Does Satan Exist? Debate

[JM]

"Nightline Face-Off" Thursday, March 26, 2009, on ABCNews.com and at 11:35 p.m. on "Nightline"

On one side of the debate is Deepak Chopra, famous philosopher and author of "Jesus: A Story of Enlightenment" and Bishop Carlton Pearson, author of "The Gospel of Inclusion." They will argue that Satan does not exist. Chopra is the founder of the Chopra Center for Wellbeing in California. He specializes in mind-body medicine and gives lectures and speeches around the world.

On the other side will be Pastor Mark Driscoll of the Mars Hill Church and Annie Lobert, founder of the international Christian ministry "Hookers for Jesus," who will argue that the devil does exist, and has made a personal impact on their lives.

 

[BobVigneault]

So what will be in the third ring of that circus, Dykes on Bikes?

 

[AThornquist]

So what will be in the third ring of that circus, Dykes on Bikes?

Maybe they will sing afterward--dykes with mics.


And I can't wait for Driscoll to jump over his podium and beat up Deepak Chopra. It's playing in my head over and over...

 

[Zenas]

Yay.

 

[AThornquist]

Deepak is very spiritual--and very lost. He diminishes Christ to a "man who found enlightenment." It is awful.

-----Added 3/17/2009 at 12:22:46 EST-----

Now that wouldn't be very exemplary of a minister of the gospel, now would it?

Indeed. (Drats! )

 

[Zenas]

Josh is right. Mark should bring the stake and torch.

 

[SolaScriptura]

And I can't wait for Driscoll to jump over his podium and beat up Deepak Chopra. It's playing in my head over and over...

Now that wouldn't be very exemplary of a minister of the gospel, now would it?

I'll leave that for others to decide.

But I do believe that sometimes - every now and then - what a person needs most... is a good beatdown.

 

[Zenas]

Josh is right. Mark should bring the stake and torch.

I'm pretty sure I never asserted, implied, or even thought that.

It's implied from the word "of".

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

How is this even a "debate?" Satan clearly exists according to Scripture, unless Jesus imagined His personal conversation with him when tempted (not to mention the numerous other NT and OT references). Chopra and this "bishop" obviously have no regard for the authority of the Bible. The debate is therefore utterly useless...

 

[AThornquist]

LOL good news for Mark, there would be no resistance! Check out this excerpt from Hannity and Colmes:

HANNITY: So if I punch — if I punch you, you're going to turn the other cheek?

CHOPRA: Twenty years ago I would have knocked you back.

HANNITY: That's a good answer. But now you would...

CHOPRA: But now I would create an environment where you wouldn't feel like punching me.

HANNITY: All right. What if somebody...

CHOPRA: You didn't hear me. I said I would create an environment where...

HANNITY: Where I wouldn't want to punch you.

CHOPRA: You know, and I wouldn't — salvation peace consciousness (ph). Then people around me cease to feel hostility.

What a weirdo.

 

[LawrenceU]

How is this even a "debate?" Satan clearly exists according to Scripture, unless Jesus imagined His personal conversation with him when tempted (not to mention the numerous other NT and OT references). Chopra and this "bishop" obviously have no regard for the authority of the Bible. The debate is therefore utterly useless...

And anyone on this board thought they might?

 

[SolaScriptura]

How is this even a "debate?" Satan clearly exists according to Scripture, unless Jesus imagined His personal conversation with Him when tempted (not to mention the numerous other NT and OT references). Chopra and this "bishop" obviously have no regard for the authority of the Bible. The debate is therefore utterly useless...

To some extent I agree with you. But the fact that they are not debating the existence of God is telling.

See, in our modern self-help and therapeutic oriented culture people are willing to believe in a god... because "god" is usually construed as being a feel-good Santa Claus type of figure.

The devil, Satan, on the other hand is seen as a malevolent being that is "out to get us."

To the modern mind, the things we "like" about "god" are able to eclipse the things the Bible reveals about God which are not to our liking. However, in regards to Satan, there's really no way to get around the "negative" image.

In our feel-good culture, the idea that there's a "really bad Bad Guy" out there trying to work towards my misery and demise is NOT conducive to feeling happy and optimistic about tomorrow.

So there is reason within that world-view to want to deny Satan's existence while affirming god's.

 

[MrMerlin777]

So what will be in the third ring of that circus, Dykes on Bikes?

 

[apaleífo̱]

As Baudelaire said, the cleverest thing the Devil ever did was to convince the world that he didn't exist.

 

[asc]

To some extent I agree with you. But the fact that they are not debating the existence of God is telling.

Interesting point. If they understood God will judge them for their sin with eternal punishment if they don't flee to Christ, they'd probably think God to be like Satan, since in their mind God could never do such an "evil" thing.

 

[ColdSilverMoon]

How is this even a "debate?" Satan clearly exists according to Scripture, unless Jesus imagined His personal conversation with Him when tempted (not to mention the numerous other NT and OT references). Chopra and this "bishop" obviously have no regard for the authority of the Bible. The debate is therefore utterly useless...

To some extent I agree with you. But the fact that they are not debating the existence of God is telling.

See, in our modern self-help and therapeutic oriented culture people are willing to believe in a god... because "god" is usually construed as being a feel-good Santa Claus type of figure.

The devil, Satan, on the other hand is seen as a malevolent being that is "out to get us."

To the modern mind, the things we "like" about "god" are able to eclipse the things the Bible reveals about God which are not to our liking. However, in regards to Satan, there's really no way to get around the "negative" image.

In our feel-good culture, the idea that there's a "really bad Bad Guy" out there trying to work towards my misery and demise is NOT conducive to feeling happy and optimistic about tomorrow.

So there is reason within that world-view to want to deny Satan's existence while affirming god's.

Yeah, I see your point and I agree with you. I was just making the point that the basic idea of Satan's existence is readily affirmed in Scripture. Outside that I agree that the modern mind has no place for such a thoroughly evil being...

 

[TheocraticMonarchist]

"Nightline Face-Off" Thursday, March 26, 2009, on ABCNews.com and at 11:35 p.m. on "Nightline"

On one side of the debate is Deepak Chopra, famous philosopher and author of "Jesus: A Story of Enlightenment" and Bishop Carlton Pearson, author of "The Gospel of Inclusion." They will argue that Satan does not exist. Chopra is the founder of the Chopra Center for Wellbeing in California. He specializes in mind-body medicine and gives lectures and speeches around the world.

On the other side will be Pastor Mark Driscoll of the Mars Hill Church and Annie Lobert, founder of the international Christian ministry "Hookers for Jesus," who will argue that the devil does exist, and has made a personal impact on their lives.

 

[Tim]

As Baudelaire said, the cleverest thing the Devil ever did was to convince the world that he didn't exist.

Yes. And I think Satan would be quite pleased that doubt has been cast on his existence.

 

[apaleífo̱]

Though this idea probably wouldn't be shared by most, I actually find it more comforting to think that there is an Author of Evil than that evil is simply a meaningless by-product of an uncaring universe.

 

[BobVigneault]

I agree c, I know exactly what you mean, though we can debate whether or not the word 'author' should be used. It would at least need to be qualified.

 

[apaleífo̱]

I agree c, I know exactly what you mean, though we can debate whether or not the word 'author' should be used. It would at least need to be qualified.

I suppose referring to the Devil as the Author of Sin is a rather old-fashioned term -- though, in terms of humanity, he is the one who tempted humanity to sinfulness.