THE TEMPLE OF SOLOMON THE KING
Before the birth of Copernicus the sun was universally
considered to be a body moving round the earth; it was a
FACT, and probably whilst it lasted the most universal fact
the mind of man has ever accepted; but since that illuminated
sage arose, it has been shown to be a simple fable, a child-like
error, a puny optical illusion—so much for pseudo-scientific
dogmatics.
To a child who has never seen a monkey, monkey is out-
side the circumference of its knowledge; but when once it has
seen one it is mere foolishness for other children to say: “Oh
no, you didn’t really seea monkey ; such things as monkeys do
not exist, and what proves it beyond all doubt is that we have
never seen one ourselves!” This, it will be seen, is the
Freethinkers’ * old, old conclusive argument: “There is not a
God because we have no experience of a God.”+.. . “ There
is not a South Pole because we have not trudged round it six
times and cut our names on it with our pocket-knives !”
Now what is knowledge ?
Something is !—Call it Existence.
What exists ?
“T exist!” answers the Idealist, “I and I alone!”
rather than believe in the resurrection of a dead person, but his speech was
rash, for itis on the faith of universal testimony that he believed in the impossi-
bility of the resurrection. Supposing such an occurrence was proved, what
would follow? Must we deny evidence, or renounce reason? It would be
absurd to say so. We should simply infer that we were wrong in supposing
resurrection to be impossible.’”—E. Lévi, “The Doctrine of Transcendent
Magic,” pp. 121, 158, also p. 192.
Also see Capt. J. F. C. Fuller, The Star in the West,” pp. 273-284.
* As opposed to “ free thinker.”
+ Not “There is not a God for us, because we have no experience of a God,”
which, so long as they had no such experience, would be correct.
207