Three Deaths, Three Worlds

On November 22, 1963, C.S. Lewis, John F. Kennedy, and Aldous Huxley die within hours of each other. Each represents a dominant worldview: Lewis, theism (orthodox Christianity); Kennedy, modern humanism (liberal Christianity); Huxley, Eastern pantheism (mystical, perennial philosophy). The book imagines their meeting in the afterlife, setting the stage for a Socratic Dialogue Structure about the meaning of life, death, and, above all, the identity of Jesus Christ. Their deaths become a microcosm of humanity's intellectual and spiritual history, and their conversation is a "Great Conversation" about the ultimate questions.

Meeting Beyond the Veil

The trio finds themselves in a mysterious, pleasant place—neither heaven nor hell, perhaps purgatory or limbo. They quickly begin to debate where they are and why, each bringing their own assumptions: Lewis suspects purgatory, Kennedy is skeptical, and Huxley claims everywhere is heaven if one is enlightened. Their banter quickly turns to method: how can one know anything about the afterlife, or about ultimate reality? The stage is set for a deeper exploration of faith, reason, and authority.

Where Are We Now?

The men discuss the reality of heaven, hell, and purgatory. Lewis insists on the literal existence of heaven and hell, while Kennedy is uncomfortable with the idea of eternal punishment, preferring to see God as pure love. Lewis counters that hell is a logical consequence of free will—people choose separation from God. Huxley, meanwhile, sees all as one, blurring distinctions between heaven and hell. The conversation exposes the foundational differences in their worldviews and their implications for human destiny.

The Nature of Truth

The dialogue shifts to epistemology: how do we know what is true? Lewis argues for faith based on authority, but not blind faith—reason and faith are partners. Kennedy is wary of authority, suspecting it of being a psychological crutch. Lewis exposes the "genetic fallacy"—the error of dismissing a belief because of its origin rather than its truth. The men agree that truth is correspondence with reality, not merely subjective preference or social consensus.

Authority and Faith

Lewis distinguishes between human and divine authority, arguing that Christ's authority is unique because he is the "Author" of reality. Kennedy resists, seeing authority as potentially oppressive. The discussion reveals the modern suspicion of authority and the challenge of accepting revealed truth. Lewis insists that faith begins with the will's assent to God, not the mind's surrender to the Church, and that reason can and should examine faith's claims.

Who Is Jesus?

The conversation zeroes in on the pivotal issue: who was (and is) Jesus? Kennedy sees Jesus as the ideal man, "man become God" in the eyes of his followers, not "God become man." Lewis insists on the traditional Christian claim: Jesus is literally God incarnate. The debate highlights the difference between "old" and "new" Christianity, and the stakes: if Jesus is not divine, Christianity collapses; if he is, everything else follows.

Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?

Lewis presents the classic apologetic: Jesus claimed divinity. If true, he is Lord; if false, he is either a liar (if he knew it was false) or a lunatic (if he believed it). The "just a good man" option is ruled out—no sane, moral person claims to be God unless it's true. Kennedy resists the black-and-white logic, but Lewis presses: the gap between Jesus' claims and reality must be explained. The argument is not about preference but about logical necessity. This section introduces the Trilemma as a central Plot Device.

The Sage and the Madman

The men discuss what makes a sage: wisdom, love, creativity. Sages are trustable, but those with a "divinity complex" are not—they lack true wisdom, love, and creativity. Jesus, uniquely, combines the qualities of a sage with the claim to divinity. No other sage (Buddha, Socrates, Confucius) claimed to be God; those who do are usually insane. The uniqueness of Jesus' claim and character is underscored, challenging the "just a great teacher" narrative.

The Guru to the Jews

Huxley offers the perennial philosophy: all religions are one at their mystical core, and Jesus is a "guru to the Jews," teaching the same truth as Eastern sages. Lewis refutes this, pointing out six crucial differences between Jesus and the gurus: God is personal, God is Creator, God is knowable, God is good (not beyond good and evil), salvation is by grace not nature, and hell is real. If Jesus was a guru, he was a spectacularly unsuccessful one, as his teachings led followers in the opposite direction. This section employs Comparative Religion as a plot device.

