Heaven: Our Enduring Fascination with the Afterlife

by Lisa Miller

“Wonderful…. A smart and accessible take on the ultimate What is Heaven? Lisa’s book is a good place to begin to find an answer.” — Jon Meacham, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of American Lion

“A rare combination of journalism, memoir, and historical research … this smart yet heartfelt book leads us into the center of one of the greatest conversations of all time. And Lisa Miller is the perfect conversation partner.” — Stephen Prothero, New York Times bestselling author of American Jesus and Religious Literacy

A groundbreaking history of the hereafter, Heaven by Newsweek reporter and religion editor Lisa Miller draws from both history and popular culture to reveal how past and presage visions of heaven have evolved and how they inspire us to both good and evil.

Genres: Nonfiction, Religion, History, Spirituality, Philosophy, Theology, Audiobook

371 pages, Kindle Edition

First published March 23, 2010

About the author

Librarian Note: There are more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.

Reviews

[Will Byrnes · Rating 4 out of 5]

What is your vision of heaven? (presuming, of course, that you have one) Harps and angels, great swaths of light, one’s ancestors waiting in a reception line? There are plenty of notions from which to cobble together an image. How did the practice of ancestor worship, and its suppression lead to notions of heaven? How did notions from diverse religions regarding life after death influence each other? Where does the expression "7th heaven" come from? How do scientific understandings of the universe affect religious views about heaven?


Lisa Miller

There is a wealth of extremely fascinating material in this look at how the notion of heaven came to be and how it has changed over the course of human history. Our contemporary parallel-universe notion is a far cry from early visions. Heaven was once thought of as the residence of the gods. Think Mount Olympus.

But the idea of heaven as we understand it—a place in the sky where the righteous go after death to live forever with God—that is a concept born to the Jews sometime during the second century before Christ…the connection between “righteous” behavior, as the Bible puts it, and resurrection and eternal life was entirely new and almost entirely Jewish.

Miller talks with a range of people with varying perspectives on heaven, some scholarly, some artistic, some personal. Don Piper had a near-death, or maybe post-death experience and wrote a book titled 90 Minutes in Heaven. Glenn Klausner claims to speak with those on “the other side.”

Heaven is a rich subject in literature and art, Dante, Revelations, the Koran, Gilgamesh, New Yorker cartoons. Albert Brooks talks with Miller about his film about the afterlife, Defending Your Life. She looks at the influence of artistic interpretations as both source and effect of popular notions of heaven. Dante and the Bible, in particular.

I quite enjoyed reading this book. There is great pleasure to be had in gaining new insights to the world, whether that world is this one or the next, and Miller offers it up in great dollops.

I had the pleasure of attending a book reading by the author in April 2010. Sitting in a Park Slope Barnes and Noble, waiting for the author to arrive, one could not help but note the presence of a pixie-ish young lady by the name of Josephine, maybe 6, 7, or 8 years old. She was beaming as she bounced up and down the aisles informing anyone whose eye she could catch that her mommy was the author. We are quite used to excessive numbers of parents, both of the helicopter and ground-based varieties, who regard their miniature walking DNA extracts as creatures deserving special (and often undeserved) admiration. How refreshing it was to see the reverse in action, but merited this time. Heavenly indeed.

Published - March 3, 2010
Review first posted - April 2010



=============================EXTRA STUFF

Links to the author’s personal, Twitter and FB pages

Another book on how our view of something profound has changed over time, How Jesus Became God, by Bart Ehrman

[Bakari · Rating 2 out of 5]

As you probably could guess, as an atheist I am largely disappointed with Lisa Miller’s Heaven: Our Enduring Fascination with the Afterlife. The book was endorsed by the popular atheist author Sam Harris, so I thought I’d give it a read.

I thought it would provide a critical analysis of how and why people believe in the concept of Heaven. Instead, the book is more about Miller’s journey to the questions, What do people of the mainly monotheistic religions believe about Heaven, and how do they act on those beliefs. She shares her own kind of spiritual journey to understand her beliefs, or lack of, about God, the afterlife, love, and Heaven. She finally answers in her epilogue what she herself truly believes about heaven.

As I read the book, I kept being overcome with sadness, because to me much of the convictions people seem to have about heaven stem from the existential life that we live. The concepts about largely center on longings for eternal joy and peace, mainly because life here on earth has been too complex, too wrought with uncertainty. And in the end, people want to believe that they will end up somewhere else that is not this place. That there life will not be lived in vain.

Now of course it so very difficult to talk objectively about heaven because much of what is said about it is rooted in mythical religious beliefs. Those beliefs are as varied and fanciful as any tall tale. It seems as though that people over time have just made up whatever they wanted to believe about heaven, as a way of expressing their spiritual longings, or the emptiness they feel when their love ones die. But I don’t think we should burden ourselves with these kinds of fanciful notions and concepts.

My father died back in 1981 and though I‘ve had many dreams about him, and though I wish that he were with us today, I’ve never felt like he had to be in some place called heaven. He was here; he lived, and now he’s not here. That’s it. He lives through our memory of him.

So for me, this question of heaven is just another religious concept that keeps us from connecting with the existential realities of life.

Miller doesn’t go into philosophical questions about existentialism as it relates to ideas about heaven. Her narrative and reportage never get any where that deep. Toward the end of the book, I thought she would at least include and analyze John Lennon’s song, "Imagine", where he starts off with:

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today

Interviewing people about what they understand by what he meant in those lyrics would have fit so well into her book. Yet, she spends pages and pages sharing the fanciful stories about what people believe about heaven. None of the descriptions are based on one iota of fact or rationality. One author writes about what heaven is like: “Mouths will no longer eat, nor will genitals copulate in heaven....mouths will sing praises to God, and genitals will survive for the sake of beauty. We will not chew in heaven, but we will have teeth, because we would look funny without them.”

From the Catholics to the Mormons, from the Jews to the Muslims, the fictional accounts of heaven get no better. The enduring fascination with the afterlife makes us seem so frail and inept at confronting life as it truly is.

Can most people ever really imagine there's no heaven? Sadly, it’s getting harder to believe that they can.

[Kristina Coop-a-Loop · Rating 2 out of 5]

Read Lisa Miller’s Heaven: Our Enduring Fascination with the Afterlife with a skeptical eye. By the end of the book, I found her research and her book to be lacking in her declared objectivity: “It is not my job, nor is it my intention, to prove or debunk the reality of any one vision” (xiv). Also:

I am not a scholar, a religious apologist, or an inspirational writer; I do not aim to say definitively what heaven looks like, let alone to prove or disprove its existence. I am a journalist in the field of religion, and my goal is to write a book that might guide people through the thicket of their own views about heaven by holding up a mirror of other people’s beliefs, both current and past. (xvi)

Unfortunately, Miller makes the book personal by injecting her own musings into the book; comments that often had me rolling my eyes in irritation or amused disgust.

