Why Christians should embrace gene-editing
By applying scientific knowledge responsibly, Christians can continue to enhance the human experience while honouring God’s creation.
Written by Lipton Matthews.
Christianity arguably laid the foundations of the modern Western world. Reflecting a divine vision of human accomplishment, many Christians believe that God wants humans to achieve their full potential, a goal that can sometimes require the advancement of science and technology. One technology that may soon offer a golden opportunity to address pressing health challenges, while also enhancing human capabilities, is gene editing.
The technology has of course sparked fierce debates within the Christian community ever since it first appeared on the horizon. Critics contend that tampering with our DNA would be an affront to God’s authority. Yet as a Christian, I believe that gene-editing technologies (particularly those designed to improve our health and intelligence) are perfectly compatible with a worldview that prioritises human potential, stewardship and minimising the suffering of innocents.
In the Bible, health is considered a blessing from God. Many parts of scripture attest to the importance of healing, physical wellness, and the gift of well-being. For example, John the Apostle writes, “Beloved, I pray that in all respects you may prosper and be in good health, just as your soul prospers” (3 John 1:2). Health is portrayed not only as an indication of physical condition but as essential to the broader project of human flourishing, which includes both body and spirit.
Current technologies, such as pre-implantation genetic testing and embryo selection, provide Christians and non-believers alike with the means to promote physical health in a targeted manner. By editing genes to prevent congenital diseases, we could soon be able to reduce human suffering on an even larger scale. Gene-editing is poised to target ailments like cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s disease and muscular dystrophy – debilitating conditions with known genetic origins. Ensuring that future generations are liberated from these diseases should be seen as an act of compassion and good stewardship, which helps humans to fulfil their role as co-creators in God’s design.
American theologian Philip Hefner argues that humans have a duty to promote the advancement of society:
Human beings are God’s created co-creators whose purpose is to be the agency acting in freedom, to birth the future that is most wholesome for the nature that has birthed us – the nature that is not only our genetic heritage, but also the entire human community and the evolutionary and ecological reality in which we belong. Exercising this agency is said to be God’s will for humans.
A central plank of Christianity is compassion for those who suffer, epitomized by Jesus’s life and eventual death on the cross. Christians believe that Jesus healed the sick, restored sight to the blind, and exhorted his followers to care for others. Therefore, those who advocate embryo screening and gene-editing are not abandoning their faith. They are simply extending the Ministry of Healing into the realm of preventive care. Embracing gene-editing affords Christians the privilege of forestalling serious illnesses before they arise, thereby reducing pain and suffering in ways that would have seemed unimaginable to previous generations.
What’s more, gene-editing technologies pave a path for Christians to truly uphold the values that Jesus lived by. Just as medical professionals generally act in a spirit of compassion, geneticists and other scientists use their skills to protect innocent lives. As technology evolves, Christians might come to see gene-editing as a powerful weapon in the healing arsenal, one that promotes generational transformations in health, longevity and human potential. Viewed correctly, gene-editing need not pose a threat to traditional Christian beliefs.
We Christians already rely on scientific treatments to cure diseases, ease pain and extend life. Many also proclaim that prevention is better than cure, so embracing gene-editing technologies ought to be seen as a straightforward application of Christian values.
Christian theology has long held that human ingenuity and scientific discovery are manifestations of God’s gifts, which reflect our God-given curiosity and intelligence. Several influential thinkers, from Saint Augustine to C.S. Lewis, maintained that humans have an obligation to engage with science and explore the natural world as part of our calling to understand God’s creation. Meanwhile, contemporary figures such as Brian Green and Stephen O’Leary have argued that Christianity imbued science and technology with spiritual significance as an avenue to improve humanity in a fallen world.
In this context, gene-editing can be seen as the natural outgrowth of a belief in scientific progress – just like vaccines, antibiotics, surgical innovations and other life-saving innovations. By applying scientific knowledge responsibly, Christians can continue to enhance the human experience while honouring God’s creation.
