Page 184 - Foundations

this topic. I would recommend strongly that anyone with an interest in this subject read Dr. Faulkner’s
revised and expanded writing that is dated February 6, 2013 (see the link above). It is very well
written, and patiently researched, though it continues to manifest some deficiencies.

Some of the fault I find with his refutation of Frances Rolleston’s work I would describe as errors of
argument, or reason. For example, it is mentioned more than once that Dr. Faulkner could not find
the subject of the prophetic foretelling of the Gospel in the stars in any of the Bible commentaries that
he consulted. This is not surprising. I have largely avoided Bible commentaries for the past two
decades as I have found them to be very shallow, and often wrong-minded, in their expositions of
Scriptures. Most Bible commentaries perceive only the most elemental truths in the Scriptures.
Although these elemental truths may be profound, and certainly should not be denigrated, I was so
frequently met with disappointment at the lack of deeper insight by the authors of these works that
I long ago stopped looking to them for answers to the deeper things of God. I am put in mind of
Paul’s lament to the Hebrews.

Hebrews 5:12-6:3
For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the
elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. For
everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is a babe.
But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and
evil. Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying
again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of instruction about
washings, and laying on of hands, and the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. And this
we shall do, if God permits.

Although Bible commentaries can provide useful information regarding ancient traditions and
customs, geographical locations, and assorted historical data, when it comes to teaching on doctrines,
they seldom rise above the level of those subjects Paul described as “elementary teaching about the
Christ.” It should not discourage any seeker after truth to find that a topic that is outside of the normal
purview of Christianity is not addressed in the Bible commentaries. The omissions of Bible
commentaries are great and varied.

Another objection I have to Dr. Faulkner’s treatise is his assertion that because the testimony of the
stars is “non-verbal” it must also be “non-specific.” He argues that a non-verbal form of
communication could only convey general information, and would lack the ability to communicate
something as detailed as the Gospel of Christ. He further argues that non-verbal communication is
subject to the vagaries of interpretation. He writes:

Non-verbal communication can convey information, but it lacks precision and specificity, and thus
it is very easily misunderstood... Even in human interaction we frequently communicate by non-verbal
means, for body language and facial expressions can convey thoughts. Unfortunately, those
non-verbal communications can be tricky to interpret. We can easily misinterpret these silent
messages to mean something other than what was intended. A direct verbal statement clearly is
preferable to a non-verbal message, as all marriage counselors advise when they are trying to help
a couple whose marriage is in trouble... For even though general revelation is everywhere, it is silent.