The early chapters of Heaven are fairly straightforward research. Miller investigates the concept of heaven as presented by the three major monotheistic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. She traces the beginnings of the concept of an afterlife—or lack of an afterlife—for each religion and how those visions changed over time. The author includes scriptural excerpts and many interviews with religious scholars. The idea of heaven also includes the problem of how one actually gets there—bodily resurrection or spiritual? This is apparently a contentious debate. Miller describes “skeptics” as those who refuse to believe in a bodily resurrection. They do not think God will be able to reassemble bodies whose remains may be scattered and/or completely obliterated. God, these skeptics believe, cannot put Humpty Dumpty back together again, thus spiritual resurrection is only possible. This whole section about resurrection inspired reactions of disbelief, amazement and amusement. Disbelief and amazement that people believe in God, who, by the very nature of the name—God—should be all powerful but (perversely) don’t believe their God is powerful enough to recreate missing or mangled body parts. Oh, ye of little faith. The worries and questions about bodily resurrection amused and fascinated me: which “you” will be resurrected in heaven? You at death, or you at your physical peak? Or a more perfect version of you? (I prefer resurrected me to be much taller with perfectly arched eyebrows.) Will we have sexual organs or be smooth like plastic dolls? Will we eat, drink, have hair that grows? Such prosaic concerns. Never, in a million years, would I ever have thought about any of this. Granted, I’m an atheist so I see all of this as pointless anyway, but believers put a lot of thought into something they cannot control. Author and professor of religion at Boston University, Stephen Prothero, says: “It seems fantastic and irrational that we’re going to have a body in heaven” (109). Yes, but is not the whole idea of heaven and God fantastic and irrational? If I’m going to believe in that kind of magic, why limit it? There is no reason why my magical God cannot, upon my death, restore my physical body to its youth and improve upon it as I wish then send it via an invisible elevator, escalator, or beam of light (beam me up, Scotty) right to heaven where I will frolic for all eternity with animals, visit with family and friends I’m still on speaking terms with, read lots of books, eat carbs without counting calories, and catch up on all of my tv shows and movies.

Of course, before we get too excited about going to heaven (and before we should even care about whether we have bodies or just float around like balls of light), there’s the whole problem of paying the price of admission: salvation. Do good works get you through the pearly gates? Or must you rely on God’s grace? I favor the idea of good works because it gives you the (illusion?) having some kind of control over your heavenly fate. The problem with this, Miller states, is that it relies on the idea that eternal destiny is completely within an individual’s control. This leads to abuses such as the Great Indulgence Scandal of the Roman Catholic Church (which prompted Martin Luther’s angry list), martyrs (9/11), and false claims of goodness to disguise bad actions. The problem with grace is obvious—should you bother with good works or trying to lead a decent life if God’s grace can overrule any awfulness you’ve engaged in? And if you can gain entry to heaven only through knowing Jesus, then what about those who lived pre-Jesus? Or those who haven’t had the pleasure of a visit by Jehovah’s Witness practitioners passing out their incredibly scientifically inaccurate little booklets? Do people who did not and will never know of Jesus (through no fault of their own) burn in hell? That seems pretty harsh. Then there’s the problem of predestination. Some religions (including JW, which begs the question—why bother knocking on my door to tell me about Jesus if your God has already decided who gets to ride the heavenly Ferris wheel and who doesn’t?) believe that salvation is predestined and nothing you do or don’t do during your earthly life affects this. Predestination seems totally impractical from a religious perspective. If God decides your eternal path before you are born, why bother joining a religion (particularly one that holds this belief)? Why bother trying to live a good life? Why bother spreading the word of God? I guess you must be very confident that you (for whatever reason) are one of the blessed few.

Unfortunately, heaven isn’t the only place you land after death. There’s hell, purgatory and limbo. Purgatory is the cosmic waiting area after death. You hang out here for an unspecified time, flipping through months-old issues of Good Housekeeping and People Magazine and looking at your phone (which is probably useless in purgatory and who wants to check their Facebook page anyway after death? Your friends and family are out having fun and here you are, stuck in this misty void, attempting to cleanse your soul of its residual wickedness while waiting for Saint Peter to open the side door, look at a clipboard, and announce your name). Purgatory is either a painless soul-cleansing process or a torturous journey designed to teach you a lesson about the errors of your past life. Limbo is the fun place reserved for unbaptized babies. These babies are coated with original sin and doomed to spend all of eternity in baby hell—Limbo. Augustine, who decided this, obviously was a baby-hating dick. Not surprisingly, theologians were uncomfortable with the idea of baby hell, so eventually Thomas Aquinas (that sentimental goof) changed the description of Limbo as a happy place. Not heaven (original sin still present) but a peaceful place stocked with clean nappies, teething rings that never fall on the floor, lots of stuffed animals and colorful mobiles to coo at. Later, Pope Benedict XVI decided to phase out Limbo and send all those babies straight to heaven. This whole Limbo thing is nuts. It was created entirely by Roman Catholic theologians to solve the problem of where to put dead unbaptized babies still afflicted with original sin (a concept created by a patriarchal religion to keep women in line). If you’ve got original sin, you can’t go to heaven, even if you’re a baby. Now, if you’re a Christian, you believe this place is real and sanctioned by God. But if we (humans) find this baby hell an uncomfortable concept, we can just get rid of it? I love this! So…did Pope 16 have a chat with God first? Is God okay with the Pope getting rid of Limbo? It’s so amusing to me—humans decide they don’t like some part of a (supposed) God-sanctioned policy, so they just get rid of it…easy to do when it’s all a bunch of fiction anyway.

After discussing salvation and resurrection, Miller moves on to visions of heaven as expressed by religious scriptures, theologians, and artists. There is too much discussion here of Dante’s Divine Comedy. She also brings up Alice Sebold’s The Lovely Bones frequently. These might be the only two fictional works she’s read that describe heaven. Oh, and there is a (too serious) discussion of the song “Heaven” by David Byrne and the Talking Heads. It’s a great song but I never paid any attention to the lyrics (apparently to my detriment). Miller touches on reports of heaven; that is, near-death experiences (NDE). She introduces the subject in chapter 7: Visionaries by describing the NDE of Don Piper, although she doesn’t describe it as such. About 15 years after he nearly died, Piper wrote the book 90 Minutes in Heaven describing heaven. Miller asks: “Is Don Piper a crackpot, a huckster—or a prophet?” (159) She conveniently forgets to give readers the option of NDE. Almost twenty pages later, she finally introduces NDE. “In modern America,” Miller writes on page 176, “with all the resuscitation techniques available to us, the number of NDEs is surprisingly high.” I would say that’s not surprising at all. It’s probably because of our advanced technology that there is a rise in the number of reported NDEs. We can now—almost literally—bring people back from the dead and some of these people would be able to remember the experience. Miller interviews an associate professor in the Radiology Dept. at the University of Pennsylvania who studies brain scans of religious people who have ecstatic experiences as they meditate and explains those experiences in physiological and biological terms. He tells the author that these same processes may be what dying people experience, although he would not say that visions of heaven are caused by neurological processes. In order to balance out this science-based explanation, the author introduces a psychologist researching the possibility that the visions of heaven should be taken at face value and a Christian author who argues that because there are so many visions of heaven by people who experienced NDE, heaven is real.

