The "Dire" Straits of De-Extinction
The “Dire” Straits of De-Extinction
“Then God said, ‘And now we will make human beings;
they will be like us and resemble us.
They will have power over the fish, the birds,
and all animals, domestic and wild, large and small.’”
Genesis 1:26, GNT
Introduction
The recent breaking news about the "de-extinction" of the dire wolf, that vanished 10,000-13,000 years ago, places humankind in moral dire straits. Numerous media outlets reported the news, and it was not long until ethical questions began to surface. The situation is indeed morally serious, as the above title suggests, so I ask in this Pathway Perspectives article whether the genetic modification of two ancient dire wolf DNA samples has caused humankind to slide further down an ethical slippery slope with serious consequences. I will also invite Christians to reflect intelligently upon genetic modification and make wise decisions about the benefits and burdens of this technology. This "de-extinction" phenomenon raises sober questions indeed.
Questions in need of answers
What is a dire wolf and what has transpired? Colossal Biosciences, a Dallas-based biotech company, announced on April 8 that it had used cloning and gene-editing on two ancient samples of dire wolf DNA to birth three pups. [1] The team used DNA from a 13,000-year-old tooth and a 72,000-year-old skull to fashion the healthy puppies. The young wolves are no doubt cute, but the claim that the company brought this species back from extinction is not accurate. [2] The cubs are actually "genetically modified grey wolves.” [3] The de-extinction team, however, did apply a new synthetic biology technology, where ancient dire wolf DNA was used to identify key segments of genetic code, which the team then edited into the biological blueprint of a grey wolf.
Is such genetic alteration legal? There are no current United States laws that regulate genetic modification and de-extinction of animals. The "Animal Welfare Act" does regulate animal research, but it does not limit the types of experiments that can be conducted on animals. Federal funding on human germline gene editing is forbidden, but there is no restriction for non-human species. [4]
Is this genetic breakthrough a dire wolf in a sheep's clothing? Not necessarily. This does not mean that biotech companies like Colossal are thought to be automatically bad, even though secular science does not start from a Christian worldview, where God is sovereign Creator and Lord over Creation. To its credit, Colossal's work, for example, also includes attempts to save endangered species that suffer from a lack of genetic diversity, which can cause birth defects, sterility, and health problems. [5] Such a lack of diversity could lead to ultimate extinction. So, the company strives, in these cases, to "genetically edit" more diversity into these populations, resulting in genetic enhancement.
Admittedly, this is an anthropocentric viewpoint on the world, which places humanity at the center of reality and understands the universe “primarily in terms of human values and human interests." [6] The ethical challenge is to ensure a proper motivation for the application of this and other biotechnologies. Sometimes the underlying goal leans more toward moneymaking or human recognition. In these cases, the end does not always justify the means. [7] How should Christians think about this?
Christians should be aware that there has been in fact a centuries-long overlapping relationship between Christianity and science, so a warfare reaction is not required! Instead, there is a constructive, fruit bearing approach, where Christians may interact with science on a platform of shared values. Since all truth is God's truth, as St. Augustine famously stated, we do well to seek common ground where science and Christianity converge. [8] This discussion begs one further question (at least for now!). What then/ does the Bible, our guidebook, say about "genetic engineering" and "genetic modification" The short answer is, "Nothing, explicitly." However, there are general biblical principles we may readily apply to ethical issues that surface with the application of such technologies.
Is such genetic alteration legal? There are no current United States laws that regulate genetic modification and de-extinction of animals. The "Animal Welfare Act" does regulate animal research, but it does not limit the types of experiments that can be conducted on animals. Federal funding on human germline gene editing is forbidden, but there is no restriction for non-human species. [4]
Is this genetic breakthrough a dire wolf in a sheep's clothing? Not necessarily. This does not mean that biotech companies like Colossal are thought to be automatically bad, even though secular science does not start from a Christian worldview, where God is sovereign Creator and Lord over Creation. To its credit, Colossal's work, for example, also includes attempts to save endangered species that suffer from a lack of genetic diversity, which can cause birth defects, sterility, and health problems. [5] Such a lack of diversity could lead to ultimate extinction. So, the company strives, in these cases, to "genetically edit" more diversity into these populations, resulting in genetic enhancement.
Admittedly, this is an anthropocentric viewpoint on the world, which places humanity at the center of reality and understands the universe “primarily in terms of human values and human interests." [6] The ethical challenge is to ensure a proper motivation for the application of this and other biotechnologies. Sometimes the underlying goal leans more toward moneymaking or human recognition. In these cases, the end does not always justify the means. [7] How should Christians think about this?
