in Greece, a revolutionary idea emerged around the 5th century BCE: Hippocrates, the famed physician, taught that mental disorders were not divine curses but physical conditions. “Rejecting the idea of demonic possession, [Hippocrates] said that mental disorders were akin to physical disorders and had natural causes.”
He and his followers classified conditions like melancholia (deep sadness, akin to depression), mania (abnormal excitement or frenzy), and phrenitis (brain fever/delirium). They even spoke of an imbalance of bodily fluids (humors) as the cause – an early attempt at medical explanation. While this rational perspective was remarkable, it was not the dominant view in popular culture for many centuries. Roman physicians later adopted some of these ideas, offering treatments like warm baths and massage for emotional distress, which, while not cures, at least showed a gentler approach than exorcism or imprisonment.
Early Christian and Medieval Thoughts: Moving slightly beyond biblical times, it’s worth noting that early Christian theologians inherited both the biblical demonological understanding and some classical knowledge. Figures like St. Augustine acknowledged the reality of mental disturbances but often saw them in spiritual terms (temptations, trials, or demonic attacks). By the medieval era, unfortunately, the demon-focused view often dominated: mental illness could be seen as witchcraft or possession, leading to some horrific responses. This was a step backwards from Hippocrates. It wasn’t until much later (18th-19th centuries) that the Western world fully swung back to a medical model of mental illness. We mention this trajectory because it shows how deeply ingrained the biblical-era attitudes were – the legacy of equating mental illness with moral or spiritual failings persisted for millennia. Even today, echoes of these ancient views exist (for example, the continued practice of exorcism in some communities for treating mental disturbance). Knowing this history helps us appreciate the cultural gap we must bridge when applying modern psychiatry to ancient texts. It reminds us to tread carefully – what we see as schizophrenia might have been interpreted as prophecy or possession back then, and neither interpretation is to be dismissed outright.
In summary, the historical context surrounding the Bible offered a very different interpretive lens for behavior and mental states. Biblical authors and audiences used the frameworks of their time: theology, mythology, and early natural observation. As we proceed to examine characters through our modern frameworks, we will constantly anchor our discussion in this context. We’ll ask: How might people of that time have understood this person’s behavior? and How does that differ from a modern psychological understanding? By keeping these questions in mind, we ensure that our analysis respects the ancient worldview even as we introduce contemporary insights. This two-way dialogue between past and present can enrich our understanding of both the Bible and the evolution of mental health concepts.
Comments