The final chapter discusses the crazy idea that heaven could be boring. All that singing, floating around on clouds: “all are engaged in the activity of heaven, which is gazing upon God” (189). Thrilling. The problem, Miller and others say, is that contemporary American life is extremely comfortable and rivals the descriptions of material comfort found in heaven. That’s why, for many people, the idea of heaven seems to be ever more personal and reflect the current culture. Or, as in the idea of the Islamic paradise, an idealized world the provides all the comforts yours lacks (Islam, a religion borne of desert people, envisions heaven overflowing with lush fruit, streams, and let’s not forget all those virgins).

The more Miller strayed from theological research that could be supported by scripture, religious texts and archaeological artifacts, the more eye-rolling and ridiculous I found the book. She is on this journey to discover heaven along with the reader, and updates her progress periodically. Although Miller calls herself a “professional skeptic” and says she cannot bring herself to believe in a “supernatural realm where my grandparents exist as themselves” (241), she often comes across as someone who is this close to falling for a brilliant con. She interviewed a Trappist monk named Father Dominic Whedbee. This is a man who gave up having a normal life to be a monk and “through constant prayer to gain heaven for the whole community, and even for all the souls in the world” (136). Miller is grateful for his prayers: “It feels crazy to be saying this, but Dominic’s martyrdom consoles me. I am too distracted with my job, my family, my commute, and my grocery list to pay real attention to the fate of my soul. Dominic’s silent life of prayer gives me comfort and hope. I actually believe that if anyone’s prayers can get me to heaven, Dominic’s can” (137). In discussing people’s need to believe in supernatural help (because supernatural help is so much more reliable than calling 911) in times of trouble, she mentions a friend whose son died: “For the sake of my friend Jerry, I want to believe in miracles. It’s enough to make me pray” (xxv).

I have a problem with the people she interviewed to support her research. Other than the theologians and experts on religious texts, whose comments focused primarily on interpretations of text, some of her interview subjects seemed to be chosen to deliberately support what I feel is the author’s actual premise of the book—that heaven is real, depending on how you define it: “Happily, in my research for this book, I did find answers—believers whose visions made heaven seem possible or at least comprehensible, theologians and scholars whose explanations were, for me, both moving and memorable. The sources of my inspiration were unlikely because they mostly came from believers whose religious faith does not mesh neatly with my own” (xxvi). Her last sentence is ridiculous. The dogma of the three monotheisms may differ in some aspects, but they all overlap (particularly Islam, which is the youngest of the three and borrows from the earlier two) and have one major tenet in common: they all demand belief in the supernatural. She just wrote a whole damn book explaining how similar the religions are regarding the belief in an afterlife of some kind. When discussing NDE, she doesn’t interview a medical researcher or a doctor or anyone who can explain the neurological/chemical events that happen as the brain shuts down. She interviews an associate professor who studies brain scans of religious people. When asked if visions of heaven are merely chemical-neurological events, he is described as laughing “nervously” when he says (reasonably), well, there’s not enough evidence (which, based on his job description I don’t think he is qualified to give anyway) to support a definitive answer one way or another. Then she interviews a psychologist who talks with dying people to find patterns and similarities among their experiences: “Kelly believes the experiences of people who have had near-death visions demonstrates that consciousness exists even after normal brain function ceases—a theory that could suggest explanations for an afterlife beyond the scientific” (180). First, she’s a psychologist and does not have a medical background. Talking with someone is not comparable with brain scans. Second, can she definitively state that that person was medically dead at THIS TIME, yet still experiencing consciousness? I mean, come on. What she’s getting are the fleeting impressions that (I assume) an oxygen-starved brain is experiencing; Kelly’s interviewee could be unconsciously adding details that maybe he thinks Kelly wants to hear, or details he’s heard from other NDE; even so, this person was DYING and his memories of garbled sensory input are not solid evidence of anything, much less heaven. Kelly goes on to say: “The frequency and uniformity of NDEs opens up the possibility that these experiences are what they say they are, and we have to take that seriously” (180). Carl Sagan would say, actually, that proves the exact opposite; that because humans—no matter our customs, religious background, ethnicity, nationality—are composed of the same biological and chemical matter. At some point, a body shutting down engages in similar processes and will produce the same chemical-neurological sensations. The fact that dying people may all see long dead loved ones isn’t remarkable; if you missed someone greatly and know (or suspect) you may be dying, the brain may present with images of comfort. What would be interesting research: exploring if NDE are reported by people who were conscious of their impending death rather than those who were unconscious/comatose at the time.

The author’s credibility is pretty much shot with me when she interviews a Glenn Klausner, a “medium with a good reputation” (203). Well, whew. I’d hate to think she went to one of those mediums with a bad rep. Miller wants him to contact her grandmother, but (not surprisingly) Glenn does not do that. He basically dials into the spirit world and speaks with whomever answers the phone. An Ed Asner lookalike answers and Glenn decides this is her father-in-law (probably because he died before the author met him). Even though Glenn gets a lot wrong in this communication, when he tells Miller that her spirit father-in-law is apologizing for not being a better father to her husband, the author tears up. What a sucker. She compounds this sucker impression by admitting that (despite several misses) her remaining credulity in Glenn doesn’t completely vanish until spirit dad-in-law says his (still living) wife takes too much Valium (she doesn’t take any). But Miller still thinks Glenn is a “perfectly nice person” who “probably believes his own stories.” She comes to this no shit, Sherlock conclusion about Glenn: “For my part, I believe Klausner traffics in grief. If he really has this gift, he should always give it for free” (206). *eye roll*

