# Nightline 3/26-does Satan exist?



## Jesus is my friend (Mar 25, 2009)

Nightline is at it again with it's Thurs. night program featuring a segment entitled "Does Satan exist?"-Pastor Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill church Seattle had asked for Zacharias or Carson to assist him and for whatever reason could not get them His side will be debating two men one of whom is Deepak Chopra,I'm sorry I dont have more details but I will let the link speak for itself

Nightline Face-Off - ABC News


----------



## Michael Doyle (Mar 25, 2009)

eye-yi-yi...

...leave it alone Mike...step away from the keyboard, the fruit of the Spirit is...self control. OK I got er reigned in


----------



## toddpedlar (Mar 26, 2009)

Well look who Reverend Driscoll got on his side now:



> The "Face-Off" is a recurring series where opposing sides debate hot topics. In this third installment, philosopher Deepak Chopra and Bishop Carlton Pearson will face-off against Pastor Mark Driscoll of the Mars Hill Church and _Annie Lobert, founder of the Christian ministry "Hookers for Jesus"_ about the existence of the Devil.



Nice job, Pastor. Glad you could get such a reputable apologist. (I wonder why he couldn't get Carson, or Zacharias, or Dever, or Mohler, or... hmm... I wonder why?)


----------



## Jesus is my friend (Mar 26, 2009)

toddpedlar said:


> Well look who Reverend Driscoll got on his side now:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice job, Pastor. Glad you could get such a reputable apologist. (I wonder why he couldn't get Carson, or Zacharias, or Dever, or Mohler, or... gee, I wonder why?)





Their arguments are so poorly reasoned and flawed that a child with the Word could defeat them,and I also wonder why he didnt get one of the men you mentioned of which actually respect him-yes it's true

As far as Miss Lobert goes she's engaged to a friend of ours and we wish her well as God uses her life for His Glory,would we have chosen her for a debate partner,no,I would have chosen one of the men you mentioned,Mohler was an excellent choice and would have been mine also,If ABC would let me and I believe the network constrained Pastor Mark from choosing who he wanted

I am sorry I cant continue to respond gracefully to your post sir,I am sorry you feel the way you do


----------



## Classical Presbyterian (Mar 26, 2009)

They should have asked a liberal from _my_ denomination! They work for the Prince of Darkness...


----------



## ww (Mar 26, 2009)

Classical Presbyterian said:


> They should have asked a liberal from _my_ denomination! They work for the Prince of Darkness...



 Ouch!


----------



## Theognome (Mar 26, 2009)

Classical Presbyterian said:


> They should have asked a liberal from _my_ denomination! They work for the Prince of Darkness...



I don't know if I should laugh or weep on that comment...

Theognome


----------



## raekwon (Mar 26, 2009)

toddpedlar said:


> Well look who Reverend Driscoll got on his side now:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Probably because they were all busy with something else already. Carson recently spent a weekend lecturing and preaching at Driscoll's church, FYI.


----------



## AThornquist (Mar 26, 2009)

Deepak's glasses are just fabulous.


----------



## raekwon (Mar 26, 2009)

AThornquist said:


> Deepak's glasses are just fabulous.



Looks like he got them from Jan Crouch.


----------



## AThornquist (Mar 27, 2009)

Driscoll was definitely the voice of sanity in this discussion. The ex-hooker gal was...touching I guess...but I think she said a lot of things that put the blame on Satan and not on her own depravity. Having someone more scholarly would have helped Driscoll out a bit. 

And Deepak is crazy. 

-----Added 3/27/2009 at 12:48:50 EST-----

AND HEY! Didn't I say that Driscoll would do something like punch a crazy like Deepak? He practically threatened Pearson with that!!


----------



## turmeric (Mar 27, 2009)

A snippet - mods feel free to remove if problematic

Orlando Sentinel - ABC's "Nightline" asks in Thursday show, "Does Satan Exist?" by Hal Boedeker


----------



## JimmieD (Mar 27, 2009)

AThornquist said:


> Driscoll was definitely the voice of sanity in this discussion. The ex-hooker gal was...touching I guess...but I think she said a lot of things that put the blame on Satan on not on her own depravity. Having someone more scholarly would have helped Driscoll out a bit.
> 
> And Deepak is crazy.



I wished the blonde girl wouldn't have teared up so much and I wish she would have just stuck to whether or not satan exists and not how much trouble he was drumming up on the street corner.

Chopra was....inconsistent. He said religious views have been causing all the evil in the world lately, then towards the end he quoted his religious book (gasp..you evil man!). He pointed at the bible at one point and accused Driscoll of having "your faith in that book", then toward the end of the show he quoted his own book (thanks for trying to play the reason game Deepak, but JV practice is over - get off the court). Chopra seemed to think that if you define God you limit him; I wonder how he came by that information.

