Genetics, God and the Future of Humanity

Thanks for posting the article Ruth. There are obviously some rather ‘grey areas’ regarding the (biblical) notion of ‘being made in the image of God’ (imago Dei). The functional interpretation of ‘image-bearing’ seems to offer a better fit for the Christian practitioner working at ‘the chalk face’. The functional view of image-bearing touched on in the article does not, in faciem, cause one to have to ‘wrestle’ with the implications that other notions of image-bearing bring with them—though I suspect there are, at least for the professing Christian, nagging questions that—presently ‘beg the question’. It is a brave and necessary ‘New World’ in which advances in medicine offer hope for so many. Who is to judge?
I personally do not hold to the functional interpretation of ‘image-bearing’.
Best regards
Derek j. White

Science and Belief

dna-3888228_1920 pixabay crop Pixabay

Scientists have had a remarkable technique available to them in the last few years. A new editing system called CRISPR-Cas (biologists like acronyms as much as anyone) has made it possible to accurately change the genetic code – like guiding a pair of scissors to exactly the right spot in a text.

This technology has been used to heal genetic disease in children, such as Daniel who suffered from Wiskott-Aldrich Syndrome. Cells were taken from his bone marrow and cultured in the lab, the faulty genes were replaced, and the ‘healed’ cells were put back into his body. Daniel has not suffered from the severe asthma and inability to fight infections that afflicted his older brother, and he is now alive and well aged 18.

But what about the ethical issues around this new technique? Should it be used to modify embryos? What about going beyond healing to enhance human…

View original post 846 more words

Guest Post: Believing the Unbelievable?

Science and Belief

22278391204_2a4cf5989e_z Rocky Chang, Flickr, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/

There are more things in heaven and on earth than are dreamt of in our philosophies

 Shakespeare

A common objection to Christianity is that it simply isn’t believable. The virgin birth, the resurrection, the feeding of the five thousand – it’s just all rather improbable isn’t it, if not downright impossible. The question I’m going to consider in this blog post is “Does the truth have to seem believable?”, looking at examples from modern science.

One area I’m interested in is quantum mechanics. Quantum simply means discrete (as opposed to continuous, think dots rather than lines) and mechanics is the branch of physics which deals with motion. Quantum mechanics deals with the behaviour of small particles, and it defies all notions of common sense. Quantum particles can:

  • Seemingly exist in two places at once (the principle of superposition)
  • Have mysterious instantaneous links between them regardless…

View original post 866 more words