Lisa Miller spends much of this book trying to justify a belief in heaven for her own personal reasons. Although she professes to be a skeptic and to not believe in heaven, I don’t believe her. She comes across as a sucker just waiting to be taken. The people she often chooses to interview are not the best choices and provide weighted commentary in support of heaven. Their research seems to be geared to accruing evidence to support their predetermined result—the existence of heaven. If the thesis of her book had been: “This book supports my theory/hope that heaven exists” then fine. But she clearly states that that is NOT her mission for the book. My problem is the book is trying to prove the idea that heaven exists by interviewing dubious sources and providing weak scientific evidence she knocks down later—something she claims she will not do. Miller then has the gall in the epilogue to complain that atheist writers Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris (whose work she “generally admires”) set up God to be a straw man they can easily knock down later: “they define God in the most simplistic, kindergarten terms: an omniscient, omnipotent meddler, whose inscrutable ways and insane approach to justice motivate people to great evil, or, at best, to compliant thoughtlessness” (243). She goes on to say that the majority of Americans don’t believe in that kind of a god. Miller, your argument is simplistic and as flimsy as the straw God you complain about. I agree, some of both authors’ writings do describe God the way she describes. Why? Because that is the Biblical God! They are not going to criticize the more gentle, kind, understanding God that people like to believe in—the God Americans have created because they are uncomfortable with the angry, spiteful, cruel God of the Old Testament. They will base their research on Biblical text! Not only that, both authors discuss much, much more than this tyrannical god. Their arguments are much more complex and encompassing of religious belief and its practitioners.

Heaven: Our Enduring Fascination with the Afterlife could have been a much more interesting book had the author been a better journalist and remained objective. She injects her desire to believe into the book and that undermines her stated goal for the book. If she had been a gifted writer with a wry sense of humor about her own gullibility, I probably could have laughed with her. However, by the time I finished, I had very little respect left for her as a supposed journalist and skeptic.

[Richard Derus · Rating 3 out of 5]

I approached the book as a non-believer in any of the Big Three religions responsible for the idea of Heaven in the first place. I want always to keep my antennae out for changes in their belief systems, since the Big Three have a history of disliking people like me, and the only way to do that is to read up on where things began. Can't recongize change if you don't have a picture of the starting point, can you?

Ideas of Heaven have always seemed so...well, silly is the only word I have for it...to me. I can think of nothing that fits more exactly the "are you KIDDING with this stuff?!" strain of unbelief than the notion of Eternal Delight or Eternal Punishment. What could one possibly do in one meager lifetime to merit Eternal Anything At All? It's a very exclusion-oriented, blame-fixated kind of concept.

So that's what I learned about myself from reading this book: I chose wisely when I waved bye-bye to Jesus, I can't even buy into the rewards program, still less the nonsensical rules part of the contract.

But the evolution of the idea, which remains one of the most powerful and motivating in the Big Three's arsenal, is fascinating. The author is a professional religion journalist in mainstream publications (!) and a sort of practicing Jew. Of the Big Three, Judaism is the lightest on the Heaven front, and isn't growing as fast as the other two, more nimble, marketers. She approaches each of her subjects with a profound respect for his or her beliefs, with the notable and quite rudely dismissive exception of a psychic medium. She delves briefly into the history of each of the Big Three's ideas of Heaven before going into a lot of detail about the current set of beliefs in the current version of their concepts.

It's a shock to me that people buy this guff at all. It's transparently manipulative, and it's not in the least bit shy about its net effect of damning those Not Like You to eternity without happiness. What a horrifyingly vicious mindset that is.

Well, the author doesn't agree with me, and she very carefully and very thoroughly explains what the Big Three's adherents today think without judging them. I wish I could be so kind. I judge them harshly for this mindset, and I think they should all remember that chickens always come home to roost...what goes out strongly flavors what comes back.

Look at me! I give out rationalistic unbelief, and am engulfed in *tidal waves* of emotionalistic credulity. It is the way of the world. More's the pity.

[Lee Harmon · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’ve found my soul sister! Meet Lisa Miller, a self-described journalist, religion expert, and professional skeptic. She sometimes wants to believe, but it isn’t in her. She misses her grandparents, and wishes she could picture them contentedly up there in heaven waiting for her, but she just can’t. Her journey in this book to learn about heaven may have been spurred by a certain emptiness.

In search of heaven, Lisa interviews dozens of people, from rock musicians to homemakers to heavy-hitting theologians. From Muslims to Jews (her heritage) to Christians and beyond. She finds that, for most people, heaven is the best of what they already enjoy on earth—only a little better. And forever.

Lisa likes statistics, and the statistics show religious views are changing. Today, 65 percent of Americans believe that many different religious paths can lead to eternal salvation. Only a third of Americans still believe in a God who controls human events. Yet, 81 percent of Americans tell pollsters that they believe in heaven, up from 72 percent ten years earlier. How can this be? “It’s hard to know exactly what they mean—beyond an automatic and understandable hope for something after death besides the terrifying end of everything.” Belief in reincarnation, for example, is trending upward, fueled in part because people today WANT to come back and live again. Life is better in our age. Where before, we wanted to escape the cycle, now we want another run at it.

A fun and thought-provoking book, I’d recommend this one for anyone.

[Dean Anderson · Rating 4 out of 5]

When I was a little kid, first grade or so, I had a nightmare about Chilly Willie, the penguin cartoon character. Chilly was out in the ocean and he drowned. But that wasn't the scary part. The scary part was seeing the bird sitting on a cloud in heaven. And he was going to be there, doing nothing for ever. That boredom was what scared me.
That's why I was happy to see that Lisa Miller, in her book Heaven (Harper Collins 2010), included a chapter entitled "Is Heaven Boring?" Because a lot of adults wonder about that, it isn't just the mini-me. Miller explores many interesting questions about heaven and the answers provided by the monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) for the last few millennia. Ideas about Heaven from culture (Dante) to pop culture (The Lovely Bones) are also presented.
Miller is Jewish, the religion editor of Newsweek and skeptical herself about the existence of heaven. But her interviews with followers of various faiths are fair and respectful. She calls Anne Graham Lotz (Billy's daughter) a friend and listens politely (and uncomfortably) to Anne pleas to take the Christian path to Heaven. She also writes about her respect for prominent atheists.
It is interesting to follow the history of views of Heaven through the years and the various ways heaven is viewed today. Is Heaven a physical place or purely spiritual? Does one get entrance to Heaven through faith or works or does everyone get in? How does one's view of Heaven affect the way one lives life? The varied answers to these questions that Miller finds are intriguing, sometime funny, and thought provoking.
I knew a lot of the things that Miller writes about. I remembered from my seminary days about Augustine's teaching that unbaptized babies would not get into heaven. (The Bishop of Hippo wrote that just as the thief on the cross would enter Heaven based on his faith, though he was not baptized; babies who are baptized enter Heaven though they have not faith.) I hadn't known (or remembered) that the church father went on to argue that there was a special baby hell, wherein baby souls wouldn't really even notice their torture. (Baby hell is a concept worth pondering.)
I was unaware of some of the Muslim theories of the intermediary state between death and the Resurrection. This is a theory that two angels with green eyes and long fangs test the newly dead with a series of questions. Those who pass the test with flying colors will get a window view of heaven. Second tier corpses will get a window to hell with the assurance that they won't go there. Third level is pretty bad because your grave will be set afire and fourth is worse because your sins are turned into wild animals that will attack you.
I also found fascinating the archeological evidence that in ancient Israel, people kept their ancestors bones under there house and may have consulted and/or worshiped them.
Miller can, of course, present no definitive conclusions with her research. But she seems to believe that it is a challenge to rationalism to believe in Heaven and is very uncomfortable with the idea that there is only one route to get there.
Obviously, these are difficult questions. But I believe in a powerful God who can do as He chooses. And that He has graciously choose to give life to His people after life on this earth.
And as to that question of whether Heaven is boring, I came to my own conclusions when I attended camp as a kid, a few years after that penguin dream. A speaker at camp pointed to the beauty around us (the spectacular Sierra Nevada Mountains) and the fun we'd had though the week (swimming, games, archery, great food) and said that a God who thought up such great things would have even better things to come. For me, that answered my fear. That's when I trusted Christ for forgiveness of my sins and began looking forward to Heaven.