The Bible encourages the acquisition of knowledge, describing it as a virtue that fosters understanding and righteousness. Proverbs 2:6 states, “For the Lord gives wisdom; from His mouth come knowledge and understanding.” Christians believe that God desires humans to expand their understanding – not only of the divine but also of the world around them. Improving intelligence through gene editing is a particularly thorny issue. Yet grappling with it is critical to human flourishing.
In a society that increasingly rewards analytical abilities, technological literacy and cognitive adaptability, higher intelligence enables individuals to thrive and to solve complex global challenges. This aligns with the Christian goal of encouraging human flourishing in all its facets, with the goal of bettering the world.
A major concern that many Christians have about genetic editing is its potential for misuse. While questions about playing “God” or interfering with nature are legitimate, they are not specific to genetic editing. Similar concerns have been raised with many other medical and scientific breakthroughs. They call for discernment and responsibility rather than outright prohibition.
For Christians, loving one’s neighbour means having a stake in their welfare and working for a world in which all people can excel. Using gene editing to enhance health and intelligence is therefore an expression of this imperative. Of course, Christians must contribute to ethical discussions surrounding the technology, ensuring that it is used in ways that affirm life and respect human dignity.
While gene-editing promises many benefits, it also demands ethical scrutiny. By using gene-editing technologies in a manner that aligns with Christian ethics, believers can shape the direction of genetic science to prioritise values such as compassion and universal respect. This balance reflects a commitment to both faith and reason, which lies at the core of the Christian tradition.
To preclude a situation in which societal inequality burgeons, Christians must advocate equal access to beneficial technologies, ensuring that no one is left behind in the pursuit of well-being. This includes calling for the diffusion of these technologies to underserved populations in Africa, Asia and the West Indies. Gene-editing technologies present an opportunity for Christian activists to collaborate with corporate players, multilateral organisations and other stakeholders to design programs that subsidise the cost of gene-editing for people in poor countries. After all, it is these people who stand to gain the most from the use of these technologies.
In conclusion, Christians should embrace gene-editing technologies as a means of fulfilling God’s desire for human flourishing. By screening for and then correcting genetic defects, we can prevent suffering, promote health and empower future generations. The Christian faith has always encouraged the pursuit of both wisdom and compassion; gene-editing will allow us to apply these values in a transformative way. As Christians engage with genetic science, they must also accept the responsibility of helping to guide its future development.
Lipton Matthews is a research professional and YouTuber. His work has been featured by the Mises Institute, The Epoch Times, Chronicles, Intellectual Takeout, American Thinker and other publications. His email address is: lo_matthews@yahoo.com
Consider supporting Aporia with a paid subscription:
You can also follow us on Twitter.
"One technology that may soon offer a golden opportunity to address pressing health challenges, while also enhancing human capabilities, is gene editing"
Well, which one is it? The persuasiveness (or lack thereof) of the entire column turns on this. Healing deficiencies begins with recognizing them as such. These are the easier arguments, particularly where people share a common conception of health, or at the very least, of injury.
"Enhancement," though, requires challenging existing notions of health, and this is where the quotation of Christian sources here is either shallow or misguided. No one has ever doubted that we are to ameliorate suffering. The more important question is whether we are supposed to change our fundamental notions of "excelling" through a piecemeal accumulation of mechanical tinkerings, aimed at alterations of traits in insolation.
Honestly, sometimes I wonder if people learned a damn thing from the covid vax debacle. Evidently not.
I fear there is too much potential for the misuse of genetic engineering. There is a more conservative, albeit much slower, method for improving our genetic fitness. It is one described in Robert A. Heinlein's novel "Beyond This Horizon". It involves choosing the individual chromosomes that are combined from two parents, selecting the most favorable natural combinations out of more than a quarter-million possibilities, which would gradually remove undesirable genes. It does require in-vitro fertilization, but this is a decades-old technique that does not seem to have any undesirable outcomes. In his novel it was a completely voluntary method. but an almost universal practice.