"AS I SEE IT"
Volume 8, Number 4, April 2005
“I too will have my say; I too will tell what I know.
For I am full of words, and the spirit within me compels me;
Inside I am like bottled-up wine, like new wineskins ready to burst.
I must speak and find relief; I must open my lips and reply.
I will show partiality to no one. Nor will I flatter any man.”
[“As I See It” is a monthly electronic magazine compiled and edited by Doug Kutilek. Its purpose is to address important issues of the day and to draw attention to worthwhile Christian and other literature in order to aid believers in Jesus Christ, especially pastors, missionaries and Bible college and seminary students to more effectively study and teach the Word of God. The editor’s perspective is that of an independent Baptist of fundamentalist theological persuasion.
AISI is sent free to all who request it by writing to the editor at: DKUTILEK@juno.com. You can be removed from the mailing list at the same address. Back issues sent on request. All back issues may be accessed at http://www.KJVOnly.org
All articles are by the editor (unless otherwise noted) and are copyrighted but may be reproduced for distribution, provided the following conditions are met: 1. articles must be reproduced in unedited, unabridged form; 2. the writer must be properly credited; and, 3. such reproduction must be for free distribution only. Permission to distribute in any other form must be secured in writing beforehand. Permission for reproduction in Christian print periodicals will generally be given.]
“Theologians--in the broad sense all of us who believe in God are theologians, that is, we are reasoners about God--can be divided into two schools which for the sake of convenient nomenclature, let us call for the moment, the affirmative and the negative. The affirmative school holds that the universe came into being by special creation, the Bible by special revelation, Jesus came by special incarnation, that He died a special propitiation, that sins can be forgiven because of a special expiation. The negative school considers faith in these as either optional with each individual, or openly repudiates them. While the lines between the two schools of theology may not always be absolutely distinct, yet it is true in the main that one either accepts all of the above particulars or repudiates them all. But if there is one of these dogmas which stands out above another as a test by which one can determine as to which school he belongs, it is the doctrine of the vicarious atonement of Jesus Christ. All the others are, as it were, foundation stones for the arch, but this is the keystone, the one for which the rest exist. If you believe this dogma, it can be assumed that you believe the others, for they are prerequisites to this.”
D. Raymond Taggart
The Faith of Abraham Lincoln
(Topeka, Kansas: 1943), p. 304
Alexander Cruden Revisited
In an article just over two years ago, we delineated the life and achievements of Alexander Cruden (see “Crazy Alexander Cruden and His Concordance,” As I See It, 6:1). At the time, one major source of information--indeed the longest modern source of information about Cruden--eluded us. But recently, we were able to obtain a copy of Edith Olivier’s 1934 biography, Alexander the Corrector: The Eccentric Life of Alexander Cruden (Viking Press). It is a superbly written 246-page narrative of the life, follies, foibles and eccentricities of Cruden, drawn from all available sources, including Cruden’s sometimes extensive self-published autobiographical accounts, and includes numerous woodcuts and photos. No better life of Cruden is likely to be produced. This highly entertaining volume (something of a Christian “What About Bob?”) is worth hunting up and reading.