[Erik Graff · Rating 1 out of 5]

Lisa Miller has written on matters religious for both The Wall Street Journal and for Newsweek. This speaks poorly for both publications. Sadly, she doesn't know what's she writes about, not here at least, not beyond her reports of pleasant conversations she's had by phone or face-to-face with others, some of whom presumably did know what they were talking about.

I would be very surprised if Ms. Miller has ever seriously studied the Koran or the Hebrew or Christian Scriptures. If she once did, she's forgotten a lot about them and about the contexts within which they were written and redacted. What she does seem familiar with are modern polls--frightening figures indicating (at worst) that most Americans are psychotic or (at best) that many Americans lie to pollsters delivering their typically simple-minded questions.

While lacking in intellectual rigour (or just perhaps aiming for a lowest-common-denominator readership), Ms. Miller seems a nice enough person, not herself crazy and tolerant of those who are. If there are persons out there who would actually enjoy reading a sophomoric patchwork survey of beliefs in pleasant hereafters, this might be justifiable as a 'liberal' introduction to more serious religious studies.

[Jeff Crompton · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a somewhat difficult book to review, for a variety of reasons. For one thing, previous reviewers have said much of what I was thinking about saying, sometimes in almost the exact words I was planning to use. Reading Heaven got pretty tiresome after a while, mostly due, ironically, to Miller's even-handed approach. She interviews Christians, Jews, and Muslims - clerics and laymen alike - and relays a bewildering variety of opinions about the afterlife patiently and sympathetically.

She certainly has more patience than me. Belief in heaven presents a myriad of problems - Is it a real place? Will we have bodies? Will all good people go to heaven, or just those of my religion? Do unbaptized babies go to heaven? Won't heaven be boring? - and it was somewhat painful to me to read the logical contortions that theologians and regular folks have gone through to make it all plausible.

I suspect that those who, like me, have firmly established opinions on the afterlife - whatever those opinions are - will find this book trying. Perhaps those who are searching, or who don't know what to think, will find something to enjoy here.

[Trenchologist · Rating 4 out of 5]

-Has a narrowed focus on Judaism, Christianity, Islam.

This is a solid intersection of 'rigorous research' and just sitting down and having a long talk with a variety of people on the subject. Miller's voice is strong, compassionate, level-headed, readable. She's a good Beatrice (guide) for the journey through the conversations.

Nothing wildly provocative or groundbreaking but doesn't need to be. Plenty of historical--including recent history--seismic shifts are outlined. This isn't a testament to or rebuttal of faith. It's a survey of doctrines and evolving beliefs and how religions and its people got there. Which makes for an absorbing read.

[Steven Meyers · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you live long enough, you’ll deal with the loss of a loved one. Unless you’re a hardcore misanthrope or a psychopath, it’s a serious kick to one’s psyche. It’s understandable that people would yearn for an afterlife where the ones they cherish will greet them and everything will be rainbows and sunshine forevermore. The Rainbow Bridge myth is where pet owners reunite for good with their dead pets. The poem popped up sometime during the 1980s or 90s. It helped fuel a very lucrative market for rainbow bridge-themed dog urns and whatnot. We recently had our sweet beloved 15-year-old dog euthanized. This was the third canine in which we’ve had euthanasia performed. Man oh man, it’s never easy being there for the pets during the last moments of their life. Even as a decades-long agnostic, a very, very teeny-tiny part of me irrationally clings to the fantasy that there is something beyond death and we will all possibly meet again. Self-deception is a tool humans use all the time to alleviate our own suffering or anxiety. Because my feelings were so raw due to our dog’s death, I felt it was an opportune time to read Ms. Miller’s investigation into how people around the world perceive the afterlife. Her book was published in 2010.

Ms. Miller’s introduction was reassuring. She’s well aware that “…the story of heaven is as much about believers as it is about belief – for how people imagine heaven changes with who they are and how they live.” Her mindset seems to align closely with my own. The author states, “(I) have an impatience for insufficient explanations and a reverence for the inexplicable beauty and perfection in the natural world.” We’re not on the same page about the perfection part but close enough. The book focuses on the perceptions of heaven by the three largest Western monotheisms: Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. The author starts before the entire concept of people going to heaven became a thing. It was back during a time when Jews had old traditions such as feeding the dead. ‘Heaven’ shows how numerous arguments over cultural practices and religious interpretations have been going on since humans invented gods. Ms. Miller addresses when, how, and if the dead hit the spiritual sweepstakes. There appear to be as many set of criteria as there are stars in the sky, depending upon your religious persuasion. It also touches upon such things as the Apocalypse; physical resurrection; Salvation (grace versus deeds); purgatory; the Christian practice of indulgences to fast-track yourself into heaven; the creative impact of Dante’s Paradiso; near-death experiences as well as scientists weighing in on what such people were experiencing; Spiritualism; and the concerns about celestial tedium.

Ms. Miller’s book reminds me of Mary Roach’s informative works such as ‘Stiffed’ and ‘Spook.’ It is not presented in a cynical manner but with a combination of curiosity, candor, and respect. The author asks many cogent questions in her personal search for answers. Ultimately, I found the book interesting but was slightly disappointed that no one in ‘Heaven’ considered the dynamics based upon people having mental-health issues. It avoids such debilitating conditions as schizophrenia that might have been an affliction the supposed prophets were sporting and also how such other mental-health disorders like sociopathy or psychopathy factor into a person entering heaven. Subtly and advancements in science of the mind are ignored. ‘Heaven’ is a nice presentation of what various people throughout history have believed happens when they kick the bucket, but it’s really just an archaic exercise in futility and fantasies.

