I read The Everlasting Man, an apology of Catholic theology because I wanted to understand how G. W. Chesterton influenced C. S. Lewis. As I began it, I found Chesterton's arrogant arguments childish and weakly supported. By the time I finished it I decided he ought to have titled it, In Defense of Catholic Inquisitions . His initial arguments defending the proposition that one cannot understand history without understanding that Christ was the son of God incarnate were ad homina arguments. that is he systemically ridiculed science, philosophy, and monotheism by discounting their proponents rather the substance of their arguments. He used metaphor as axiom and supposition as proven fact. His arguments may seem juvenile because the sources of knowledge that he ridiculed have grown so much since the time of his condemnation. Because of his prominence as the Prince of Paradox , I expected much more from this scholar, but sadly was greatly disappointed.