Solid Sense from A. T. Robertson (1863-1934):
Quotes from Studies in the Epistle of James
(Broadman Press, n.d. Revised by Heber F. Peacock)
“There is much dirt of all kinds about us. The germs of sin infest and infect us all. And yet it is not hopeless to make a fight for purity in life. We do not give up the battle for cleanliness of body, for healthfulness of body, for victory over the germs of disease about us and in us. It is worthwhile to lead the clean, white life of purity. One has his reward in this life--in fresh power, in new joy, in richer fruitage. He has his reward also in the inspiration given to others, who are cheered to strive likewise against sin, to fight for personal and social purity, for better homes and better cities, for a better world in which to serve God, for a bit of heaven here on earth, the reign of God in human hearts, for likeness to Jesus the Son of God.” (p.74)
“There is no danger of an oversupply of well-equipped teachers, who are masters of the message of Christ.” (p. 107)
“There are learned fools, men who have a lumber of learning in their heads but in a disorderly jumble. In the use [i.e., view] of James the only really wise man is he who places God in the center of his life, who serves Christ as Lord and Master, who keeps the intellect in subjection to the will of God. There are plenty of ignorant fools also, men who have neither intellectual apprehension nor practical wisdom. . . . Is it not possible that not enough care is taken in the choice of teachers in the churches and the ordination of preachers of the gospel?” (pp. 126, 127)
“The greatest asset that the preacher has, after all, is his life, a long life of piety and consecration. There is no answering that argument.” (pp. 127-8)
“There are no happy old men save those that are Christians.” (p. 134)
“We must learn to put first things first. In wisdom, purity of character and motive is absolutely essential at any cost.” (p. 135)
“One cannot run with the hare and the hounds. The devil makes no objection to such a double life of hypocrisy, but God does.” (p. 148)
“The law of spiritual life is not always understood. Some men wonder why they are not spiritually happy, why they do not enjoy religion. They are living in sin with the world yet marvel at their lack of communion with God.” (p. 150)
“It comes to this, that a man must decide whether or not God is to rule his life. It is self or God, and that is the same thing as the devil or God, for a self without God is ruled by the devil.” (p. 153)
“The word for repentance does not mean sorrow but change of mind and life. The need for a change implies sorrow for the sins of one’s life, to be sure. But one may have sorrow and still not change his heart and life. The thing that counts is the change, not the degree of the sorrow. But, certainly, sorrow for sin is appropriate and natural for the sinner who turns away from it.” (p. 155)
[Editor’s note: this commentary on James by A. T. Robertson is a first rate work, as are nearly all his shorter books, with both full head and warm heart. The wise reader will buy everything by Robertson he can get his hands on, and read his writings with close attention]
Wise Words from Frank Gaebelein’s, Faith that Lives
(Chicago: Moody Press, 1955)
“For of all the epistles, that of James is nearer the Sermon on the Mount than any other. It is possible to find in the epistle no less than twenty-two references to the sermon. In some form each of the beatitudes is alluded to.” (p. 13)
“[The book of James] is less a train of thought than a string of pearls.” (p. 15)
“As John Wesley said, ‘The problem of problems is to get Christianity put into practice.’ “ (p. 15)
“It was the great expositor Bengel who said that upon definition of twenty words the understanding of the whole Scripture depends.” (p. 70)
“What is pride? It is the sin that, arrogating to self the credit belonging to God alone, cheats Him of the honor due His name. In wicked self-sufficiency, it bypasses the Sovereign of heaven and earth and presumes to act in willful independence. It is the very spirit of secular sin, the leading characteristic of this God-forgetting age in which we live” (p. 96)
“In Solomon’s list of seven things God hates, pride stands first. The sin through which Satan fell, it is at one and the same time the worst and the most highly regarded of sins.” (p. 96)
Jerry Vines on Preaching:
Quotes from A Guide to Effective Sermon Delivery
(Chicago: Moody Press, 1986)
“If the sermon is not real and alive to the preacher as he delivers it, there is little chance of its being real to the congregation.” (p. 75)
“St. Bernard said, ‘Yesterday, I preached myself and the scholars came up and praised me. Today, I preached Christ, and the sinners came up and thanked me.’ “ (p. 166)
Patton: A Genius for War by Carlos D’Este. New York: HarperCollins, 1995. 978 pp., hardback.
When the movie “Patton” came out in the summer of 1970, I saw it in theaters three times, and was decidedly impressed with George S. Patton, Jr.’s screen-portrayed prowess as a general who knew how to lead men in war, with designs entirely and exclusively on victory, unlike the “prolonged indecision” that had characterized American war efforts in Korea and Vietnam in the quarter century since Patton’s death in 1945. I was also, frankly, exceedingly uncomfortable as a new Christian with the profanity and blasphemy that poured out of Patton’s mouth. (The movie version of General George S. Patton, Jr. is a generally fair portrayal of the General as he was, though actor George C. Scott could not and did not imitate the high, squeaky voice of the original).
Somehow, I had managed to graduate from high school with all but never having even heard of Patton, so deficient was the state of public education in Kansas in the 1960s (and it is much worse today). After seeing the movie, I was motivated to read what I could about this towering military figure, and soon acquired and read Patton’s World War II diary, War as I Knew It. This was followed a few years later by Ladislas Farago’s Patton (on which the movie was largely based), and later still, his Last Days of Patton (the basis for a very poorly-done made-for-TV movie in the 1980s or early 1990s). Some years later, I read with avidity Robert Patton’s The Pattons: A Personal History of an American Family not long after it was published in 1994. And while I purchased D’Este’s Patton the year it came out (dirt cheap, as part of a “History Book Club” promotion), I largely assumed that I had no compelling reason to read it through, as it was unlikely to add much to what I already knew about the general. In this, I did err.