[Paul Patterson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lisa Miller gives us readers an extremely entertaining, educative and vulnerable exploration into the plethora of views regarding heaven. She is a Reformed Jew and editor of Newsweek's religion section. Miller isn’t committed to a firm belief in Heaven but definitely manages to elicit our hopes for a meaningful life... and perhaps more. I haven’t read any treatment of heaven that is more conversationally readable than this book. With genuine interest and tolerance the author listens to a variety of view points concerning afterlife. She honestly admits that she wished she might have the same faith and confidence in heaven as some of her interviewees express. She seems particularly drawn to the ideas of heaven in orthodox Judaism and evangelicalism. I am not sure whether or not her hopes are crushed due to being a thoroughly postmodern person divorced from a the ancient world-views but she does seem to wish for the earlier literal belief in heaven, even though she is intellectually convinced of modern cosmology.

I felt as if I were receiving a wonderful review of all the comparative religion courses I have ever had while at college. The only difference was that she was thoroughly engaging and utilized testimony from individuals who believed ardently in their views of afterlife rather than mere theorists. She made me want to take the topic seriously and to explore how whatever the other side contains it has an importance to my here and now life.

Lisa Miller has definitely done a vast amount or research and recommends some of the best popular and academic treatments of her subject. I was delighted to see that she even spoke to and read N.T. Wright one of my favourite Christian theologians who stresses the importance of Resurrection rather than immortality in a bodiless other world. Like the author herself, Wright does all in his power to intricately connect the Heaven to Earth in a profoundly hopeful manner.

While tabulating the views of Heaven in the history of religions and current traditions, she doesn’t neglect to submit Heaven to the gaze of empirical science by discussing the various research on NDE (Near Death Experience) and physic phenomena. The age old dilemma of Mind/Brian connection is ever in the background. However, even when discussing the first hand accounts of dying and returning Lisa Miller emphasizes the need to apply a ethical litmus test as to whether the experience enhanced the character of the person having had it. From her examples it appears that the NDE experience regularly retrieves individuals from death to their normal consciousness with more love, generosity and confidence. Such transformation can not be easily dismissed.

Lisa Miller rarely takes sides in the debates on heaven, except in the case of exploiting the grieving through seances or by making the entry to Heaven a sectarian or ethnic privilege. She maintains an open mind throughout her book and ultimately displays a gracious attitude toward different points of view. There is very little reductionism here nor is there any deriding of the beliefs of others. Love is Heaven’s watchword; Dante is its prime poet. Miller doesn’t evade the fact that heaven, when overly literalized and humanized, is jest-worthy as her comments on Albert Brooks’ 1991 film Defend Your Life reveal. In-between reincarnating Hassid Jews, Paradise pursuing Muslims and a host of others, the true North of Miller’s discussion is an affirmation of life. She exalts the importance of Heaven for the expectant living in her last paragraph,

I do not cling to heaven as a radical concept, a place that embodies the best of everything – but beyond the best. A belief in heaven focuses our minds on the radical nature of what’s beautiful, most loving, most just, and most true. At the beginning of this book, I said, I believed that heaven was hope. I would now amend that to say, “Radical hope - a constant hope for unimaginable perfection even as we fail to achieve it. As Emily Dickinson said, heaven is what we cannot reach. But it is worth a human life to try.

[Corey · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was pretty interesting as it covered all three of the major faiths - so I learned a lot about things I never thought I would. And it didn't hurt that she threw in bits about the Talking Heads and Albert Brooks' "Defending Your Life." Still maybe not as good as Gary Scott Smith's "Heaven In the American Imagination."

[Jeanette Thomason · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating look at thoughts, beliefs, and imagination of eternity from an author who says she does not believe in Heaven. I love that Lisa Miller primes what theologians, the common woman and man, famous personalities, artists, poets, preachers, scholars, scientists, and legend have said about Heaven over the ages. Her very exploration makes me believe she has doubts of an eternal Paradise, but is in want of it; this book helps me clarify my own thinking and beliefs, while not agreeing with her own or any of the others presented. Full of anecdotes and vivid word illustration, the read is fast, fact-filled, and researched, without being pompous or academic in any way. Miller is conversational and earnest in trying to understand Heaven. Chapter five alone, "Resurrection," made the book worthy for me. Here, the author addresses the frequent accusation that Heaven is the manufacture of the grieving mind overcome with agony, that some people cling to the idea of Heaven as a way of coping with unbearable, irrevocable loss on earth, because they believe they will see and be with those they love in a non-suffering Heaven. The chapter leaves many lingering questions because the author can find no answers here. So much is unknown. This is a defining chapter about what one chooses to believe, and how either way the choice defines what and who and where you put your faith.

[Denise · Rating 3 out of 5]

My introduction to Heaven happened about the same age as most people are introduced to it, as a very young child. My grandfather had died and sayings such as "he is looking down on us" popped up. Heaven became a place "up-there" where loved ones looked down on us living. This caused a bit of embarrassment as I entered puberty. Later, I moved through groups that had abandoned Heaven and Hell, instead everyone dies and takes a dirt nap until resurrected to be judged -good people form the new Kingdom and bad people get obliterated from memory in a second death. I picked up this book on a recommendation in order to sort out some of the historical development and abandonment of Xian Heaven.

Ms. Miller covers more than Christian history, she also takes a look at Jewish beliefs present and past as well as Muslim. It is not possible for her to cover every single sect that exists, but I felt she did a good job of showing variety. I think progressive theists could read this book without issue and find it as interesting as I have. Difficult to say how an evangelist, fundamentalist, or orthodox theist would take it.

If the reader is looking for a hard-hitting book that really questions how and why people believe the things they do, this isn't that kind of book. It is interviews and conversation, a softball read.

[Pierre A Renaud]

"Yet there is an unthinking "respect" automatically accorded to religious ideas that throttles our ability to think clearly about these questions. Miller's book – after being a useful exposition of these ideas – swiftly turns itself into a depressing illustration of this. She describes herself as a "professional sceptic", but she is, in fact, professionally credulous. Instead of trying to tease out what these fantasies of an afterlife reveal about her interviewees, she quizzes everyone about their heaven as if she is planning to write a Lonely Planet guide to the area, demanding more and more intricate details. She only just stops short of demanding to know what the carpeting will be like. But she never asks the most basic questions: where's your evidence? Where are you getting these ideas from? These questions are considered obvious when we are asking about any set of ideas, except when it comes to religion, when they are considered to be a slap in the face." in 'Heaven: A Fool's Paradise' (Johann Hari) http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/c...#

[Joshunda Sanders · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lisa Miller, Newsweek's religion editor, is an adept reporter and an effective writer. This is evident, in particular, because a topic like Heaven can lend itself to histrionics and she keeps a level, skeptical and sometimes, personal, perspective that lends gravity and light to her reporting. She talks to monastics, scholars, channelers, and ordinary people to figure out how people mostly think of heaven, if they do, and what they imagine it to be. It's a compelling book.

