Skeptic Challenges Archives

May 29, 2026May 27, 2026

Intelligent or Unintelligent?

Causes can be of two types: intelligent or unintelligent. As we look for what caused the universe to come into existence or what caused life to appear on this planet, we should ask whether it was an intelligent cause or an unintelligent one, meaning chance. When you see the Grand Canyon, you can conclude that it was the result of natural forces and therefore not a direct intelligent cause. When you see Mount Rushmore, the mountain itself can be attributed to natural causes, but the faces of four presidents carved into that mountain testify to an intelligent cause.

Darwinists agree that the living things we see around us appear to be designed. But those who reject intelligent causation for living things have to keep reminding themselves that what they’re seeing was not designed by an Intelligence, but rather merely happened by chance. Is that attitude intelligent or unintelligent?

The complexity of DNA is certainly a challenge to those who believe that life happened by chance. However, they also have to contend with the fact that DNA relies on proteins for its structure, while proteins require DNA to provide the instructions for how they are to be constructed and folded. Since each requires the other, which comes first: proteins or DNA?

Spontaneous generation of life from non-life was advocated by Aristotle and accepted by science for 2,000 years until Louis Pasteur disproved it. However, those who believe that life came into being without guiding intelligence from purely natural chemicals must accept the concept of spontaneous generation, even though it is not supported by any empirical observation. Francis Crick, an atheist and co-discoverer of the DNA molecule’s structure, said, “Every time I write a paper on the origin of life, I swear I will never write another one, because there is too much speculation running after too few facts.”

Other scientists, such as Fred Hoyle, recognizing the problem of life’s origin, have proposed panspermia (“seeds everywhere”). That idea suggests that life on Earth was seeded by aliens from another star system. Besides having zero evidence for such a thing, it doesn’t explain where the interstellar life came from, stretches the imagination, and requires a great deal of blind faith. When scientists and others stick to their belief in spontaneous generation or panspermia, is that intelligent or unintelligent?

Physicist and information scientist Hubert Yockey, realizing the difficulty of explaining intelligent life without an intelligent cause, wrote, “The belief that life on earth arose spontaneously from nonliving matter is simply a matter of faith in strict reductionism and is based entirely on ideology.” The faith of those who refuse to believe in intelligent design is not based on scientific evidence but on ideological bias. Do you think that believing in creation without a Creator is intelligent or unintelligent?

May 7, 2026May 4, 2026

Humans Are Viruses on the Earth – or Not

Humans Are Viruses on the Earth – Influenza Virus — Influenza virus 3D illustration

Perhaps you have seen posts or comments online claiming that humans are viruses on the Earth. The argument is that human numbers are growing, and we “feed parasitically on the body of the Earth.” They say we are swarming over the Earth and leaving no part of the planet “untouched by our pollution and destruction.”

The mantra is that humans move into an area, multiply until they consume all the natural resources, then move on to another area, like a virus. Critics suggest that all other mammals live in equilibrium with their surroundings, whereas humans behave like viruses that spread and consume resources. So the question they ask is whether humans are a disease, a cancer, or a virus on the Earth, what are we going to do about it? How can we stop this human virus?

As Christians, we believe that humans were made in God’s image and that God entrusted the first humans and us with taking care of the planet and ruling over it (see Genesis 1:28). Perhaps we’ve done a better job of ruling over the planet than of taking care of it. Some have pointed out that even though the Bible says we were created in God’s image, we are also the ones who introduced sin into the world.

Hosea 4:1-3 is a Bible passage sometimes quoted by those who insist that humans are viruses on the Earth. In this passage, Hosea tells the children of Israel that because they have been swearing, lying, killing, stealing, and committing adultery, God will punish them by allowing them to waste away along with the animals, birds, and fish. You could say that applies to us today, but that might be stretching the context.

It is true that God gave humans the job of being stewards of the Earth, to rule over and protect or conserve the creatures that live here. It is also true that we have often failed in that job, but God always gives us another chance to do better. As for humans introducing sin into the world, God also gave us a second chance on that. The most amazing thing we read in the Bible is that God became a human being to live a perfect life, to show us what that is like, and to bear the punishment for our failures.

As we consider whether humans are viruses on the Earth, we must consider our relationship with the Creator. Perhaps if we can accept what God has done through Jesus Christ to restore us to a right relationship with Him, we will find that we can have a right relationship with the Earth God gave us to live on. Remember that God is the giver of every good and perfect gift (James 1:17).