Patton had a long southern, specifically Virginian, heritage (though he was born in California in 1885). One indication of the depths of this ingrained heritage is the fact that as a boy, Georgie mistook portraits of Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson in the Patton home for God the Father and Jesus Christ!!! One Patton ancestor fought in the American Revolution, several relatives attended the Virginia Military Institute, including his grandfather and a great uncle (both of whom fought and died for the Southern cause in the Civil War) as well as his father, and as he would himself do for a year before going to West Point. Patton idolized this heritage, and viewed himself as the continuer of this legacy, fearing all his life that he would fail to live up to his ancestry and disgrace his forebears (whom he believed were regularly watching him, literally).
Patton, always pampered as a boy, suffered from undiagnosed dyslexia (unheard of in those days) and was home-schooled until age 12, at which time he could recite at great length poems, readings from literature and the Bible, but could not read! All lifelong, he was a poor speller.
One common personality characteristic of dyslexics, according to D’Este, is an over-compensation for feelings of inferiority, with resulting over-achievement and personal recklessness to try and prove oneself. All his military life, from VMI through West Point and through his more than 30-year military career, Patton was absolutely focused, almost fanatically so, at preparing himself so that when his day of “destiny” came, he would be ready for it. He was a stickler for discipline as a cadet and as an officer, demanding of others all that he imposed on himself (which at times made him quite unpopular). He loved competition of every kind, and being accident prone, was frequently injured. His reading and study of military history was voluminous and almost exhaustive. There was scarcely a battle in all of recorded history that he had not studied in detail; he extracted from that study all the lessons that could be gleaned in preparation for the battles that he was convinced he would someday lead. His physical conditioning was notable, and his power of endurance, even in his late fifties in the height of World War II, was remarkable (and there was nothing he despised more than fat officers). Patton’s 3rd Army (July 1944 to May 1945) was the greatest field army in U.S. history, at its peak numbering 30 divisions and over 500,000 men.
As D’Este wrote: “Patton was an authentic and flamboyant military genius whose entire life was spent in preparation for a fleeting opportunity to become one of the great captains of history. No soldier in the annals of the U.S. Army ever worked more diligently to prepare himself for high command than did Patton. However, it was not only his astonishing breadth of professional reading and writing that separated Patton from his peers, but that intangible, instinctive sense of what must be done in the heat and chaos of battle: in short, that special genius for war that has been granted to only a select few, such as Robert E. Lee and German Field Marshal Erwin Rommel. Who but Patton would have tramped the back roads of Normandy in 1913 with a Michelin map to study the terrain because he believed he would someday fight a major battle there?
Patton’s great success on the battlefield did not come about by chance but rather from a lifetime of study and preparation. He was an authentic intellectual whose study of war, history, and the profession of arms was extraordinary. His memory was prodigious, as was his intellect. Patton not only believed in the Scriptures but could quote them at length. For hours on end, he could recite not only the verses of the Bible, but from his great love, poetry. His favorites were Homer’s Iliad and Kipling’s verse. He read voraciously and not only learned from what he read, but managed to remember virtually all of it.” (pp. 3-4)
Patton was famous (or perhaps “infamous” is the proper word) for his crude and blasphemous profanity, especially when addressing troops--he believed it helped motivate them to hear a general use such ungeneralish language (Lee and Jackson, who never used such language, should have been proof positive to him that such was not necessary to lead great and successful armies). And he was a practiced “actor”--putting on whatever guise was deemed appropriate for the circumstance at hand (he literally practiced making his “war face” in front of a mirror for hours on end!). Included in his repertoire were violent eruptions of fury and rage, often “staged” to terrify subordinates into obedience and action, but occasionally, the fury was real, to Patton’s detriment and regret; there were two slapping incidents in Sicily, which cost Patton the over-all command of American forces in the Normandy invasion. Instead, that job went to his Sicily subordinate Omar Bradley, and Patton was forced to serve under Bradley in France and Germany. But he served in that capacity magnificently well.