[James Frederick · Rating 3 out of 5]

For the most part, this was a fun and interesting read. There were some quirks, but they were just that. The Kindle edition is poorly edited. The word righteousness appears seemingly 100 times in this book. It always appears as "righteous ness." Princeton is rendered Prince ton. It is not like that detracts from the subject matter, but it does DISTRACT from the subject matter.

I found it surprising and disappointing that after all of the searching and seeking and research, (even from David Byrne, of all people), the writer was left with the conclusion that heaven does not exist.

I kind of got a sense that the writer was attacking this from an academic sense, as if she had decided to write a thesis or term paper on the topic. She devoted herself to completing the project and getting the grade, as opposed to ??? I don't know what I feel was missing. Faith, perhaps. As a Christian, I come to this subject matter with perhaps a different perspective than the writer did. If I was just watching a documentary on the subject, which is kind of how this reads, then maybe I would have been fine with how it turned out.

[Michael Storer · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really interesting and broad coverage of the conception and inception of this strange thing called 'Heaven'. I have learnt a lot from this book and have dog-eared more pages than most others, and I especially appreciated the contemporary personal accounts being interwoven with the historical (which was, many people forget, someone's own personal account). It took me a long time to read this book and I often left it for the excitement of others: partly, I think this is due to the topic's dense nature and the author's lack of clear differentiation between chapters and themes, and partly to my own wanting to digest this fully. For a lay person's introduction to Heaven (sociologically and philosophically) this is THE text. Just be prepared for the longhaul...

[Hank Pharis · Rating 2 out of 5]

(NOTE: I'm stingy with stars. For me 2 stars means a good book or a B. 3 stars means a very good book or a B+. 4 stars means an outstanding book or an A {only about 5% of the books I read merit 4 stars}. 5 stars means an all time favorite or an A+ {Only one of 400 or 500 books rates this!).

The great news is that I can listen to a book a day at work. The bad news is that I can’t keep up with decent reviews. So I’m going to give up for now and just rate them. I hope to come back to some of the most significant things I listen to and read them and then post a review.

[Elisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Lovely, human, personal, and comforting. Not all-encompassing, of course, because that’s impossible. So just sit back and learn about other people’s ideas about heaven through different ages, countries, and beliefs.

[Joe Henry · Rating 3 out of 5]

Miller, Lisa. Heaven: Our Enduring Fascination With the Afterlife. New York: Harper Collins, 2010.

Did you ever wonder why it is that people are so intent on believing there is an afterlife? Of course, when you look into it a bit, you see that not everyone does and at one time essentially none (of our forbearers) did. In early Hebrew history, for instance, we see no commonly held belief in individual life after death until into the second century B.C.E. Heaven was just a place where God (or, for other traditions, the gods) and angels lived; until late in the Old Testament period, only two men had been said to go to heaven (to be with God): Enoch and Elijah. Today, however, polls cited by the author suggest that in the U.S. about 80% believe in heaven as a place where people (and pets?) go after death. So, how is that?

In the introduction, the author says:

“I am not a scholar, a religious apologist, apologist, or an inspirational writer. I do not aim to say definitively what heaven looks like, let alone to prove or disprove its existence. I am a journalist in the field of religion, and my goal is to write a book that might guide people through the thicket of their own views about heaven by holding up a mirror of other people’s beliefs, both current and past.” P. xvi

In the “Author’s Note and Acknowledgements,” she allows, “This book is—as are all books, I suspect—a personal journey. It’s the story one woman exploring more than two millennia of Western ideas about heaven.” P. 249

Miller, Jewish herself, at the time of publication was religion editor at Newsweek and had been writing regular columns on the intersection of spirituality, belief, ethics, and politics. Previously, she was on staff at the New Yorker and the Wall Street Journal.

Organization of the book is as follows:
• Introduction (19 pages)
• Text body (248 pages)
• Author’s Note & Acknowledgments (6 pages)
• Notes (42 pages)
• Bibliography (25 pages)
• Index (11 pages)

One could make a pretty good guess at the content by her chapter titles:
1. What is Heaven?
2. The Miracle
3. The Kingdom is Near
4. Green, Green Pastures
5. Resurrection
6. Salvation
7. Visionaries
8. Reunions
9. Is Heaven Boring?
10. Epilogue

The way she handles notes is a little different perhaps. She does provide a lot of detail on sources and references, organized by chapter, but the text in the body itself gives no hint when there are corresponding notes. I reckon it is up to the reader to check the notes when he has a question or is curious about the source or reference for something said. So, in the Notes section, the reader finds the notes listed in sequence by page number.

Bibliography looks fairly extensive—not annotated, but it would keep one busy for a while. Index appears probably pretty decent—I didn’t have any occasion to use it.

Her research relies in part on interviews with various ones she considers expert (or strongly opinioned) on the subject—what she refers to as her panel of experts. She provides a little color in the narrative with passing descriptions of where she met them (in the interviewee’s home or at a café maybe) and/or the appearance and demeanor of the interviewee. Initially, I found this little habit rather off-putting, considering it rather inconsequential in the narrative and almost-but-not-quite gossipy—I mean, who cares, really? In fact, I remember commenting to my wife that I wasn’t sure I would finish the book. However, I kept reading…and reading…and reading…and reading. So, I reckon in the end I should say I did find it pretty readable and worthwhile…strikes me as somewhat comparable to a long-running interesting conversation on a compelling but puzzling subject.

