Does Bringing Back Extinct Animals Challenge God's Design?

Summary

Summary prepared by Acts 2:38 Life from the transcript below — the preacher’s words follow in full.

The Narrow Answer: Working Within God's Creative Plan

• The question posed: one of our viewers on YouTube wanted your thoughts on the following. He noted that science is now working to bring back extinct animals — and what does this mean, for trusting God as the designer and creator of life? He specifically cites the example of the direwolf: earlier this year, a company announced that they had brought back — using genetic engineering, of course — this particular species of wolf that has been extinct for thousands of years. And this company has also made it known that their intention is: they want to bring back other extinct animals, like the woolly mammoth. So our listener asked: does humanity's ability to bring back extinct creatures change the way we should trust God's authority over life, in general? And what do these things mean, if anything, for Christian thought?
• It's an interesting subject. Of course, the Bible doesn't directly speak to it. But I do think there's some principles here. So, a narrow answer would be: I don't see anything inherently wrong. Because after all, if God created these animals to start with — and they went extinct many times through human actions, sometimes maybe climate, and other catastrophes — but seemingly, if it was a part of God's creative plan, that he allowed it, he created it, developed it — then what would be wrong with going back to God's creative intention and plan? So from that perspective, maybe that's not really problematic. A broader answer would be raising concern about human ability to manipulate nature — and that is a cause of concern. So we can now edit genes. So, if there's a defective gene that will cause a genetic disease, and we're able to edit that — say, in the womb, or even with an embryo, or, you know, a child, a fetus in the womb — or if we're able to even do that with a person who's born, yet go back and change their genes; or if we can help prevent, in someone, inheriting it — I think that's a positive good. Because after all, creation is originally created by God, as good. So if we can help fix something that was corrupted, because of the fall of humans, by sin — again, we're going back to God's original intention. But then, you start talking about: what about trying to edit, to create superhumans, or special powers? Or what about trying to create children of your choice, with the genetic makeup that you want? And what about cloning? And of course, I think those would be directly violating God's plan, because God is the creator. So, if you're talking about narrowly bringing back an animal that's extinct, it seems like you're still working within God's creative plan. And of course, God's creation allows a variety. I do believe God created each kind, according to Genesis. But here, we're talking about the direwolf. Maybe there was one kind of proto-dog, or proto-wolf, from which there have been a whole variety, over the centuries and millennia, that have developed — that would not conflict with our belief in creation; that would not conflict with God's plan. And so, in a sense, we're just kind of working within the diversity that God already created animals to have, in their original genetic makeup.

Scriptures: Genesis (book-only)

The Direwolf Claim Is Overblown — and the Line

• And I will point out, in that regard: it's a little bit overblown. When you read that — they did not create a complete direwolf, from scratch. They took a grey wolf, and edited some of the genes, to bring in typical direwolf characteristics. So, there again, that's kind of more like breeding, but with advanced genetic techniques. So that's not qualitatively different, I would think, from variations within God's original creative intent — like we can do, in a more natural way, with breeding of species, over time: breeding of domestic animals, and so forth, for certain characteristics. We're just doing that in slow motion, instead of editing it instantly. But to truly bring back total extinct — that's not possible. Even the woolly mammoth: I think they would have to take modern elephants, and somehow work with an existing structure. Whether they could ever take something that's completely — you'd have to have a complete DNA, which degrades over time. I'm not sure it's technically possible. But, leaving aside all that: it is a cause of concern, when humans tamper with life. So, when they start trying to create of their own — and especially if it would come to dealing with humans, because I do believe, in the ultimate sense, God is the creator; death and life are in his hands. So, anything that's designed to alleviate suffering, and correct a genetic flaw — which, we say, would not have come from God's creation, but would have come from the deterioration, and fall, of humans — well, in a sense, that's still working within God's plan. But to create something new, or to clone, or to try to edit a human — I think you're more directly putting your hands in, trying to be a creator. You're trying to take God's place.

Life and Death Are in God's Hands

• There's an interesting statement, when Hannah was praying, in 1 Samuel. She said: 'The Lord kills, and makes alive. He brings down to the grave, and he brings up.' And so that's a common thought, throughout the Scripture, that ultimately life and death are in God's hands. Yes, we can try to use humanitarian efforts, medicine, and medical science. There's nothing wrong with that. But still, at the end of the day, God is going to determine if you live or die. That's reserved to God. So, once we start intruding on that, God's creative power — or trying to imitate that, or alter that — or life and death, or what it means to be human — I think we're intruding into God's creative intention. I think God's not going to allow that to continue. Judgment will come.

Scriptures: 1 Samuel 2:6

Genesis 6, Babel, and the Call for Christian Ethics

• And the reason why I say that is: before the flood, in Genesis chapter 6, God observed that humans' designs were — they were evil, continually. They were inventing, or designing, or creating new things, but it was always for evil. And if you'll notice our modern inventions: although there may be wholesome purposes, too often they're distorted for evil. Atomic energy, but yet the atomic bomb. Video technology, television technology — amazing, yet used for pornography. It seems like everything that we create, as humans, we find a way, as a human species, or human race, to distort it, and use it for evil, contrary to God's plan. So God only allows that so long, before judgment comes. So he sent the flood, because of that. The same way, the Tower of Babel: that they were building a tower to heaven. And it seems that, you know, God told them to disperse across the earth, to repopulate the earth, after the flood; they violated God's plan; they tried to build a city, and a tower that would go to heaven. It seems like it was out of pride, a name for themselves, seeing what they do. Maybe even implication: if God wants to judge us again, we're going to build a tower so high, we will be safe. I don't know if that was part of their thinking, but the overall thing was a rebellion against God's plan. So God visited them with judgment, again. He confounded the languages, to force them to spread across. But he said, in that context, of Genesis 11 — and let me just actually read, because I think this is relevant. So, the first one, in Genesis 6:5: 'Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.' So, when that happened, judgment came. And then, in Genesis 11, verse 6: 'And the Lord said, indeed the people are one, and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do. Now nothing that they purpose to do will be withheld from them.' And so, then judgment came. So it seems like God is saying: you know, humans have amazing ability, especially when they put all their resources together. And you see, in the case of technology, the accumulated wisdom of generations, and of thousands of scientists, working together. No one person could ever do this. But over the centuries, and over the thousands, and millions, of people, putting all their knowledge together, it's amazing what humans can do. And so, there's even implication: maybe humans could cross a line. But I think, if they could, God is going to stop them, before they do. And so yes, it is a great cause for concern. I think we can be scientists, but Christian scientists need to have Christian ethics, and Christian limitations. I think even the government should impose some restrictions — which they have, in the sense of no human cloning. But I do think there needs to be careful attention to these matters, careful ethical discussions, and careful regulation. Because if not, we will cross a line, or we will try to cross a line, and God will say: enough is enough. And judgment will come.

Scriptures: Genesis 6; Genesis 6:5; Genesis 11; Genesis 11:6

Scripture index: Genesis (book-only); 1 Samuel 2:6; Genesis 6; Genesis 6:5; Genesis 11; Genesis 11:6.