February 13, 2026February 9, 2026

Nonsense About a Created God

You’ve probably heard this question before. Someone says God created the universe, and then another person asks, “So who created God?” As silly as this question seems, it is often used as an argument against God’s existence by leading atheist Richard Dawkins. His best-selling book from a few years ago, The God Delusion, revolves around this very question. Asking “Who created God?” only makes sense if you are assuming a God who was created. But that’s not the God described in the Bible. It’s not the God that Christians, Jews, or even Muslims believe in. Let’s stop the nonsense about a created god.

When we talk about God, what do we mean? Are we thinking of the God described in the Bible who is eternal, uncreated, and exists before all things? “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth” (Genesis 1:1). Not only did God create everything, but He also sustains the universe (Colossians 1:17 and James 1:17). Richard Dawkins makes it clear he does not believe in God, but the god he does not believe in is not the God described in the Bible. I also do not believe in the god that Dawkins does not believe in. The God who created and sustains the universe is eternal, which voids the nonsense about a created god.

The ancient Greeks believed that matter had always existed, and that some god or gods emerged from the matter. Various gods, filled with human passions and sins, fought for control, bringing about a chaotic world. In other words, matter existed forever, but gods arose and kept things in chaos. Because of this misunderstanding of creation, the Greeks didn’t make much progress in what we now call science. If you don’t believe there is order in the universe, you can’t really study and find order within it.

Long before the Greek philosophers, the ancient Hebrews knew about the eternal God, the Creator of the universe. When the apostle Paul addressed the philosophers on the Areopagus in Athens, he pointed out how inadequate understanding of God. In Athens, Paul saw many idols honoring various gods. Just in case they missed one, he saw an inscription “to an unknown God.” Paul told them that even their own poets acknowledged that humans are God’s offspring, and if that’s true, God cannot be made of silver, gold, or stone—carved by human hands.

Therefore, we don’t need the nonsense about a created god. It’s meaningless. God is not a created being. We are His creation, meant to serve Him. Only by establishing a relationship with God can our lives be truly fulfilled, and this is possible because He seeks that relationship with us. He went so far as to send His only begotten Son to be the perfect sacrifice for our sins and to open the way for us to be restored to the eternal God who created, sustains, and loves us.

January 8, 2026December 31, 2025

Believing Extraordinary Claims Despite the Evidence

In his 1979 book Boca’s Brain, the late Karl Sagan wrote, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” That aphorism is often called the Sagan standard or ECREE. I believe Sagan was guilty of making extraordinary claims that he couldn’t prove, but we’ve discussed that before. The truth is that people are often guilty of believing extraordinary claims despite the evidence.

An extreme example of rejecting clear evidence to believe extraordinary claims is Mike Hughes, who died in 2020 while attempting to “prove” that the Earth is flat. Some say he didn’t really believe the Earth is flat but used it as a publicity stunt. What reasons, besides a desire for publicity, could cause someone to reject evidence? Psychologists suggest that cognitive biases play a role. If you expect something to be true, you might dismiss evidence that suggests otherwise.

Another reason for believing extraordinary claims despite the evidence is social influence. If loved ones or admired figures hold those beliefs, it becomes easier to accept something that contradicts the evidence. Conspiracy theories are often embraced by those surrounded by a community of fellow conspiracy believers.

A common reason for believing something extraordinary is that your personal experience has led you to believe it is true. The flat Earth concept may seem reasonable when you stand outside and look around. Does this look like a sphere to you? Do you trust what others tell you, or your own eyes? Strange experiences, hallucinations, or psychoactive drugs can also lead someone to accept an extraordinary claim.

Extraordinary beliefs aren’t inherently good or bad. Scientists challenging the status quo—such as questioning the evidence supporting neo-Darwinism—can lead to new insights. Carl Sagan’s statement, “The cosmos is all there is or was or ever will be,” (from his TV series), cannot be backed by extraordinary evidence. It’s a philosophical statement, not a scientific fact. In fact, science can’t prove that God does not exist, and increasing evidence of fine-tuning points toward an intelligence behind creation.

Both scientists and believers in God should avoid letting social dynamics and peer pressure shape their beliefs. Carefully examine the evidence for what you believe and avoid falling into the trap of believing extraordinary claims despite the evidence.

December 11, 2025December 10, 2025

If Christianity Became Illegal

Skeptics argue that Christianity is merely a large money-making scam that should be illegal. They particularly complain about religious tax exemptions and the activities churches claim as religious work, such as operating retirement centers and camps. However, these criticisms overlook what would actually happen if Christianity became illegal.

The Giving Institute reports that Americans donated $392 billion to U.S. charities in 2024. Churches support many hospitals, women’s shelters, nursing homes, food pantries, counseling centers, adoption agencies, youth camps, and more. The range of beneficial programs run by churches is extensive. While it’s true that a few individuals have committed exploitative acts in the name of religion, they represent a small minority.