The Textual Challenge

Huxley and Kennedy challenge the reliability of the New Testament, suggesting that Jesus' divinity was a later myth. Lewis counters with literary and historical arguments: the Gospels are eyewitness accounts, not myth; the style is unique, not legendary; and there is no motive for the apostles to invent such a claim, especially at the cost of their lives. The "myth" hypothesis is shown to be circular—miracles are doubted because the texts are doubted, and vice versa. This section introduces Textual Criticism and Historical Evidence as a plot device.

Six Crucial Contrasts

Lewis details six points where Jesus' teaching diverges from Eastern monism: (1) God is personal ("I am"), not impersonal; (2) God is Creator, not identical with creation; (3) God is knowable through revelation, not just mystical experience; (4) God is good, not beyond good and evil; (5) Salvation is a gift, not an awakening to innate divinity; (6) Hell is a real possibility, not an illusion. These contrasts make Jesus' message irreducibly distinct from the perennial philosophy.

The Problem of Hell

The discussion returns to the doctrine of hell, which Kennedy and Huxley find repugnant. Lewis argues that hell is not God's vengeance but the necessary result of free will and the rejection of God's love. God respects human freedom, even to the point of allowing self-chosen separation. The reality of hell is tied to the reality of choice, love, and the seriousness of human destiny.

The Will to Believe

The dialogue becomes personal: why do people believe or disbelieve? Lewis insists that the only honest reason to believe is because something is true, not because it is comforting or popular. He warns against self-deception and the temptation to reject uncomfortable truths. The will, not just the intellect, is central—honesty begins with the desire to know and follow the truth, even when it is hard. This section employs Psychological Analysis as a plot device.

The Light Dawns

As the debate draws to a close, the characters sense a literal and metaphorical dawn. The light is coming from above, and they realize their conversation must end. Each is left to ponder the argument's implications and their own openness to the truth. The light symbolizes the coming of ultimate reality—Christ himself. This section introduces Foreshadowing and Symbolism as a plot device.

A World Without Easter

In an appendix, Kreeft imagines a world where Jesus did not rise from the dead. Christianity becomes a faint memory, a set of ideals without power, hope, or transformation. The dialogue between a Christian and a rabbi reveals the emptiness of faith without the Resurrection—no real hope, no victory over evil or death, only nostalgia and unattainable ideals. The necessity of the Resurrection for meaningful faith is starkly illustrated. This section employs the Counterfactual Scenario plot device.

The Final Appeal

The epilogue and postscript urge readers to confront the truth honestly, to resist the temptation to evade or rationalize. The ultimate question is not who wins the argument, but whether we are willing to change in light of the truth. The dialogue is a model for honest, open inquiry, and a challenge to practice humility and self-examination.

The Meaning of the Argument

Kreeft explains the logical structure of the book: it is a defense of the central Christian claim—Jesus is God incarnate—against both modern skepticism and Eastern mysticism. The argument is not just intellectual but existential, calling for a response of the whole person. The Socratic Dialogue Structure is chosen for its ability to dramatize the search for truth and the personal stakes involved.

Facing the Light

As the light of Christ dawns, the three men are confronted with the ultimate choice: to follow the truth wherever it leads, even if it means changing one's mind and life. The book ends with a poetic prayer for humility and honesty, and an invitation to all readers to face the light—the truth of Christ—with courage and openness.

Characters

C.S. Lewis

Lewis is the central figure, representing orthodox Christianity and theism. He is logical, Socratic, and unafraid of uncomfortable questions. His faith is not blind but reasoned, rooted in both authority and rational inquiry. Lewis's psychological depth comes from his own journey from atheism to faith, and his willingness to examine motives and self-deceptions. He is both humble and incisive, seeking not to win arguments but to pursue truth. His development in the dialogue is steady—he remains the anchor, challenging both Kennedy's modernism and Huxley's mysticism.

John F. Kennedy

Kennedy stands for liberal, humanistic Christianity—emphasizing ethics, social action, and the goodness of man, while being uncomfortable with dogma, miracles, and authority. He is pragmatic, suspicious of "black-and-white" thinking, and prefers ambiguity and inclusivity. Psychologically, Kennedy is torn between the desire for truth and the desire for comfort or popularity. His development is marked by increasing discomfort as Lewis's arguments press him toward a decision—he is honest enough to admit his resistance, but struggles to surrender his modern assumptions.

Aldous Huxley

Huxley embodies Eastern monism and the "perennial philosophy"—the belief that all religions are one at their mystical core. He is urbane, witty, and intellectually adventurous, preferring esoteric interpretations and spiritual experience over dogma. Huxley's psychoanalysis reveals a longing for unity and transcendence, but also a tendency to evade the hard edges of historical claims and moral dualism. He challenges both Lewis and Kennedy, but ultimately must face the distinctiveness of Jesus' message.

