We think that the following audio and video resources are worth checking out.
The opening video is to the recent debate aired on Nightline entitled, “Does Satan Exist?“, check out the rest of the video at the Nightline Website. The rest of the sermons, lectures, and interviews come from the Acts29 Boot Camp in Raleigh, the 20/20 Collegiate Conference at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminar, Southeastern’s Chapel, and random Sunday sermons.
Nightline Debate on the Existence of Satan
ACTS29 Boot Camp- Raleigh, NC 2009
- Mark Driscoll – Spirit-filled Life of Jesus and Acts 29 Movement
- Danny Akin – Preaching the Gospel
- Check out rest of boot camp audio
SEBTS 20/20 Conference- The Gospel Comes to Life
- Mark Driscoll – 7 Views of Culture
- C.J. Mahaney – Extravagant Devotion, Mark 14:1-8
- Mark Driscoll – The Doxological View of Culture
- Dr. Daniel L. Akin- How Does the Gospel Come to Life According to Jesus?, 1 Corinthians 13
- Interview with Mark Driscoll- on Church Planting, Pastoring in a Post-Modern Society and Understanding Today’s Culture
- Dr. Daniel L. Akin – Spring Convocation – Passing on God’s Truth, 2 Tim. 2:1-7
- Dr. David Nelson – What We Mean by the Great Commission, Matt:28:16-20
- Dr. Jimmy Scroggins – A Warning to Young Men in Ministry, 1 Peter 5:1-11
- Mark Driscoll – 9 Distinctions Between the Gospel and Religion
- Dr. David Platt – The Glory of God in Suffering, Job 42
- Dr. Daniel L. Akin – A Great Commission Theology for Life, 1 Timothy 2:1-7
- Dr. Ed Stetzer – Generational Transitions, Titus 2:1-8
- Mark Driscoll- Temptation from Worldliness, 1 Peter
- Mark Driscoll- Marriage and Men
- David Platt – What the Gospel Demands
- David Platt – The Gospel Demands Radical Sacrifice
I listened to this earlier today off of YouTube and thought it was interesting. I found it to be relatively entertaining without any real challenge coming from either side. A Driscoll/Piper combination would have been more effective in my estimation (MacArthur probably wouldn’t pair with Driscoll, don’t know about Dr. Mohler, but Piper and Driscoll have a good working relationship).
Driscoll proved that he is a capable theologian (I enjoyed his counter with Hebrew against Chopra and the Aramaic) and we all knew he was witty. The lady (Anne?) wasn’t very helpful in my estimation. Her story is amazing! I am excited about what God has done in and through her. This,however, may have not been a great setting for her.
Chopra and Carlton were a little arrogant for my taste, but that is expected and consistent with Chopra. His “system” naturally leads to pride and self-exaltation (Driscoll did well to point that out). It was interesting to me how “good, love, compassion” and the like were quickly identified with being “proof” that God exists while on the other hand “evil, bad, sin” and the like could not point to the existence of Satan and the demonic. I didn’t understand that, but readily admit I am no philospher.
The whole issue (as with all things) comes down to whether or not there is a God who has spoken. Francis Schaeffer was correct in asserting that “He is There and Is Not Silent.” If God is there and He has spoken, then what He has said is the standard. Since the unbeliever does not start with this basic presupposition, these types of debates are many times “fruitless.”
Great debate, important topic. Emergent theology has made this a hot-topic issue (although it was before they came along and will be after they have moved on). It serves the cause of the kingdom well for believers to be able to articulate the reality of Satan, the demonic, and an eternal hell.
First of all, I was surprised by how well Deepak Chopra articulated his side of defense. Although there were times when he became flustered by Mark Driscoll or the Moderator, he held his side together and kept Driscoll on his toes. I don’t believe he has any consistency to what he was arguing… i mean, he is a postmodern-evolutionary-pantheistic-atheist… in other words – giant walking inconsistency. Chopra articulated several times that the world/universe/cosmos continue to exist because of 1) contrast; i.e., there is light and darkness; up and down, hot and cold; good and evil, but this evil, states Chopra, is only a state of mind that is impacted by our environment; and 2) the world continues to exist because of evolutionary ‘goodness persee’ consistently evolving further than the evolution of this figmatic evil that we conceive of.
I thought the Bishop who argued on the side of Chopra was horrible. Nothing he said had any logical flow at all. His whole ethos was very wishy-washy and the way he described things were just lavished with post-modern universalism! Though on the Evangelical side, I feel the chick was the one trying to keep up. When she spoke, she spoke only from experience. Although I don’t doubt her experience (although at times some of the stuff she said was kind of hard for me to follow – much less believe), Chopra danced around her all night.
Now to Driscoll. I thought he did a fantastic job pointing out the inconsistencies of Chopra and the Bishops arguments. Not only did he answer every question with an underlying defense of Scripture, he was very Christo-centric in everything he said. His main point being the difference in the Creator from the Creation, Driscoll stated that evil exists in the world not because God created it, but because he created humans and angels with free choice (i.e., the fall of Lucifer, the sin of Adam). He did a great job of articulated redemptive history in the fact that God created the world for the cross to take place. The center point of history is in fact the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus and the motif of history is what God is doing through Jesus for his own glory.
I praise the LORD for men like Mark Driscoll who battle our cultural follies and attempt to make Jesus the hero in everything they do! It was a good debate; I highly recommend you watching it HERE if you get the chance; and Jesus was glorified.
Good thoughts Jon.