[Robert · Rating 2 out of 5]

Lightly written in a journalistic style, this book is an extensive survey of contemporary views of the afterlife. Although Miller provides some historical and theological background to the orthodox views of the three Abrahamic faiths (including their evolution over time and their variants), this is not a scholarly work. Is more sociology than theology. Is based primarily on a wealth of interviews with an wide range of people - from clerical spokesmen to "spirit channelers" - encompassing a host of people she met as the Religion Editor of Newsweek. The most interesting were those of ordinary folks who, chatting over a cup of coffee or while eating lunch, articulated their authentic, informal thoughts about the nature of "life in heaven". Their concepts of heaven were often quite vividly imaged, truly appealing, and their reasons for holding those beliefs quite touching. Being human, I also would find comfort in knowing that my dead are not "gone forever". Still, to me, all "visions" of heaven, all descriptions of it, no matter how sincere, how heart-felt, seem foolish. Heaven is a concept best left vague, undefined, nebulous. Considering it logically, asking questions about whether heaven exists in space and time, whether the folks there will have bodies and bodily needs, will re-join their families, will continue to develop, continue to learn, or whether they will simple stand, forever, stupefied, around the throne of God, awestruck with wonder - treating these questions seriously, as perhaps answerable by man in the here and now - has little spiritual meaning or value for me - it turns the afterlife into a magic, wish-fulfillment fantasy. Seems better to forgo imaging heaven (as has been done with "hell"), and simply trust, as Paul wrote, that nothing can ever separate us from the love of God. This is sufficient for me - all I need to know.

[Stephanie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Summary: An examination of Western civilization's interaction with the concept of "heaven" particularly through the lens of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

Thoughts: I enjoyed this book a lot. I liked seeing how notions of heaven evolved throughout the centuries to address the concerns of people (for example, the domestic idea of heaven as a place where we are reunited with family really only comes from the past two centuries). And I liked seeing how people throughout time have grappled with these questions. They're big and I think they're important but they can also seem overwhelming and difficult.

Personally I waver on what heaven is like. I believe in it but whether it's a giant library (my favorite) or an eternity worshipping God or something else, I'm not entirely sure.

My favorite story is from the Muslim tradition where in heaven a man's good works are stacked up high as a mountain but they are outweighed by one single gift from God to the man. I think that's very beautiful and so true; God's grace to us overwhelms anything we can do. I find that very humbling and spiritually satisfying.

Another thing I like is that Miller mentions how increasingly people believe that other people can make it to heaven even if they believe something different. I find that positive that even with all the conflict here, people still want other people saved for eternity.

Overall: 4 out of 5. Good job exploring this topic and sparking my imagination about it. It also gave me some titles to add to my list!

[Todd Stockslager · Rating 4 out of 5]

Who wants to go to Heaven?

… and why. Miller asks these questions in her layman's survey of Jewish, Muslim, and Christian ideas of Heaven through the 3,000-plus years of recorded religious thought and practice of these three major religions of the Book.

Miller is a journalist, not a theologan, so she doesn't exegete the Bible, the Qaran, or the Torah, but she does ask the questions we all ask our ceilings in the darkest hour--late at night, by a loved one's death bed, after greatest successes and deepest failures. What is Heaven like? Where is it? Who will be there? Will I know and be known by my loved ones there? Her answers aren't orthodox, and aren't meant to be. As a journalist, she is synthesing information to inform, and does a good job of it (particularly walking the third rail between "mainline" and conservative Protestant ideas which can throw off such strong sparks).

It is interesting to read of the interchange of ideas between the three major religions, of the mutability of the idea of Heaven over time, and of the richness of portrails of Heaven in literature and art. She spends some time outlining Dante's Paradiso, and the bibliography should be a valuable source for those wishing to dig deeper than this short survey allows.

[Marty · Rating 3 out of 5]

There were parts of this book that I enjoyed a lot. I had never really thought before about whether or not heaven was a physical place, for example. And if so, where is it located, exactly? Do we have bodies there? Are they our resurrected physical bodies, or are we spirits? How do we look? Like we did when we died, or how we did when we were young and healthy?

I liked reading about different religion's - and individual people's - ideas of heaven. It was also interesting to learn why conceptions of heaven changed over time - for example, it was during the Civil War, when 2% of the population died, that the idea of seeing your loved ones in heaven first became popular.

The main problem that I had with this book is that it often just seemed sort of - random, I guess. As I read it, it seemed like the author jumped from one theory or hope for what heaven will consist of to another, just sort of meandering around. I know that we obviously can't know an "answer," here, and it doesn't make sense for her to argue to a point - but I needed the book to have more direction, I guess, than it did.

[Eliza Fayle · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lisa does not set out to define heaven. What she does do is provide us with a wide range of descriptions based on history, biblical research, art, and people’s beliefs. Also, while acknowledging there are more religions and spiritualities than you can shake a stick at, she confines her research to Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. She does so because Christians, Jews and Muslims all share a common belief about heaven. It is God’s home.

If Lisa is not trying to determine exactly where heaven is and what it is, then what is she attempting to do? She is doing a whole bunch of research for us, so we can draw our own conclusions. To me, this is responsible journalism. Do credible and professional research, then let me draw my own conclusions.

To read the full review visit http://silverandgrace.com/book-review...

[Donia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Despite having heard of this book and its author, it took the push of my book club to make me read Miller's Heaven. Once I picked it up, I was surprised how much I enjoyed it.

I'm perpetually wary of journalists who pursue topics generally reserved for academics and that's what initially kept me from reading this. Miller has no religion degree or history degree... She's a journalist with years of experience writing about religion.

But Miller proves to be a competent researcher. She is looking for her own answers with this book and in many ways, this is a personal pilgrimage for her. She visits academics, ministers, ascetics, and people of every religion. Along the way, Miller traces a lot of history of the major religions and I particularly enjoyed the parts on Judaism. It's an enjoyable and enlightening read.

[Eleanor · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a fantastic book.

I saw the author, Lisa Miller, on "The Colbert Report" and decided I had to order it. She had silver hair that made her look anywhere between thirty and sixty and my mom noted "I want to be her friend."

So, with high expectations, I read "Heaven" and was not disappointed. I have been interested in religion (Steven Prothero's "Religious Literacy" is on my to-read list) and this was a entertaining way to learn about the Abrahamic religions (Islam, Judaism, and Christianity) without being bored out of my skull.

Never mean-spirited and filled with hilarious jokes, I wouldn't call it a must-read but I'd call it a good-read.

[Tlaloc · Rating 3 out of 5]

Starts off strong with an explanation of how heaven, as we know it, gradually came about from an evolution of primitive Judaic beliefs coming into union with pagan and Hellenic influences. The afterlife of King David would be very much at odds with our current understanding of it, were we to compare the two.

Afterwards, however, it becomes a rather mundane overview of the concept as seen from several religions, the general geist of which I was well aware of beforehand, and I think most people with any knowledge of religion would feel bored as well.

[Mary · Rating 3 out of 5]

I didn't realize I had some sort of expectation for this book until I realized that I was disappointed after reading it. While Miller is a good writer, has done her research and presents a coherent set of ideas, I just wan't grabbed. Concepts of heaven have plenty of history in Christianity, Judiasm and Islam - so the book felt particularly religion-heavy. But then again, what was I expecting?

I suppose I found it a bit bland, that's all - I bet plenty of other will have and will enjoy this book, and they wouldn't be wrong to do so.