Chestertons otra vez

Estuve leyendo Chestertons otra vez y pues tuve q poner esta cita:

Altruists, with thin,weak voices, denounce Christ as an egoist. Egoists (witheven thinner and weaker voices) denounce Him as an altruist.I n our present atmosphere such cavils are comprehensible enough. The love of a hero is more terrible than the hatred of a tyrant. The hatred of a hero is more generous than the love of a philanthropist. There is a huge and heroic sanity of which moderns can only collect the fragments. There is a giant of whom we see only the lopped arms and legs walking about. They have torn the soul of Christ into silly strips, labelled egoism and altruism, and they are equally puzzled by His insane magnificence and His insane meekness.They have parted His garments among them, and for His vesture they have cast lots; though the coat was without seam woven from the top throughout.

Y pa todos los q creen en la evolucion sin una direccion divina pues:

Evolution is a good example of that modern intelligence which,if it destroys anything, destroys itself. Evolution is either an innocent scientific description of how certain earthly things came about; or, if it is anything more than this, it is an attack upon thought itself. If evolution destroys anything, it does notdestroy religion but rationalism. If evolution simply means that a positive thing called an ape turned very slowly into a positivething called a man, then it is stingless for the most orthodox;for a personal God might just as well do things slowly as quickly,especially if, like the Christian God, he were outside time. But if it means anything more, it means that there is no suchthing as an ape to change, and no such thing as a man for himto change into. It means that there is no such thing as a thing.At best, there is only one thing, and that is a flux of everythingand anything. This is an attack not upon the faith, but upon the mind; you cannot think if there are no things to think about. You cannot think if you are not separate from the subject of thought. Descartes said, "I think; therefore I am." The philosophic evolutionist reverses and negatives the epigram. He says, "I am not; therefore Icannot think."

En fin.