Science has been on a collision course with religion and ethics whenever human-based research comes to the fore. Among the critical areas of collision is the formation of human life through birth, with variations of birth or non-birth processes such as cloning. Religion has always held that God is the sole source of human life, through the process of procreation (Colwell, 2016). The fact that scientists have developed a capability of making humans through laboratory processes has elicited a lot of controversy. Meilaender, in his works, presents a Christian perspective on the source of life and how God orchestrates the process through which humans come into being. The fact that researchers can reverse engineer procreation by manipulating cells does not negate the fact that God is the primary source of human life.
Meilaender’s Perspective on Procreation and Reproduction
Whereas the difference between procreation and reproduction might be considered as mere semantics, Meilaender makes a sound argument to the contrary. Meilaender takes the position that procreation is a God orchestrated process where a man and a woman come together through love, then create a baby through coitus (Meilaender, 2013). Conversely, reproduction is a general term that refers to any process that results in the making of another human being. The primary distinction between procreation and reproduction is that in the latter, the God-ordained love between a mother and a father does not exist.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Meilaender’s Perspective on Being Begotten versus Being Made
Meilaender uses the concepts of being begotten and being made to differentiate between the procreation or creation of man and the making of God’s son, Jesus Christ. According to Meilaender, Jesus was a being that came directly from God with the human parent merely being a means through which He came into the world (Meilaender, 2013). On the other hand, when making humans, God makes use of human tools, generally through the process of procreation as defined above. Whereas ordinary humans and Jesus were both God’s doing, the former was made while the latter was begotten.
Informed Reflection of the Concepts
Procreation and Reproduction
Based on an informed analysis of Meilaender’s view on procreation versus reproduction, I have to agree with his description. In a world where human beings are just a collection of parts that can be manufactured in a laboratory, life would not have any spiritual or actual meaning. Human being has a body, a spiritual aspect, and a soul, which differentiates them from the rest of the flora and fauna (Cooper, 2015). Science may have come up with shortcuts that theoretically may replicate the process of reproduction but for life to have real meaning, God must be involved since he is the source of life. Procreation is thus very different from mere reproduction (Savulescu et al., 2015; Colwell, 2016).
Being Begotten versus Being Made
Whereas all human beings are also children of God, Jesus alone was a begotten son of God who was born in the absence of the full process of procreation. According to Christian doctrine, Jesus resulted from an immaculate birth through divine intervention (Evans, 2017). Jesus was God himself who became a man when He was begotten of God. He is thus different from ordinary human beings, who have been directly made by God, through procreation. Based on the above, I agree with Meilaender’s description of begotten versus made.
Conclusion
The story of creation as presented in scripture has been existent for thousands of years and has remained true, but scientific knowledge is a movable target that keeps on changing year by year. When science does not agree with religion, it does not mean that either of them is wrong but only that science has not advanced enough to arrive at the understanding of the issues outlined in scripture. Meilaender used a combined expertise in both science and scripture to not only try and bring science up to date but also put important issues relating to human life into perspective.
References
Colwell, C. (2016). Speaking out against blood antiquities. Science , 352 (6291), 1285-1285
Cooper, J. W. (2015). Scripture and philosophy on the unity of body and soul: An integrative method for theological anthropology. Retrieved from https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315613673.ch2
Evans, W. (2017). Fundamental messages no. 2: The virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Biola Publications .
Meilaender, G. (2013). Bioethics: A primer for Christians . Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Savulescu, J., Pugh, J., Douglas, T., & Gyngell, C. (2015). The moral imperative to continue gene editing research on human embryos. Protein & Cell , 6 (7), 476-479