Think about the consequences if Christianity became illegal. Many hospitals and nursing homes would shut down, and the government would have to take over the vital services that churches currently provide. With every change in political leadership, programs initiated by the previous party could be eliminated.

Our culture largely depends on Christian principles. How many atheist charities are you familiar with? How many hospitals have been established and maintained by the skeptics who criticize Christianity? Why would someone with no religious beliefs donate a large portion of their income to help the less fortunate? If your sole moral philosophy is “survival of the fittest,” why would you give money to those whom you consider to be less fit?

If Christianity became illegal, it would not eliminate hypocrisy. While some hypocrites are in churches, the greatest hypocrisy is found in those who want to make Christianity illegal.

Reference: Thrivent Magazine, winter 2025, page 4, and thrivent.com

December 10, 2025December 9, 2025

Pseudoscience, True Science, and Faith

This website is dedicated to promoting science and faith as allies. Many people in religious communities believe that science opposes faith because of their denominational teachings that conflict with scientific evidence. The faith of many young people and members of the academic community has been weakened or broken by the ongoing clash between science and faith. Often, pseudoscience is the root cause of this conflict. Here are five reasons for the tension:

1) Some of the conflict’s promoters are religious leaders with no scientific background or understanding.

2) Many of the individuals claiming to be scientists hold PhDs in fields unrelated to the issues they discuss.

3) Some scientists harbor resentment against religion and refuse to support supporting evidence.

4) Many individuals on both sides are outdated and unaware of new discoveries and insights.

5) The viewpoints of both scientists and religious leaders are not reliable sources of information.

Webster’s Dictionary defines “pseudoscience” as “a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.” Those promoting the conflict between science and faith are promoting pseudoscience. We urge parents, teachers, religious leaders, and young people to verify everything they read, hear, or see to ensure its accuracy.

This ministry strives diligently to avoid presenting anything that could be mistaken for pseudoscience. When we make an error, we issue a retraction. Our sources are academic journals that rely on the scientific method. In 1 Timothy 6:20, the Apostle Paul advised the young preacher Timothy to “turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called science.” That advice remains especially relevant today.

November 25, 2025November 23, 2025

Objections to Proselytizing

Vice President J.D. Vance raised an issue at the end of October 2025 when he expressed hope that his Hindu wife would convert to Christianity. This has sparked a lot of debate about whether it is moral or ethical for Christians to try to convert people of other faiths. In the days of Christ, many people became proselytes to Judaism. (See Matthew 23:15, Acts 2:10, and 13:43.) The apostles brought many Jews into the Christian faith, and in Acts 6:5, one convert is identified as Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch. Today, there are strong objections to proselytizing on the grounds that it can lead to cultural loss and increased prejudice.

Such objections to proselytizing are inconsistent at best. If someone’s religion demands human sacrifice, are we wrong to lead them to the Christian faith? Polygamy, a highly destructive practice found in many Eastern religions, Islam, Mormonism, and some Native American tribes, is another example. Women’s rights have advanced in modern times primarily through Christianity, and passages like Galatians 3:28 clearly state that women are equal to men in every way and should not be viewed as possessions.

The point is that many religions teach harmful ideas. Sometimes, destructive groups like the Ku Klux Klan falsely claim to be “Christian.” Jesus provided a test for authentic religious practice when He said, “By their fruits you shall know them” (Matthew 7:15-20). Compare the fruits of Islam and Hinduism with what Christianity has brought to the world. How many schools, hospitals, nursing homes, care facilities, and food banks have been established by churches or individuals expressing their Christian faith? The same question can be asked about other religious faiths worldwide.

J.D. Vance’s wife, Usha, is the daughter of Hindu parents who were atheists and agnostics. Usha Vance has supported her husband’s decision to raise their three children as Christians, and the two oldest attend a Christian school. We make no apologies for our efforts to share what the Christian faith has to offer, including a better life now and eternal life after. We do this because we believe it’s in the best interest of every human on Earth. Objections to proselytizing for the Christian faith are not in humanity’s best interest.

Reference: msn.com

October 17, 2025October 16, 2025

Liberal, Missouri: A Strange Town

One of the strongest arguments for Christianity and the existence of God is that atheists lack a purpose for their existence. This may seem like a topic for philosophical debate, but in practice, atheism often leads to disaster. Skeptics might say it’s just my opinion, but there is historical evidence supporting this view. The story of Liberal, Missouri, is a clear example.

