Between Heaven and Hell

by Peter Kreeft

From the "This is a great historical novel that brings to life the times of our grandparents and the world they lived and raised families in." "The vivid portrayal of people in their struggle for growth, opportunity, and justice in the early 20th century. Chalk Hill, PA's main industry was bituminous coal mining at the time." "The author speaks with compassion, insight, and conviction, while the characters reveal their deepest desires to persist and prevail against a world that is indifferent at best and brutally cruel at it's worst." Dr. Albert Skomra, Penn State University.

Genres: Philosophy, Theology, Religion, Fiction, Christian, Christianity, Catholic

Paperback

First published January 1, 1982

About the author

Peter Kreeft is an American philosopher and prolific author of over eighty books on Christian theology, philosophy, and apologetics. A convert from Protestantism to Catholicism, his journey was shaped by his study of Church history, Gothic architecture, and Thomistic thought. He earned his BA from Calvin College, an MA and PhD from Fordham University, and pursued further studies at Yale. Since 1965, he has taught philosophy at Boston College and also at The King’s College. Kreeft is known for formulating “Twenty Arguments for the Existence of God” with Ronald K. Tacelli, featured in their Handbook of Christian Apologetics. A strong advocate for unity among Christians, he emphasizes shared belief in Christ over denominational differences.

Reviews

[David Johnston · Rating 5 out of 5]

On November 22nd, 1963 when I was eleven years old three well known figures died within hours of each other; John F. Kennedy, C.S. Lewis and Aldous Huxley. John F. Kennedy's horrific public death affected me profoundly as it did the rest of the nation and provided irrefutable proof that death is real and no one is exempt. Aldous Huxley I would not meet until Brave New World was required reading in High School. His book, The Doors of Perception provided the rationale for experimenting with psychedelic drugs (I needed little encouragement) and provided an eastern mystical worldview that went along with and seemed to explain the experience. When I finally read C.S. Lewis , it was like coming up for air or waking up after a long and troubled sleep or better yet, it was like being born again. I am not sure if I knew Christ before I started reading Lewis or after, but it hardly matters; C.S. Lewis has had a powerful impact on my merely Christian walk.

What if these three men met shortly after death somewhere between Heaven and Hell and discussed life, death, the nature of man, God, salvation, the deity or supposed deity of Christ, and the meaning of life. In this trialog Kreeft has each of his protagonists coming from a different worldview; Kennedy, as the secular humanist, Huxley, the eastern mystical pantheist; and Lewis representing orthodox Christianity. Using the socratic method, these visitors in what might be purgatory use their time wisely because it is truth or consequences for real.

[Amy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think this is a case of me-not-you. I really didn't click with the format. I'm squarely in C.S. Lewis's camp, but I find the made-up conversation format irritating with Lewis being the foundation of wisdom and Kennedy and Huxley serving as talking heads to be persuaded. Socratic dialogue works in real life but in semi-fiction it just isn't my cup of tea.

[Dan Glover · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have wanted to read this book for years as I think the premise is good and I am a big Lewis fan. This is a three way conversation in an intermediate place - somewhere between this life and the next - between three very important and influential men shortly after their death within hours of each other (C.S. Lewis, J.F.K. and Aldous Huxley). Fictional conversation is not a favourite genre of mine but it is moderately well done here, particularly in its grasp of the topic of debate and the logic of each position (Christian theism, Christian humanism, and Christian pantheism respectively). The "voices" of each of the characters don't sound quite as individual and differentiated as one would expect. It is hard to imagine Lewis quoting his own books in a debate much less quoting himself multiple times. Its not so hard to imagine Aldous Huxley doing so. And the conversation doesn't feel truly like a real conversation, as it is without much reference to the lives the three men very recently vacated. One imagines much more illustration from Lewis, and the "real world" pragmatism of Kennedy backed up by examples from his very recent political career. This conversation feels much more like a formal debate in which all three participants have cordially agreed to self moderate and play fair. Also, it feels more like two separate conversations (Lewis and Kennedy first, then Lewis and Huxley) rather than a true conversation in which all three participate simultaneously. Lewis emerges as the far superior intellect, which I think is quite accurate but which I think would have come across not quite as blatantly with two men he didn't know personally. Neither Lewis nor Huxley have many quotable lines in this conversation, which was not the case for these two accomplished wordsmiths in real life and which makes this not feel like its really them speaking. All this is to say that the author's voice tends to have a levelling effect and make the three conversationalist's voices sound too similar and rather flat. So, while the message is quite a fair representation of the positions of the debaters, the medium doesn't quite ring of accuracy. Still, a reasonably good read that is worthwhile.