Christians should be aware that there has been in fact a centuries-long overlapping relationship between Christianity and science, so a warfare reaction is not required! Instead, there is a constructive, fruit bearing approach, where Christians may interact with science on a platform of shared values. Since all truth is God's truth, as St. Augustine famously stated, we do well to seek common ground where science and Christianity converge. [8] This discussion begs one further question (at least for now!). What then/ does the Bible, our guidebook, say about "genetic engineering" and "genetic modification" The short answer is, "Nothing, explicitly." However, there are general biblical principles we may readily apply to ethical issues that surface with the application of such technologies.
What Bible principles apply to genetic modification?
God precedes all there is and is Lord over all He has made (Genesis 1:1, "In the beginning, God"). “God created” declares a singular worldview and holds profound implications for Genesis 1:1–Revelation 22:21. It also holds profound significance for our lives each day! Elohim, the word used for God in Genesis chapter one, transcends creation and His word is all-powerful, so we are to worship Him exclusively (cf. Exodus 20:1-3). The name “Elohim” indicates “honor and majesty” and commands our special reverence. Creation knows this fact and “extols God’s transcendence and the power of His spoken word," and good Christian foundations remain rooted in this truth (cf. Romans 8:20-22). [9]
We also should show great care of the world that God has made as a sign of our commitment to Him (1:28). Even though the aim of the biblical accounts of origins is not primarily scientific, we may see something of the careful attention that God gives to each specific part of the whole (1:11-12, 21, 24-25, “according to its kind”). Genesis teaches us about the role that humans will fulfill in God’s world. His rule over our lives leads to our proper service in His creation. This role will include the right and just application of science and technology. God intended for creation resources to be preserved, but not preyed upon by human beings, so Christians are right to raise questions about the long-term implications of de-extinction efforts.
There are limits to our human authority. For us to say, “God created” is to reject all other creation accounts where the origins and biographies of such gods are chief. God alone is eternal, and we are finite; therefore, we need His presence in our lives to live and breathe and for a clear direction each day. It then becomes pure worship for us to state, “God creates!” Currently, a loose net of laws govern bioengineering, but Christian responsibility includes researching/asking what our duties are to protect plants, animals, and humankind under God's sovereignty. The underlying ethical principle is this: Just because we can do something scientifically and technologically does not mean that we ought to do it. The good news is that there is a way forward.
Pursue right and just care of God's creation. Christians rightly and justly weigh the benefits and harms that biotechnologies might cause to animals and what unforeseen implications there are for all the natural world, including plants and humans. We should consider what threats to human health there might be if these new wolves become hosts for a "virus, bacterium or parasite that directly infects humans who interact with them." [10] Colossal Biosciences's work to clone dire wolves does not represent a harm-proof solution to the extinction of a species. For example, Dolly, the sheep, although successfully cloned on 5 July 1996, had crippling arthritis. There also were 276 failed attempts before the sheep-cloning was fruitful. Christians support the fair treatment of animals and strive to reduce their suffering because the Bible contains commands about the just treatment of animals (Exodus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:1-4, 6-7; 25:4; Matthew 6:26; 10:29-31; cf. Psalm 104).
De-extinction aside, current major reintroduction efforts do not always work (e.g. the red wolf in the southeast U.S.). Scientists express disquiet that the benefit of present attempts at species-conservation might be overridden by the ecological detriment of a broad-scale de-extinction program. The effects of reintroduction of dire wolves into an ecosystem could also cause unforeseen imbalance. And worries have been raised as to whether a focus on de-extinction might also divert attention away from protecting current endangered species. [11] Reflective caution is the prudent course to take.
We also should show great care of the world that God has made as a sign of our commitment to Him (1:28). Even though the aim of the biblical accounts of origins is not primarily scientific, we may see something of the careful attention that God gives to each specific part of the whole (1:11-12, 21, 24-25, “according to its kind”). Genesis teaches us about the role that humans will fulfill in God’s world. His rule over our lives leads to our proper service in His creation. This role will include the right and just application of science and technology. God intended for creation resources to be preserved, but not preyed upon by human beings, so Christians are right to raise questions about the long-term implications of de-extinction efforts.
There are limits to our human authority. For us to say, “God created” is to reject all other creation accounts where the origins and biographies of such gods are chief. God alone is eternal, and we are finite; therefore, we need His presence in our lives to live and breathe and for a clear direction each day. It then becomes pure worship for us to state, “God creates!” Currently, a loose net of laws govern bioengineering, but Christian responsibility includes researching/asking what our duties are to protect plants, animals, and humankind under God's sovereignty. The underlying ethical principle is this: Just because we can do something scientifically and technologically does not mean that we ought to do it. The good news is that there is a way forward.