His perception of battlefield (and political) situations and his knowledge of how to respond were unexcelled. Politically, it was he who first recognized that the Russians intended to enslave Eastern Europe after the war, and so was incensed when Eisenhower short-sightedly prevented American forces from occupying Berlin, eastern Germany and Czechoslovakia. Patton also recognized as early as 1944 that Eisenhower was intent on running for President (which he would not do until 8 years later), and despised what he viewed as Ike’s politically-motivated actions during the war.
Theologically, Patton was raised in the Episcopalian faith and knew the Bible thoroughly (throughout his life, he read the Scriptures almost daily), as well as the Book of Common Prayer. At least some of his Civil War-era ancestors were true, born-again-according-to-the-Bible Christians. During one of his postings near Washington, Patton’s wife and daughters attended a Baptist church, because they liked the music, and because they served cookies and cocoa in Sunday school. But with all that, he adopted some very strange views--especially a belief in re-incarnation (no doubt the product of the stories he heard as a child combined with a particularly fertile imagination), and that he himself had been a perpetual warrior since the dawn of time, serving in many armies and campaigns over the millennia. He prayed to the God of Scripture and called Jesus Lord and Savior, but also prayed to the god of battles, and deemed that one religion was as acceptable to God as another. He believed in visions and believed that he frequently had them. All this is very strange.
The book is as a sidelight an excellent text on leadership, a skillt at which Patton excelled (note the quotations from Patton himself on this subject below).
Two figures who come off very poorly in D’Este’s account are Eisenhower and Omar Bradley, the first as overly-pre-occupied with political considerations and the latter as much too timid, and both as remarkably indecisive under pressure.
D’Este does make some factual errors (e.g. saying Robert E. Lee was the owner of Arlington, when it was in fact Lee’s wife’s family who owned it). The printed book has a much higher than normal number of typographical errors and a few stylistic problems (including repetitions and such) that a little more attention by a competent editor would have resolved. But it is most assuredly worth the time necessary to read it.
Some quotes from Patton by Carlo D’Este--
“Babies are ‘an alimentary canal with a loud voice at one end and no responsibility at the other.’ “ (p. 123)
“It was not uncommon for Patton to immerse himself in books for twelve hours at a time, and the mental uplift he derived encouraged him to continue to study even more.” (p. 152)
“Throughout his long military career Patton never once lowered his standards or his microscopic attention to the smallest detail. Many did not like it, and more epithets were directed at Patton than perhaps any soldier in modern military history, but most of the men in his charge flourished, and it was the secret to his success as a commander and trainer of troops.” (p. 220)
“His secret was preparation and a superb memory. ‘Sometimes it seems to me that all I have ever done has been in preparation for my present job.’ Still, he thought that ‘genius as Napoleon put it, is simply a memory of detail.’ “ (p. 222)
“What Patton and Eisenhower did together [during the 1920s] was what Patton would continue to do for nearly twenty years: to study and prepare for the day when his knowledge might actually be put to use.” (p. 299)
“Patton . . . began. . . adding hundreds of new books to his personal library. He read them all avidly, took his usual copious notes, and incorporated what he learned into his growing lexicon of knowledge. . . .Patton’s evenings were generally reserved for reading and study. He devoured what [J. F. C.] Fuller and others had to say about every aspect of war, from the theoretical to the practical. He studied wars of the past such as the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 and the little-known Franco-German War of 1866-67. It was his custom to scribble in the margins of his books and later type or inscribe the results--often on note cards--into a synopsis that became a permanent part of his personal papers. During the interwar years Patton consulted an eclectic list of the famous and the lesser known, ranging from Napoleon and Clausewitz to du Pisq, Jomini, Cromwell, Xenophon, and Frederick the Great.” (pp. 316, 317).