[Mike (the Paladin) · Rating 4 out of 5]

C. S. Lewis, Aldous Huxley, and John F. Kennedy all died on November 22, 1963. An odd coincidence that accounts for the little notice taken at the time of the death of Huxley and Lewis (the press so busy with the assassination of President Kennedy the other two were barely noticed.)

This novel is inspired by this fact and we are "privy" (in the novel) to the conversation the three have as they wait to face God and discover the truth of their "disagreements" and their lives. I like the book and the conjectured conversation is well done and interesting as these 3 men wait for their sojourn in eternity to begin.

[Hon Lady Selene · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had higher hopes for this, it ended up being a religious themed snooze-fest.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the most dramatic events of the twentieth century was the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963. What is less well known is that two other great men died the same day -- Christian scholar and author C. S. Lewis, and novelist and pantheist Aldous Huxley.

Philosopher Peter Kreeft knew that Lewis and Kennedy had died within hours of one another. But it was on a Monday more than thirty years ago that he discovered that Huxley (author of Brave New World) had died the very same day as the other two. The possibility of the three of them meeting in the next world, in a kind of anteroom to heaven, immediately came to him. Here were three famous, classic and clever representatives of three great worldviews -- Eastern pantheism, Christian theism and modern humanism. It was a book that had to be written, and in three days Between Heaven and Hell was finished.

It may be intimidating to some to put words in the mouth of perhaps the greatest Christian apologist of the last century, but Kreeft (pronounced Krayft) was undaunted. When asked about Kreeft's love for C. S. Lewis, a friend once replied, "Love Lewis? He thinks he is Lewis!"

Be that as it may, in the postscript to the second edition of Between Heaven and Hell Kreeft relates meeting George Sayer, a friend and biographer of Lewis, after Sayer had read Kreeft's book. How many times had Kreeft met Lewis? Sayer wanted to know. "Never," Kreeft said.

"Impossible," Sayer replied. "You make Lewis sound exactly the way he sounded in real life -- not just his style of writing but his style of talking. How did you do that?"

Following the format of the Socratic dialogs that Kreeft appreciates so much, the conversation among the three in Between Heaven and Hell focuses on the identity of Jesus. Kennedy and Huxley in turn raise many classic objections to Christianity and to the notion that Jesus was God incarnate, with Lewis ready to the defense. Thirty years later, a book about three great men who died on the same day fifty years ago this month is still in print.

[Kenny Kidd · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ok so!

At my hoity-toity Christian private high school, I remember a lot of my teachers just LOVED this book, and I’ve been interested in it ever since! Essentially, the book is a modern-day Socratic dialogue, where the participants are JFK (who represents a secular, humanistic philosophy), Aldous Huxley (who represents a more eastern, pantheistic-ish philosophy), and C.S. Lewis (who represents orthodox Christianity), as they discuss the person/divinity of Jesus and the truth of the biblical texts (the reason for the author choosing these three particular folks for this dialogue is because they all died on exactly the same day—November 22nd, 1963).

The first half is mostly a conversation where C.S. Lewis convinces JFK that Jesus was not, in fact, just a really good teacher, but the true Son of God, while the second half is C.S. Lewis debating Aldous Huxley on whether or not Christianity really teaches the same Truth as other religions, or if there’s something unique and more fully True to it that other religions lack.