Pursue right and just care of God's creation. Christians rightly and justly weigh the benefits and harms that biotechnologies might cause to animals and what unforeseen implications there are for all the natural world, including plants and humans. We should consider what threats to human health there might be if these new wolves become hosts for a "virus, bacterium or parasite that directly infects humans who interact with them." [10] Colossal Biosciences's work to clone dire wolves does not represent a harm-proof solution to the extinction of a species. For example, Dolly, the sheep, although successfully cloned on 5 July 1996, had crippling arthritis. There also were 276 failed attempts before the sheep-cloning was fruitful. Christians support the fair treatment of animals and strive to reduce their suffering because the Bible contains commands about the just treatment of animals (Exodus 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:1-4, 6-7; 25:4; Matthew 6:26; 10:29-31; cf. Psalm 104).
De-extinction aside, current major reintroduction efforts do not always work (e.g. the red wolf in the southeast U.S.). Scientists express disquiet that the benefit of present attempts at species-conservation might be overridden by the ecological detriment of a broad-scale de-extinction program. The effects of reintroduction of dire wolves into an ecosystem could also cause unforeseen imbalance. And worries have been raised as to whether a focus on de-extinction might also divert attention away from protecting current endangered species. [11] Reflective caution is the prudent course to take.
Conclusion
How do Christians address the moral dire straight of de-extinction? The bedrock principle to consider is that humans are finite and do not always foresee the consequences of our scientific and technological agendas. We need guidance. Thankfully, Christ, the Lord over all creation, stands ready to give us wisdom (cf. Colossians 1:15-17). He ministered to humanity by preaching the Good News, feeding the hungry, healing the sick, and raising the dead (cf. Genesis 1:26-28; Genesis 3:15; John 1:14; 3:16-17). While He always spoke to humankind’s most pressing need of eternal life (John 6:26-27), He also cared for basic human needs, such as wellness (cf. John 9:1-12) and “daily bread” (cf. Matthew 13:32-38, 4000 were fed; John 6:1-14 and Luke 9:12-17, 5000 were fed), thus indicating the value of life, health, and basic sustenance.
Christ also sought both to provide for and to protect the helpless (Matthew 7:7-11, implied; Mark 7:9-13). His followers will seek to provide for the basic needs of humankind (e.g. allaying sickness and hunger through the application of helpful biotechnologies) and protect the vulnerable, including plants and animals, by staying abreast of and voicing concern against potentially harmful biotechnologies. Christ’s shalom, the wholeness of God’s peace, calls His church to minister to the needs of the entire person and care for His creation.
Prayerfully yours,
Larry C. Ashlock
Christ also sought both to provide for and to protect the helpless (Matthew 7:7-11, implied; Mark 7:9-13). His followers will seek to provide for the basic needs of humankind (e.g. allaying sickness and hunger through the application of helpful biotechnologies) and protect the vulnerable, including plants and animals, by staying abreast of and voicing concern against potentially harmful biotechnologies. Christ’s shalom, the wholeness of God’s peace, calls His church to minister to the needs of the entire person and care for His creation.
Prayerfully yours,
Larry C. Ashlock
Resources for Reflection and Exploration:
1. The name "Dire Wolf" has nothing to do with the creature by the same name in the Game of Thrones drama series. This species of wolf became extinct 10,000-13,000 years ago. It shares a significant genetic similarity with the grey wolf species.
Clone: An identical copy of an individual organism, a cell, or a gene, or the totality of all identical copies made from an individual organism, a cell, or a gene. In genetics, the clone implies an identical in genetic make-up of the original. Dolly, the sheep, comes to mind. Unlike Dolly, the dire wolf pups are actually hybrid grey wolves, except for some features, like the color of the fur and size of the skull. See also Note # 3, "Genetic Modification."
2. Victoria Gill, "Experts dispute claim dire wolf brought back from extinction," 8 April 2025. [See BBC article]
3. Genetic Modification is the process whereby a genetically modified organism is made in a laboratory. This involves making artificial or modified genetic material (GM constructs) that is next inserted into the genomes of cells or embryos. Then, the cell or embryo is regenerated to an organism, out of which a GM line or transgenic line is derived.