“He knew only two speeds: fast and faster.” (p. 317)
“As I approach 41 and there is no war I. . .fear that I shall live to retire a useless soldier.” (p. 329)
“I do . . . regard with horror a state of affairs which would make our country both unready and unwilling to defend its honor.” (p. 343)
“On Memorial Day 1932 Patton delivered a passionate speech to the American Legion in Alexandria, Virginia, in which he warned that disarmament was actually a prescription for war, and if the United States did not remain prepared for war the deaths of those who fought in World War I might have been in vain. ‘Perpetual peace,’ he said, was ‘a futile dream’ dominated by internationally minded pacifists (the ‘jellyfish of the world’) who were ‘constantly working to change Armistice Day into disarmament day.’ “ (p. 355; their ilk persists to this hour--the Ted Kennedys, John Kerrys, Jimmy Carters, Bill and Hilary Clintons and such like in America)
“He was forty-nine years old, and he still had not won a war or kept his part of the bargain with Grandfer Ayer about winning the glory. He looked stricken to the heart.” (p. 356)
George C. Marshall: “we have tried since the birth of our nation to promote our love of peace by a display of weakness. This course has failed us utterly.” (p. 373)
“It is said that only the president and crusty Joe Stilwell ever dared to call Marshall ‘George’ to his face, and that Roosevelt only did so once.” (p. 376)
“Patton’s years in the wilderness were finally over. It had taken thirty-one years of service, but at last he was a general.” (p. 383)
“When Germany invaded Poland [September 1, 1939], the United States was a third-rate power with an army that still ranked a miserable seventeenth in the world. So sorry was the state of the U. S. Army in 1939 that--had Pancho Villa been alive to raid the southwestern United States--it would have been as ill-prepared to repulse or punish him then as it had been in 1916.” (p. 393)
“General Matthew B. Ridgway once said that it didn’t hurt morale for the troops to see a dead general once in a while, and Patton would have agreed with him.” (p. 401)
“Every man in his command must be able to run a mile in fifteen minutes with a full military pack.” (p. 405)
“All my life, I have wanted to lead a lot of men in a desperate battle; I am going to do it, and at 56, one can go with equanimity--there is not much one has not done.” (p. 425)
“When I think of the greatness of my job, . . . I am amazed, but on reflection, who is as good as I am? I know of no one.” (p. 426; and he wasn’t wrong)
“Never in history has the Navy landed an army at the planned place and time. If you land us anywhere within fifty miles of Fedhala [in north Africa] and within one week of D-day, I’ll go ahead and win. . . . We shall attack for 60 days, and then, if we have to, for 60 more. If we go forward with desperation, if we go forward with utmost speed and fight, these people cannot stand against us.” (p. 426)
A G.I.’s remark re: the incompetence of early leadership in North Africa: ”Never were so few commanded by so many from so far away.” (p. 457)
“Patton and the armored division commanders of World War II were a special breed, quite different from their brother officers. Mostly ex-cavalrymen, they tended to be combative, high strung, flexible, and fiercely loyal to their troops. They led from the front, seized opportunities, created high morale in their units, argued against orders they thought wrong, and took responsibility for acting on their own. On the battlefield, armored divisions habitually operated in uncertainty, often across vast areas, and always with the object of destroying the enemy.” (pp. 466-7).
“Always go forward. Go until the last shot is fired and the last drop of gasoline is gone and then go forward on foot.” (p. 468--a Patton quote posted in many defense factories in America).
“[I] wish I were triplets and could personally command two divisions and the Corps. . . . I am the best there is, but of myself, I am not enough. ‘Give us victory, Lord.’ “ (p. 472)
“As I gain experience, I do not think more of myself but less of others.” (p. 488)
Re: the North Africa campaign: “I have been gone 43 days, fought several successful battles, commanded 95,800 men, lost ten pounds, gained a third star and a . . . lot of confidence and am otherwise the same.” (p. 490)
“If there was a single, consistent Allied failure in Normandy that distinguished the campaign, it was that Eisenhower, Montgomery, and Bradley all seemed to have disregarded Napoleon’s principle that battles are fought to destroy the enemy, not for capturing terrain.” (pp. 614-5)
“Bradley’s gravest concern about Patton was that he would act too aggressively.” (p. 630; !!!!!)