So here’s the sitch: I went into this with a mixture of hope and skepticism. Skepticism because I’ve done a whole lot of reading/conversing about various objections to Christianity, holes in the logic of certain orthodox beliefs, and exploring assumptions that many Christians and non-Christians alike make when discussing the truth of Christianity, and hope because, frankly, I’ve been in a place recently where I just really have a lot of questions about Christian belief that have never found a sufficient answer. And so I was really hoping this would offer the answers to those questions that I was having, but alas :-/

The first half is kinda tedious, honestly; most of the argument C.S. Lewis makes in defense of Jesus’ divinity is the “Either God or a bad man” argument, which was drilllllled into our heads in high school and is honestly (at the risk of sounding arrogant) just really dumb? Like it’s not a good argument, and it’s easy to poke holes in, but of course the author writes from a similar ideology to Lewis and so these objections aren’t really brought up, which is lame (on a personal note, I actually do still believe in Jesus’ divinity; that’s not one of the myriad questions/objections I have to Christianity, and I think that I have a pretty solid basis for believing that Jesus is the actual Son of God; the “Either God or a bad man” argument is absolutely not part of this basis though 🤷‍♂️).

The second half is where I was much more interested, because the more I think and explore other belief systems, the more I really do think that all religions are far more similar in essence than dissimilar, and believe (pretty firmly, like willing-to-get-in-an-argument firmly) that the Church would benefit GREATY from exercising more mental/spiritual humility and being more universal and accepting of people from different faiths and religions, and that this might be at the core of many of Jesus’ teachings. And the argumentation C.S. Lewis makes in a lot of this section for why other religions are NOT like Christianity is often just stupid? Like again, not to be arrogant, but without much time spent thinking about it as I was reading I saw holes in the points that C.S. Lewis was making against Huxley’s “all regions are one” claim, and it was just frustrating. It felt intellectually lazy, which I’m aware is muy pretentiousante but hey, I’ve been doing some thinking about this! Like there’s one section where Lewis lays out precisely six ways that Christianity differs from Eastern mystic religions (totally disregarding the Church’s rich history of engaging with the mystic tradition?), and literally none of them held water; I ended the dialogue being less certain in various claims in Christian orthodoxy, which is the opposite intent that the author had :-/

It’s very entertaining to read! I enjoyed my time with it, and there are certainly many parts/points that Lewis makes that are profound and insightful; I just think that many, many more of the arguments really don’t hold up to much scrutiny, and it makes me frustrated with the book. So yeah, my ideology at the mo pretty much consists of (I’m gonna use the pretentious philosophy words hope that’s ok 🥺) a mixture of agnosticism and Christianity in my theology/metaphysics, empiricism in my epistemology, Christian existentialism in my ethics, and universalism in my teleology, and none of these beliefs felt really challenged by this bük :/// Which is a shame because I know that Peter Kreeft is a BRILLIANT man, and I feel like a douche for critiquing him so heavily; the book just didn’t do it for me, sorry 😔

(To end this obscenely long review: there’s a moment where Huxley asks Lewis “If humans are inherently fallen, and they are the ones who CHOSE the canon of the Bible, then how can we be sure these books are really the word of God?” Which is EXACTLY the question I asked in my senior year Bible class after, like, years of these kinds of conversations, and Lewis gave the exact same answer my teacher did: “That’s really complicated and I don’t want to go into it at the moment.” No joke, that’s Lewis’ answer to the entire question of why we should believe the Bible to be the infallible word of God in this book. SMH 😤)

[Robin Hatcher · Rating 3 out of 5]

Audiobook (narrated by David Swanson)
While this book is a fictional dialog between three famous men who died on the same day, it is much more than a short novel. It is dense and a great example of Christian apologetics. And it reveals common misconceptions and different ways of thinking (worldviews). I’m glad it was recommended to me.

Robin’s Ratings
5🌟 = Out of this world. Amazing. Unforgettable. A personal favorite.
4🌟 = Loved/really enjoyed it. Will recommend to others.
3🌟 = Liked it. Glad I read it. Engaging/entertaining/interesting.
2🌟 = The book was okay, but I’ve enjoyed other books so much more.
1🌟 = For whatever reason, I didn’t like it and can’t recommend it.