Although human genetic intervention is outside the scope of this article, it is important to understand what it includes: 1) Somatic therapy aims to repair a defect in a gene of a living individual (e.g. to cure cystic fibrosis). “A somatic cell is any cell of the body except a sperm or egg cell. Somatic cells are diploid, meaning that they contain two sets of chromosomes, one inherited from each parent. Mutations in somatic cells can affect the individual, but they are not passed on to offspring.” 2) Germline therapy alters a person’s reproductive DNA and thus prevents genetic errors from being passed on to future generations. Germline gene therapy is a controversial procedure, because the introduction of a gene into germline cells will result in inherited changes that affect future children. Germline gene therapy is not currently scientifically possible in humans. 3) Somatic enhancement engineers improvements in desired genetic traits for an individual. This technique aims to improve human capacities—e.g. memory enhancement, increased physical endurance, and increased height—rather than treating a disease. 4) Germline enhancement engineers such improvements for future generations. Memories of Nazi Germany’s eugenics program and fears of a new emerging eugenics program has led to a broad range of ethical concerns attached to germ-line enhancement techniques.
4. Colossal Biosciences is a private company and did not use Federal funds for its research. The Animal Welfare Act was first passed on 24 August 1966, as the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act. It was renamed the Animal Welfare Act in 1970.
5. Jeffery Kluger, "The Science Behind the Return of the Dire Wolf," in Time Magazine.
6. Ken Magnuson, Invitation to Christian Ethics, 507.
7. E. David Cook, "What are the Limits in Bioengineering ," in Not Just Science, ed. by Dorothy F. Chappell & E. David Cook, 116-118.
8. Spradley, "How Have Christian Faith and Natural Science Interacted in History?" in Not Just Science, ed. by Dorothy F. Chappell & E. David Cook, 27-28.
9. Kenneth A. Matthews, New American Commentary: Genesis.
10. Scientists Claim They Genetically Engineered a Dire Wolf. Should We Bring Back Extinct Species? Georgetown University, April 11, 2025.
11. Ibid.
1. The name "Dire Wolf" has nothing to do with the creature by the same name in the Game of Thrones drama series. This species of wolf became extinct 10,000-13,000 years ago. It shares a significant genetic similarity with the grey wolf species.
Clone: An identical copy of an individual organism, a cell, or a gene, or the totality of all identical copies made from an individual organism, a cell, or a gene. In genetics, the clone implies an identical in genetic make-up of the original. Dolly, the sheep, comes to mind. Unlike Dolly, the dire wolf pups are actually hybrid grey wolves, except for some features, like the color of the fur and size of the skull. See also Note # 3, "Genetic Modification."
2. Victoria Gill, "Experts dispute claim dire wolf brought back from extinction," 8 April 2025. [See BBC article]
3. Genetic Modification is the process whereby a genetically modified organism is made in a laboratory. This involves making artificial or modified genetic material (GM constructs) that is next inserted into the genomes of cells or embryos. Then, the cell or embryo is regenerated to an organism, out of which a GM line or transgenic line is derived.
Although human genetic intervention is outside the scope of this article, it is important to understand what it includes: 1) Somatic therapy aims to repair a defect in a gene of a living individual (e.g. to cure cystic fibrosis). “A somatic cell is any cell of the body except a sperm or egg cell. Somatic cells are diploid, meaning that they contain two sets of chromosomes, one inherited from each parent. Mutations in somatic cells can affect the individual, but they are not passed on to offspring.” 2) Germline therapy alters a person’s reproductive DNA and thus prevents genetic errors from being passed on to future generations. Germline gene therapy is a controversial procedure, because the introduction of a gene into germline cells will result in inherited changes that affect future children. Germline gene therapy is not currently scientifically possible in humans. 3) Somatic enhancement engineers improvements in desired genetic traits for an individual. This technique aims to improve human capacities—e.g. memory enhancement, increased physical endurance, and increased height—rather than treating a disease. 4) Germline enhancement engineers such improvements for future generations. Memories of Nazi Germany’s eugenics program and fears of a new emerging eugenics program has led to a broad range of ethical concerns attached to germ-line enhancement techniques.
4. Colossal Biosciences is a private company and did not use Federal funds for its research. The Animal Welfare Act was first passed on 24 August 1966, as the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act. It was renamed the Animal Welfare Act in 1970.
5. Jeffery Kluger, "The Science Behind the Return of the Dire Wolf," in Time Magazine.
6. Ken Magnuson, Invitation to Christian Ethics, 507.
7. E. David Cook, "What are the Limits in Bioengineering ," in Not Just Science, ed. by Dorothy F. Chappell & E. David Cook, 116-118.
8. Spradley, "How Have Christian Faith and Natural Science Interacted in History?" in Not Just Science, ed. by Dorothy F. Chappell & E. David Cook, 27-28.
9. Kenneth A. Matthews, New American Commentary: Genesis.
10. Scientists Claim They Genetically Engineered a Dire Wolf. Should We Bring Back Extinct Species? Georgetown University, April 11, 2025.
11. Ibid.
Posted in Pathway Perspectives