Patton on himself: ”I’ve studied military history all my life. Georgie Patton knows more about military history than any living person in the United States Army today. With due conceit--and I’ve got no end of that--I can say that’s true.” (p. 690)
“During this operation [i.e. the Battle of the Bulge], the Third Army moved farther and faster and engaged more divisions in less time than any other army in the history of the United States--possibly in the history of the world.” (p. 701)
“After Trier [Germany] fell, Patton received a message directing him to bypass the city as it would take four divisions to capture it, leading to his famous irreverent reply, ‘Have taken Trier with two divisions. Do you want me to give it back?’ “ (p. 708)
Patton quotes on leadership--
“Genius is an immense capacity for taking pains.” (p. 87)
“Always do more than is required of you.” (p. 87)
“We live in deeds not years.” (p. 87)
“By perseverance and study and eternal desire any man can be great.” (p. 93)
“Never Never Never stop being ambitious. . . . You have but one life; live it to the full glory and be willing to pay.” (p. 93)
”If you infringe your honor you have sold your soul.” (p. 93)
“There is but one time to do a thing that is the first.” (p. 93)
Quoting Napoleon, “To command an army well a general must think of nothing else.” (p. 93)
“I don’t fear failure. I only fear a slowing of the engine which is pounding on the inside saying up--up--someone must be on top; why not you?” (p. 103)
“Qualities of a great general
1. Tactically aggressive (loves a fight)
2. Strength of character
3. Steadiness of purpose
4. Acceptance of responsibility
6. Good Health and strength” (pp. 105-6)
“There are no practice games in life.” (p. 142)
“The more I read, the more I see the necessity for reading.” (p. 152)
“War is not run on sentiment” (p. 214)
“When I realize that I am without question a very superior soldier. . . (p. 218; spoken as a WW I captain, and he was!--ed.)
“Instant, cheerful, unhesitating obedience. . . . Discipline is not a foolish thing, it is not a demeaning thing, it is a vital thing.” (p. 219)
“Be they the tank or a tomahawk . . . wars may be fought with weapons, but they are won by men. It is the spirit of the men who follow and the man who leads that gains the victory.” (p. 221)
“Do ever in all things our [best] and never oh never retreat.” (p. 226)
“There is nothing more pathetic and futile than a general who lives long enough to explain a defeat.” (p. 306)
“Success in war depends upon the Golden Rule of war: speed, simplicity, boldness.” (p. 306)
“The ‘Fog of war’ works both ways. The enemy is as much in the dark as you are. BE BOLD!!!!!” (p. 306)
Quoting Napoleon, “The greatest general is he who makes the fewest mistakes--i.e., he who neither neglects an opportunity nor offers one. The only right way of learning the science of war is to read and reread the campaigns of the great captains.” (p. 317)
“Buddeke: ‘No matter how high an officer goes as a teacher or administrator, his true role is a leader of troops. To be good at this he must study military history, work map problems, and think war.’” (p. 318)
“Frederick the Great: ‘Ride the enemy to death. L’Audace, l’audace, tout jours l’audace [“boldness, boldness, always, boldness”].’ “ (p. 318)
“A leader is a man who can adapt principles to circumstances.” (p. 318)
“Victory will be decided by those possessing the highest attributes of courage and loyalty.” (p. 388)
“Keep off the roads.” (p. 401)
“He stated that the greatest difficulty in the Army was the lack of initiative and sense of responsibility among the younger officers.” (p. 410)
“His exhortations were a series of ‘nevers’: Never give up, never dig in; never defend, always attack; never worry about defeat, think and plan only for victory; you win by never losing. He would caution that to win a battle a man had to make his mind run his body because the body will always give up from exhaustion. But when you are tired, the enemy is just as exhausted: ‘Never let the enemy rest.’ “ (p. 411)
“Another pet-peeve of his was foxholes, which he called graves. Keep moving rapidly and there would be no need for them. Wars were won not by holding land, which he deemed worthless, but by killing the enemy. Man himself was the ultimate war machine.” (p. 412)
“Good soldiers should dread their own commander more than the enemy.” (p. 412)
“Patton also told his lieutenants and captains that they were expendable and must personally lead their men into battle and take the same risks as their lowest-ranking soldier.” (p. 463)
Quoting William Tecumseh Sherman: “No man can properly command an army from the rear; he must be at the front . . . at the very head of the army--[he] must be seen there, and the effect of his mind and personal energy must be felt by every officer and man present with it.” (p. 463)
“Discipline consists in obeying orders. If men do not obey orders in small things, they are incapable of being [led] in battle. I will have discipline--to do other wise is to commit murder.” (p. 464)
“Battles take years to get ready for; all one’s life can be expressed in one little decision but that decision is the labor of uncounted years. It is not genius but memory--uncounted memory--and character, and Divine Wrath which does not hesitate nor count the cost.” (p. 501)
“Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity.” (p. 577)
“The only point I tried to stress was that, in case of doubt, follow the old Confederate adage of ‘Marching to the sound of the guns.’ “ (p. 596)
“Patton advised Middleton that military history taught that it was generally fatal not to cross a river.” (p. 622)
“I don’t want to get any messages saying that, ‘We are holding our position.’ We’re not holding anything! Let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly and we’re not interested in holding on to anything except the enemy.” (p. 623)
[One Patton quote not included in D’Este’s book, but which merits repeating--“No battle was ever won by a rigid adherence to a pre-conceived battle plan.” I don’t recall where I read it--ed.]
