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
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
. 