This is an archive copy of wikilivres.ca as of 18 February 2017 (from the WikiTeam dump). The original site is closed.

The Everlasting Man: Difference between revisions

Free texts and images.
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Yann
mNo edit summary
imported>Yann
mNo edit summary
Line 25: Line 25:
** [[The Everlasting Man/Part II, 6|VI. The Five Deaths of the Faith]]
** [[The Everlasting Man/Part II, 6|VI. The Five Deaths of the Faith]]
* [[The Everlasting Man/Conclusion and Appendices|Conclusion and Appendices]]
* [[The Everlasting Man/Conclusion and Appendices|Conclusion and Appendices]]
** Conclusion: The Summary Of This Book
** Appendix I. On Prehistoric Man
** Appendix I. On Prehistoric Man
** Appendix II. On Authority and Accuracy
** Appendix II. On Authority and Accuracy

Revision as of 14:49, 9 December 2007

The Everlasting Man
written by Gilbert Keith Chesterton
The Everlasting Man is a two-part history of mankind, Christ, and Christianity published in 1925.



Prefatory Note

This book needs a preliminary note that its scope be not misunderstood. The view suggested is historical rather than theological, and does not deal directly with a religious change which has been the chief event of my own life; and about which I am already writing a more purely controversial volume. It is impossible, I hope, for any Catholic to write any book on any subject, above all this subject, without showing that he is a Catholic; but this study is not specially concerned with the differences between a Catholic and a Protestant. Much of it is devoted to many sorts of Pagans rather than any sort of Christians; and its thesis is that those who say that Christ stands side by side with similar myths, and his religion side by side with similar religions, are only repeating a very stale formula contradicted by a very striking fact. To suggest this I have not needed to go much beyond matters known to us all; I make no claim to learning; and have to depend for some things, as has rather become the fashion, on those who are more learned. As I have more than once differed from Mr. H. G. Wells in his view of history, it is the more right that I should here congratulate him on the courage and constructive imagination which carried through his vast and varied and intensely interesting work; but still more on having asserted the reasonable right of the amateur to do what he can with the facts which the specialists provide.