Frozen in Time: The Woolly Mammoth, the Ice Age and the Bible by Michael J. Oard. Green Forest, Ark.: Master Books, 2004. 217 pp., paperback.
Michael Oard, a trained meteorologist with an M.S. degree in atmospheric science, has previously written An Ice Age Caused by the Genesis Flood (1990) a more technical treatment of much the same subject as here, namely, how the massive glaciation of northern North America and northwestern Europe commonly referred to as “the ice age” (with corresponding glaciation in regions n the southern hemisphere) can be fitted into a Biblical framework. Oard demonstrates the insuperable problems with all uniformitarian paradigms for explaining the ice age(s) and explaining the massive extinctions that occurred at the ice age’s end, notably the woolly mammoths that existed--and perished--in the millions in Siberia and North America.
The many, many uniformitarianism-based scenarios proposed (and rejected) for explaining the how and when and why of the ice age(s)--and the long series of proposal after proposal demonstrates the unsatisfactory nature of them all--all fail miserably, whether they propose one or many ice ages. They can provide no mechanism for explaining even a single ice age, much less a series of 20 or 30, with the patterns of ice and snow in evidence, and the massive extinctions that followed not all but only the last ice age. In particular, they are at an utter loss to account for the absolute demise of the woolly mammoths of Siberia.
In contrast to these failed proposals, Oard posits a post-Flood world with warm oceans (warmed by massive volcanism during the Flood year) in association with the release of massive amounts of super-heated water when the “fountains of the deep were opened” (Gen. 7:11). This would result in vastly increased evaporation of water from the oceans and a corresponding voluminous increase in precipitation in certain places, depending on weather patterns. One feature of this much warmer ocean would be a warm and completely ice-free Arctic Ocean, a key factor in the glaciation of the northern portions of the continents. At the same time, ash and other emissions from the gradually declining volcanic activity would result in a cooling of the atmosphere and the landmasses due to reduced solar radiation reaching the surface, allowing for the precipitation to fall as snow, and remain through the summer cycle.
As strange as it may seem, the single ice age (and the uniqueness of the never-to-be-repeated post-Flood phenomena requires that there be only a single ice age) would have had cooler summers, but also warmer winters than at present. Siberia, famous today for its bitterly cold winters, would have been much more temperate and would have escaped glaciation because of prevailing weather patterns.
In Oard’s scenario, snow accumulation reached its peak about 500 years after the Flood, at which time the oceans had cooled to the point where evaporation and precipitation were no longer adequate to make up for summer melt. Concurrent declining volcanic activity meant that increased solar radiation resulted in a net decline of snow cover, and within 200 years, the ice age glaciers had disappeared from all but the polar and near-polar land masses (Antarctica and Greenland) and the colder mountain regions of Alaska, and typical modern weather patterns (with the harsh winter weather on lands bordering the now-frozen Arctic Ocean) settling in--a now-inhospitable climate for the mammoths, which eventuated in their extinction.
Oard corrects numerous erroneous notions about the mammoths. First, most remains are strictly bones, not hair, hide and flesh. Such preservations are quite rare. And of those cases of soft tissue preservation, none are in a supposed “fresh frozen” condition (and hence, no quick-freeze with minus 150 F. temperatures is necessary). It is further unquestionably true that man did NOT “hunt the mammoth” to extinction (in only a couple of dozen cases are human artifacts--especially spear points--found in association with mammoth remains). Furthermore, the mammoths and likely all proboscideans (elephant and elephant-like creatures--mammoths, mastodons, etc.) are merely varieties of the “elephant kind” which were on the ark, rather than being so many separate species.
All in all, Oard’s book provides a reasonable and satisfying explanation of how and when the ice age occurred. One minor criticism--his de facto use of Ussher’s chronology (which assumes no gaps or leaps in the genealogies of Genesis) is not justified by evidence. The Flood likely occurred a couple of millennia or so earlier than that chronology allows, say circa 5000-4500 B.C.