[Philip · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this book, C.S. Lewis, Aldous Huxley, and J.F. Kennedy (who died the same day) meet in Purgatory. What follows is Socratic discussion with Lewis answering the questions and attempting to lead Huxley and Kennedy to answers. Lewis represents orthodox Christiany, Kennedy humanistic (modern liberal) Christianity, and Huxley an easternized version mixing Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity into a sort of neo-Gnosticism.
In the first section, Kreeft as Lewis debunks Kennedy's objections and ends up showing that modernism is a sort of intellectual dishonesty. His debate with Huxley is much harder to follow and Lewis doesn't seem to refute Huxley as soundly as Kennedy. The reason for this is that Eastern mysticism is vague and Lewis and Huxley are unable to agree on terms. However, Lewis does succeed in showing that, at least as far as the Biblical text shows, Jesus was not a sort of guru. By doing this, Lewis is able to show that Christianity is distinct from Eastern philosophy.
Although there are some obvious theological issues in the book (especially being set in Purgatory), the book is very readable and enjoyable. Kreeft writes very simply and often interjects humor to keep interest. However, he deals with very deep subjects, but is able to deal with them in a logical and understandable way. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in apologetics and philosphy.

[Mikey Gee · Rating 3 out of 5]

I must admit that I am reading just because I am a big Lewis fan. A bit of a Lewis geek. I'm just started so might have something to say about the play itself and what Kreeft is trying to do but for now I am just pleased by how well Kreeft has managed to capture Lewis' voice and style... though I find it highly unlikely that Lewis would ever use one of his own books to state a point. I've never heard of him doing it in any of his writings and it just seems very un-British.

Having now finished I conclude that this book would pretty much only be enjoyed by a Christian fan of C.S. Lewis. I can only imagine my non-believer brother seething by how graciously Huxley and Kennedy say "we'll let that point stand for now so we can move on." There are multiple points which are let to stand favoring Lewis' argument but with possible holes. This is so they can cover all of the points in a pithy way rather than have a dialogue for each point but I can imagine someone wanting to answer them in depth.

[Brian Watson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've heard of Kreeft's imaginative philosophical dialogues before and had been meaning to read this. When I found it for $2.50 at a bookstore, I had to get it.

JFK, C. S. Lewis, and Aldous Huxley all died on November 22, 1963. Kreeft imagines a conversation--a "trialog"--that the three have somewhere between heaven and hell, immediately after they die. Kreeft states at the beginning that JFK represents a humanist (really, a bad Catholic), Lewis represents orthodox Christianity, and Huxley believed in the perennial philosophy, essentially that all religions are the same. Huxley apparently was some kind of pantheist, though of the western, Christian-influenced variety.

The first half of the book is mostly JFK and Lewis discussing if Jesus is actually God. The second half has Lewis debating Huxley regarding Jesus' teaching. Lewis shows that Jesus cannot be regarded as some kind of eastern guru. Some of the lines of argumentation were new to me, particularly what is said about how Jesus is different from other sages.

I doubt that Kreeft tried hard to make the three characters sound like the men of real life. That would be hard, indeed. But that's not the point of this book. The point is the argumentation, and here it is good, as far as it goes. One can't expect too much of a short book of conversational arguments. But Lewis prevails, and in not some ham-fisted kind of way. Kreeft doesn't present straw men only to be knocked down.

It seems that the only argument one can make against Christianity is that the story is made up. But Lewis says the story doesn't read like myth, and if the disciples made up the story, they're fools for dying for it. And who would make up a story that has you dying to self?

This is a short read, so anyone can get through it easily enough. I recommend anyone interested in Jesus and Christianity read it.