On October 26, 1880, George H. Walser, an Illinois lawyer and self-described “freethinker,” filed a plan for a town in Missouri. The town would be divided into eight blocks, with 25 commercial lots, 57 residential lots, and a city park. Anyone wishing to join the “freethinker” town had to agree that no church, Christian, or believer in God could live there.

The story of Liberal, Missouri, along with the supporters and opponents of Walser’s town, was documented in a book by James Proctor Moore titled This Strange Town–Liberal, Missouri, with the subtitle “A History of the Early Years 1880 to 1910.” Sadly, the book is now out of print, but it describes what happened in Liberal. It clearly shows that without belief in God, there is no reason for anyone to be moral, and without morality, everything falls apart.

Today, Liberal, Missouri, still exists, with a population of 629 residents according to the 2020 census. However, it is no longer an atheist or “freethinker” town. As reported on churchfinder.com, it now has six churches.

Looking at what is happening in America today, we see a repeat of the events in Liberal. Over 40% of Americans, when asked about their religious beliefs, say “none.” As a result, America is turning into a nation without moral values. Will we learn from history, or will we repeat it?

References: Wikipedia.org, churchfinder.com

September 3, 2025September 2, 2025

Neanderthal DNA and Humans

Neanderthal Fossils and Humans — Neanderthal Skull

Skeptics try to disprove the Bible by claiming that Neanderthal fossils invalidate the biblical account of humans’ special creation.

The Neanderthal story began in 1856 when remains were found in a cave in the Neander Valley, 8.1 miles east of Düsseldorf, Germany. A few years later, Charles Darwin’s work was published, and skeptics argued that the Neanderthal fossils demonstrate the truth of Darwinism. Because skepticism was popular at the time, the biblical claim that humans are created in God’s image was widely mocked.

One of the most serious implications of Darwinism was related to race. Slavery was justified by claiming blacks were mere apes and whites were more evolved. Applying “survival of the fittest,” racial prejudice reached an all-time high. As science advanced, the human genome was sequenced in 2003, and Neanderthal DNA was sequenced in 2010. This research showed that the human genome contain about 2 percent Neanderthal DNA.

The Bible does not specify what the first humans looked like, but it’s almost certain they were not blond, blue-eyed, and white-skinned. If a scientist found a skeleton of Adam, what could they know about the color of his eyes or his hair? Humans have adapted over time and climate changes, which we call “evolution.” But humans are still humans, and despite having some Neanderthal DNA, we are still created in the spiritual image of God.

Reference: “Finding our Neanderthal Side” in Discover magazine, September/October 2025.

August 29, 2025August 29, 2025

Prayer Changes Things

As Paul concluded his first epistle to the Thessalonians, he gave them a list of instructions (1 Thessalonians 5:14-22). Among these is the admonition to “Pray without ceasing” (verse 17). That does not mean to be constantly on your knees or even with your eyes closed. The idea is to maintain a constant attitude of prayer. Prayer changes things, starting with the person who prays.

In Acts 12:5, we read about what the early Church did when Peter was imprisoned for preaching the gospel. “Peter was therefore kept in prison, but constant prayer was offered to God for him by the church” (NKJV). They prayed without ceasing for Paul, and God answered their prayer with a miracle. God doesn’t always answer with miracles. Miracles, by their very definition, are extremely rare. However, that does not mean that prayer can’t change things.

Recently (August 27, 2025), a gender-confused person with wicked motives opened fire on children in a Minnesota Catholic school during mass, killing two and injuring 15, plus 2 adults. The deranged shooter apparently harbored major anger toward Christianity and a desire to kill children. This incident also prompted many politicians and media personalities to display their hostility toward prayer. They demonstrated that they can’t believe prayer changes things.

In a press conference, the mayor of Minneapolis criticized people who were calling for prayer in response to the shooting. “Don’t say this is about ‘thoughts and prayers’ right now. These kids were literally praying…they were in a church.” Other Democratic officials and liberal media figures also disparaged faith-based responses to the tragedy. Dana Bash on CNN repeated the mayor’s call to “forget about thoughts and prayers.”

Jen Psaki, the former White House press secretary under President Biden, in a rant on X, stated, “Enough with the thoughts and prayers.” Then, on her MSNBC show, Psaki criticized President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance for calling for prayer for the families involved. Vance had defended prayer by writing on X, “We pray because our hearts are broken. We pray because we know God listens.”

As I said, prayer changes things. Living in an attitude of prayer will change your life. It will change your attitude toward others. It will make you concerned for their needs and their pains. It will ease your own burdens and lead you to demonstrate God’s love for others. Perhaps it will bring a miracle, and maybe that miracle is a change in your life. Pray without ceasing.