The Satan question to be decided in Seattle

In theory, Seattle is the most "unchurched" city in America, so it's a bit shocking that ABC is coming here to debate the question of whether Satan exists. To be honest I would be more interested in watching the episode of Nightline if I had much confidence that the participants had been picked out for the depth of their research, their scholarly publications, anything of that type. Unfortunately arguing against the existence of the devil will be Deepak Chopra and Bishop Carlton Pearson, and for the existence of the devil will be Seattle's own Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church and Annie Lobert, a former "escort" who founded an organization called Hookers for Jesus.

I guess having Chopra will bring a non-christian viewpoint, which seems important for a balanced debate. Admittedly I have not read any of his writings, so I can't critique his positions. He is a doctor, a member of the AMA, has taught at Tufts and Columbia, and was Chief of Staff at a Boston hospital, so I will except that he is a sharp guy. Pearson is interesting because he is a Pentecostal minister who denies the existence of Satan. If you are interested in how much trouble that has caused him, there is a great episode of This American Life devoted to his story that is worth a listen.

As for the existence team, I don't know anything about Lobert and I would hate to attack her qualifications without knowing more than my cursory internet search told me. As for Mark Driscoll, I can say that he disturbs me. He has made some very misogynists and homophobic comments in the past. His church, Mars Hill, started out as part of the Emergent movement, but he says he had to distance himself from them. He said they were "referring to God as a chick, questioning God's sovereignty over and knowledge of the future, denial of the substitutionary atonement at the cross, a low view of Scripture, and denial of hell which is one hell of a mistake." I can't say I've really been blown away by much of the emergent church stuff I've read, but it is at least open to dialogue, and closer to "accepting" than most mainstream churches. I have absolutely no respect for Mark Driscoll, I think he embodies everything that is wrong with the Church.

I will say that I don't hold out much hope for scholarly theological debate from the for team, and I will be surprised if there is much from the the non existence side. In fact I will be flabbergasted if I am convinced one way or the other by the made for TV debate.