RE: [asa] Ratcheting Concordism in Dennis Venema's talk at ASA meeting

From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
Date: Tue Dec 01 2009 - 12:27:36 EST

I don't think you can really ratchet through it unless the ratchet has huge notches such as YEC, OEC, TE. On a smaller ratchet scale, there are discontinuities. For example, a young earther can't accept an ancient earth, no matter the evidence. If they accept it, they become an old earther. It is a state or phase jump. An old earther rejects evolution as a design process, because they see God as making humans 'de novo,' no matter the evidence. If they accept the evidence of evolution, they become a version of TE (a state jump). Once a TE, there are various ratcheting positions (and probably also within YEC and OEC). I didn't refresh my memory by again listening to the presentation, so I'm not sure of the details from Dennis. I agree there is a sliding/ratcheting process, as I went from it with NA -> YEC/OEC -> ID -> TE -> AE (NA= not applicable, AE is atheistic evolutionist).

...Bernie

________________________________
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Dennis Venema
Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 9:14 AM
To: Steve Martin; AmericanScientificAffiliation
Subject: Re: [asa] Ratcheting Concordism in Dennis Venema's talk at ASA meeting

Hi Steve,

thanks for sending this direct - I do tend to be pretty hit-and-miss here.

The term is one I coined - to describe what I see as a phenomenon in scientific concordist approaches to Scripture.

Dennis

On 01/12/09 5:40 AM, "Steve Martin" <steven.dale.martin@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

I was interested in Dennis Venema's term "Ratcheting Concordism" at the ASA meeting. (see presentation slides here <http://www.asa3.org/ASA/meetings/baylor2009/papers/ASA2009Venema.pdf> & audio here <http://www.asa3.org/ASAradio/ASA2009Venema.mp3> ... his brief mention of ratcheting concordism occurs around 36:00 min time).

Dennis describes ratcheting concordism as a scriptural concordist strategy that, when in the face of overwhelming evidence, will ratchet over one position and lock in there (until the next batch of evidence comes along).

Now, I know Dennis isn't a theologian but I'm intrigued by that term ... & I think it is helpful (not like I'm showing my cards here :-) ). I'm wondering a) if this is a new term and b) if others think this is helpful. I would especially be interested in hearing comments from those who believe that some historical and/or scientific concordism is important &/or essential for interpreting Gen 1-11 if we are to hold a high view of scripture.

cc'ing Dennis too ... not sure if you are as hit-and-miss on this list as I am.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Dec 1 12:28:09 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Dec 01 2009 - 12:28:09 EST