[Ivan Loginov · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ever since I heard about Aldous Huxley, C. S. Lewis and John Fitzgerald Kennedy dying at the same time, I have been excited to read this book. Unfortunately, it was really disappointing. I was prepared for it to be biased; that would make sense. But I was still awaiting a thought-provoking discussion of three fascinating people. In an introduction, I was surprised to read that all three of them are characters that represent three different approaches to Christian spirituality present in the second half of the 20th century. Still, I was hoping for an inspiring conversation. In the end, Between Heaven & Hell ended up being a boring Socratic dialogue, two of them in a row, to be precise. Instead of being a collision of equal opponents, Lewis is appointed to the position of the teacher, guide, Socrates, who patronizingly explains everything to confused Huxley and JFK, thus completely denying Christian humanism and monism any import.

[Emma :) · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’ve never read any philosophy books by myself, and certainly no Christian apologetics, so this was pretty cool. The fact that it was a Socratic dialogue made it much more digestible as opposed to a a straight up monologue. I got click baited though, because there was very limited characterization of Huxley, Lewis, and Kennedy outside of their positions in the argument

Gosh this guy really really likes CS Lewis like WE GOT IT

[David Bradley]

A fun, quick read. Three giants of the Twentieth Century who died on the same day decide to spend their first few hours post death debating the identity of Jesus Christ. Like Socrates in Plato's dialogues, Lewis ends up running laps around his interlocutors.

[George Trudeau · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fun vivid dialogue in the style of the Socratic Dialogues. Very much a Lewis-centric book between the 3 thinkers. It would be a good play.

[Jakub Lewandowski · Rating 5 out of 5]

"aut deus aut homo malus"

[ValeReads Kyriosity]

I read this in print many years ago, so I thought I'd give the audio a try when I spotted it. Y'all...the narration was so painful I just couldn't go through with it. To would-be narrators: Don't do accents if you can't do accents. 😖

[Naomi Young · Rating 4 out of 5]

I haven't read this in many many years, but coming across it now I am reminded of how much I liked it, and I want to point it out to you. Kreeft takes as his starting point an odd historical fact: C.S. Lewis, John F. Kennedy, and Aldous Huxley all died within a few hours of each other. Kreeft then posits a convenient sort of anteroom to the particular judgment where the three men meet and discuss the claims of Christ. Kreeft uses the three men not so much as historical figures as exemplars of three points of view: the traditional Christian (Lewis); the modernist/humanist Christian (Kennedy); and the pantheist/mystic (Huxley). These categories of course more or less correspond to the views these men had, or seemed to have, in life. Well, if you know Kreeft, you know that Lewis gets the best arguments; but he is fair to all three. I read this as an undergraduate, over a pint or two. I don't know if I'd feel the same way about it today, but I was transfixed by it at the time. It's a short book written in a vivid, script-like style.

[George Shubin · Rating 5 out of 5]

November 22, 1963, the day President Kennedy was killed, was a day that all who were alive that day clearly remember. Although overshadowed by the events in Dallas, two other quite famous people died that day as well, Aldous Huxley and C.S. Lewis. This delightful book explains the worldwiews of these three men by means of a fictional meeting they have on their way to their final reward.

C.S. Lewis was an orthodox Christian. Kennedy was a humanist, albeit with a Roman Catholic bent. And Huxley believed in eastern pantheism.

Meeting up in a white mist, they debate where they are, what they believe and where they think they will end up. We peek in on their conversation as each makes his case for what he believes.

This is a fun, light read, written in an engaging style. If you want to understand the flavors of Christianity that swirl around us this book will give you a clear and concise, yet engaging and humorous presentation of the three main attitudes today.

[Psylk · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is the first Socratic dialogue I have read so I can't compare it to others and how they are normally meant to be. I will say though that while the content and layout was interesting I felt the argument a bit one sided. It didn't appear to me be three men arguing from three points of view but one man arguing one point of view while briefly acknowledging but almost mocking the other two views. There is a lot of mention on finding the undeniable truth but that seems a tall order when it comes to anything that isn't scientifically proven and relies mostly on faith. I don't deny the author;s point of view or attempt to say he is wrong I just simply don't feel that this was very well portrayed as an argument among one more than one person. As I said I found it all very interesting but it was really just a bit black-and-white for my taste. I don't feel that there is a right or wrong, a truth or lie in argument like this and it seems to me that was the only point of the dialogue.