Jesus Christ (as discussed)

Jesus is the "absent center" of the dialogue—his identity is the main question. He is variously seen as Lord, liar, lunatic, sage, or guru. The psychological analysis revolves around whether his claims to divinity are credible, insane, or mythic. The characters' responses to Jesus reveal their own deepest commitments and fears.

The Church

The Church is discussed as the bearer of authority and tradition. For Lewis, it is the channel of revelation; for Kennedy, a source of suspicion; for Huxley, a symbol of exoteric religion. The Church's role in shaping belief and interpreting texts is a recurring theme.

The Apostles

The apostles are invoked in the debate over the reliability of the Gospels. Their willingness to die for their testimony is used as evidence of sincerity and the implausibility of a deliberate hoax.

The Sages (Buddha, Socrates, etc.)

Other sages are discussed as models of wisdom, love, and creativity, but none claim divinity. Their role is to highlight the uniqueness of Jesus' claim and the inadequacy of reducing him to "just another sage."

The Modernist Critics

Represented by figures like Rudolf Bultmann, these critics challenge the historicity of the Gospels and the possibility of miracles. Their psychological motives—egalitarianism, discomfort with exclusivity—are analyzed.

The Gnostics

Gnostics are discussed as early proponents of mystical, symbolic readings of Christianity. Their rejection by the Church and their differences from orthodox teaching are used to clarify the boundaries of Christian belief.

The Reader

The reader is implicitly invited to join the dialogue, to examine their own beliefs, motives, and openness to truth. The book's psychological and existential challenge is directed at the reader as much as at the characters.

Plot Devices

Socratic Dialogue Structure

The entire book is structured as a Socratic dialogue, allowing for rapid-fire questioning, clarification, and challenge. This format dramatizes the search for truth, exposes hidden assumptions, and keeps the argument lively and personal. The dialogue's progression mirrors the movement from superficial disagreement to deep existential confrontation.

The Trilemma (Lord, Liar, Lunatic)

Lewis's famous argument is the central plot device: Jesus must be either God, a bad man, or insane. This logical structure drives the narrative, forcing the characters (and readers) to confront the implications of Jesus' claims and character.

Comparative Religion

The dialogue uses the presence of three distinct philosophies—Christian theism, modern humanism, and Eastern pantheism—to highlight the uniqueness of Christianity. The "perennial philosophy" is tested against the historical and doctrinal claims of Jesus.

Textual Criticism and Historical Evidence

The reliability of the Gospels is a recurring plot device, with arguments about myth, legend, and eyewitness testimony. Literary analysis and historical reasoning are used to challenge or defend the Christian narrative.

Psychological Analysis

The dialogue frequently turns inward, examining why people believe or disbelieve, the role of the will, and the danger of self-deception. This adds depth and realism, moving the argument beyond abstract logic to personal stakes.

Foreshadowing and Symbolism

The literal dawn at the end of the dialogue foreshadows the coming of ultimate truth—Christ himself. The movement from darkness to light symbolizes the journey from ignorance or evasion to knowledge and acceptance.

Counterfactual Scenario

The appendix imagines a world where Jesus did not rise, illustrating the emptiness of faith without historical foundation. This device sharpens the stakes of the argument and underscores the necessity of the Resurrection.

Analysis

"Between Heaven and Hell" is a masterful philosophical drama that distills the central question of Christianity: who is Jesus? By staging a posthumous debate between three iconic figures, Kreeft exposes the foundational differences between theism, humanism, and pantheism, and demonstrates that the identity of Jesus is the fulcrum on which all else turns. The book's enduring relevance lies in its insistence that truth matters more than comfort, popularity, or even happiness, and that honest inquiry requires both reason and humility. Kreeft's Socratic Dialogue Structure makes complex arguments accessible and engaging, while his Psychological Analysis challenges readers to examine not just what they believe, but why. The ultimate lesson is that the search for truth is not merely intellectual but existential—requiring the courage to face the light, even when it demands change. In a pluralistic, skeptical age, "Between Heaven and Hell" remains a compelling call to take the claims of Christ seriously, to test them with both mind and heart, and to follow the argument wherever it leads.

Last updated: June 19, 2025