Pearson mostly talked from experience (like the blonde girl did). In an attempt to demonstrate that you can't really know things about God (such as the creation of satan), he did say you can "experience infinity; you can't know infinity"....oh, really? You _know_ that 'Bishop'? He also brough up the age of the bible books and objected to not having the originals.

Driscoll did about the only thing you can do in the topic "Does Satan Exist"; he stuck by the bible and Jesus. Ultimately Driscoll and the blondie believe Satan exists because they believe in the God as revealed in the scriptures, so just stick to what you believe. I wish he would have pointed out the inconsistencies and arbitrariness on the other side to go along with it, but at least he just stuck to the Book and stuck to Jesus.


ABC "debates" drive me crazy. This one wasn't near as painful to me as Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort vs. the Rational Response Squad though.


----------



## Scott Shahan (Mar 27, 2009)

I thought that Mark did a good job.. I am interested in watching all of the debate though.


----------



## BlackCalvinist (Mar 27, 2009)

toddpedlar said:


> Well look who Reverend Driscoll got on his side now:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Todd, was this post really necessary ?


----------



## raekwon (Mar 27, 2009)

The debate in its entirety is much better than what was aired. Driscoll pretty much schooled his opponents (particularly Pearson) regarding history, theology, etc.


----------



## AThornquist (Mar 27, 2009)

raekwon said:


> The debate in its entirety is much better than what was aired. Driscoll pretty much schooled his opponents (particularly Pearson) regarding history, theology, etc.



Yeah, I was very relieved that he did so well despite his "debate partner." 

What I would have LOVED to remove from the debate, though, was the Q&A blond girl who argued with Deepak about how he was on a higher level than her and blah blah blah. She looked like a total goof "in the name of Jesus." Sigh. The parting comments were sad too. Deepak, "I have written two books about Jesus--you should read them!" Blond girl, while trying to sound tough, "Well maybe I will!" Then she storms away.  

What I found very interesting about Pearson was his experience with Pentecostalism!!! They are always seeking after signs, religious experiences, etc., and he was a _perfect_ example of it.


----------



## Romans922 (Mar 27, 2009)

I loved this question from the audience: 

*"You stated that all belief is a cover up for insecutity.. do you believe that?" Deepack answered "Yes I do". The man in red said "Thank you." *


----------



## AThornquist (Mar 27, 2009)

[Insert Indian accent] Josh, that is because you let your shadow break the great balance between evolution and creativity. [/]

Doesn't Deepak's concept of God sound like Star Wars, though? His concept of God or a High Power is just like "the force." Anything that is viewed negatively comes from our shadow (basically depravity), much like "the dark side." Unbeknownst to Deepak, but knownst to us , Deepak summed up the mind of the reprobate _very well_ when he talked about how he can't trust his mind, he contradicts himself, he confuses himself with both good and evil, etc. He lost it when he said that the only thing he can trust is his "soul," but up until then it was just  he's actually right about this!?


----------



## JM (Mar 27, 2009)

http://www.puritanboard.com/f24/does-satan-exist-debate-45443/

Deepak = His irrationalism hurt my head.

Pearson = huh? What did he say?

Driscoll = Cool, calm and did a good job. 

Lobert = Too emotional.


----------



## Michael Doyle (Mar 27, 2009)

Joshua said:


> Casting pearls before swine, In my humble opinion.



Joshua, this was my impression as well.


----------



## tdowns (Mar 27, 2009)

*I liked it.*

I think it was good, Mark D. did a great job, I pray for the black guy, you can tell he just bought into the whole scientifically enlightened *rap Yoda was spitting out. 

People are emotional, she's been on an emotional journey, nothing wrong with that in my opinion.

As far as casting pearls, I don't think so, Mark presented the gospel, clearly, to a live audience as well as television viewers, let those who have ears to listen, listen.

I watched the full version on-line.

Oh, I do agree, the question from the audience, was classic, on the believe...and also classic in a bad sense, with the woman.


----------



## TheocraticMonarchist (Mar 27, 2009)

Driscol did a great job! I had underestimated him.


----------



## Romans922 (Mar 27, 2009)

One thing I did not like, in the context Driscoll was in (some were saying Jesus died or is the Savior of all the people in the room), He continued to say that Jesus died for all or Jesus is the Savior of all. Just a thought. Could have clarified. I think he did once, but it was hard to understand.


----------



## JM (Mar 27, 2009)

Amyraldism? I've heard that about him before, yet, I bought Charnock's "Christ Crucified: a puritan's view of the atonement" after finding it on his recommended reading list...hummm....


----------



## AThornquist (Mar 27, 2009)

He holds to unlimited limited atonement. So, in his view, Jesus died for everyone, but certain redemptive qualities only apply to the elect. He talks about it in his latest(?) book in a chapter titled something like "My Daddy, the Preacher."


He also did a sermon series called Unlimited Limited Atonement that you may want to listen to if you want to know more.


----------