[William]

This is a fascinating concept for a book. Unfortunately, the execution perhaps could have been a bit better. Mr. Kreeft obviously knows the works of C.S. Lewis well and even does a pretty good impression of him here. The other two figures are definitely given short shrift, becoming essentially the embodiment of skeptical humanism (Kennedy) and vague "all religions teach the same good thing at their core" pantheism (Huxley). In the end, I'm of the persuasion to want to side with Lewis, but I was hoping for more of a dialogue. Instead, Kreeft's book mostly gives us an extrapolation of C.S. Lewis presenting the world with his argument for Christianity. It certainly has its moments, but skirts over issues like the authority of biblical texts that I'd like to here more about.

[Sarah Wells · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this quite a while ago but remember enjoying the fictitious dialogue between these three historical figures. "On November 22, 1963, three great men died within a few hours of each other: C.S. Lewis, John F. Kennedy, and Aldous Huxley. All three believed, in different ways, that death was not the end of human life. Suppose they were right and suppose they met after death. How might the conversation go?" Each character in the story represents the most influential philosophies and religious perspectives prevalent during their time, and likely during the present time as well.

Well worth the read.

[Alechia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow is all I can say. My husband and I were loaned this book shortly after we began attending our church. We both read it, and then we returned it to the original owner. We immediately went out and bought a copy for ourselves and read it again. It has sparked some of the most interesting and thought-provoking conversations I have had with my husband and others. It's a great book to get you thinking about one problem from different viewpoints. Each of the characters in the book had excellent points to discuss. Also, if you're looking for a good intro to reading more C.S. Lewis, this book is a great summary and will get you excited about reading more.

[Joel Wentz · Rating 5 out of 5]

This incredibly readable "dialogue" blew me away. It's based on the historical reality that three amazingly influential men all died on the same day: C. S. Lewis, JFK, and Aldous Huxley. In this fictional dialogue, these three men have a conversation about life, spirituality, religion, and life-after-death immediately after dying, but before moving into the "beyond". It's primarily a Christian apologetic, but it packs a punch. All three of the individuals Peter Kreeft portrays embody the 3 main streams of thought in our modern world, and he is remarkably fair and candid in his portrayal of them. Even if you're not into apologetics, give this a shot.

[Alex Strohschein · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a brief read. Aldous Huxley, C.S. Lewis and JFK all died the same day and this book is a fictional conversation between the three. It reads like an "apologetics narrative" with Kennedy and Huxley raising objections to Christianity through a humanist and Eastern framework respectively and Lewis handily trouncing them with logic and history. A lot of basic apologetics arguments, including those that appear in Lewis' own work, are brought in here. I do think Peter Kreeft underplayed the "antagonists;" JFK in particular isn't portrayed as very bright. Somewhere between a 3/5 - 4/5.

[Charity Tinnin · Rating 2 out of 5]

2016 Reread: 2.5 stars

An interesting premise but the execution falls short for me. Kreeft admits to using these three men as figureheads for his argument instead of writing them as they were and seems to run out of space to have Lewis argue with the same depth with Huxley as he did first with Kennedy.

[Benjamin · Rating 4 out of 5]

JFK, C. S. Lewis, and Aldous Huxley all died on November 22, 1963. The Catholic philosopher Peter Kreeft uses this curious fact to set up a Socratic dialogue among the three. Lewis represents traditional "mere" Christianity. JFK represents modern Western humanism. And Huxley represents Eastern pantheism. The result is an easily read but profound work. It is also a remarkable piece of apologetics.

[Sofia · Rating 5 out of 5]

I think it's a great book. I wanted to read something that taught me more about Christianity and this was perfect. I had to read some parts more than once, because I didn't know anything about Budhism and Eastern religions. On the whole, Peter Kreeft did a great job

[Gabby · Rating 2 out of 5]

worst fanfiction i have ever read

[Ian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kreeft at his best. A kind of extended meditation on Lewis' "trilemma."