English
Português
Español
Français
Answer
The possibility of cloning humans for reproductive purposes raises numerous moral, ethical, and medical inquiries. It also delves into profound theological considerations. One fundamental question stands out: would a cloned human possess a soul?
While some find the answer self-evident, others have reservations. Certain individuals even argue that human cloning would be unattainable because a soul would not be bestowed! How one perceives this matter largely depends on their understanding of how a soul originates. Since the Bible does not offer explicit guidance on such specific, non-salvation matters, it is advisable to approach this issue with caution rather than dogmatism.
Having considered various spiritual, scientific, and practical aspects, the most plausible response to whether clones would possess souls is “almost certainly, yes.”
Christians hold diverse views on the creation of immaterial souls. Two positions with biblical support are (soul) creationism and traducianism. The former asserts that God creates the soul at the moment of conception, while the latter posits that the soul is generated through physical conception by the parents. Notably, beliefs like the pre-existence of souls lack biblical foundation and are irrelevant in this context.
Before delving deeper, it is crucial to define some terms. Here, “human” denotes a biological homo sapiens individual: the physical and genetic components. “Person” encompasses the complete being: mind, body, soul, and spirit, with a focus on the spiritual dimension. “Clone” and “MZ twin” refer to individuals produced through the described processes.
In standard nuclear transfer cloning, the nucleus (the information hub) of an unfertilized egg cell is extracted. It is then replaced with the nucleus of a donor cell from the organism intended for cloning. Subsequent stimulation of this newly formed cell initiates division, resulting in an organism with DNA identical to the donor.Donor’s. In therapeutic cloning, growth occurs in a laboratory setting and generates tissues. In reproductive cloning, growth occurs in the womb of a surrogate mother and can lead to the birth of a fully formed replica of the donor.
Biologically speaking, entities very similar to human clones already exist. Identical twins, or monozygotic twins (MZ twins), are the outcome of this natural process: one sperm and one egg unite, forming a single fertilized cell known as a zygote. Subsequently, this zygote divides into two or more entirely distinct embryos, which then develop autonomously. MZ twins are essentially clones of each other.
In essence, biologically (genetically) replicated humans already exist. The process of their formation differs significantly from laboratory-based cloning, but the final outcome is essentially identical. This is a crucial point to bear in mind when considering various perspectives on whether clones possess souls. One’s stance must be coherent and applicable to both natural clones like MZ twins and those who could potentially arise through reproductive cloning.
The creationist perspective would readily assert that clones possess souls, as God is directly engaged in the creation of each soul at the appropriate moment. It is conceivable that God infuses a single soul into a fertilized zygote, generating additional souls if or when the zygote divides. While the Bible does not provide clarity on this matter, the specifics are inconsequential for this discussion. According to soul creationism, the method by which the physical body is formed is unrelated to the infusion of a soul. Whether conceived, cloned, or otherwise, the viewpoint of soul creationism maintains that God creates the soul, and there are no scriptural or spiritual grounds to suggest that He would not do so for all human beings.
Conversely, the traducian perspective introduces several complexities. According to traducianism, both the body and the soul are inherited from the parents. Specifically, it posits that an individual’s sinful nature is inherited from Adam through his or her father. This implies
That the moment at which sperm and egg combine to create the DNA of a new human, a soul is simultaneously created. However, in cloning, there are no “parents,” only one human contributing genetic material that is then duplicated. There is no “conception,” only the replication of existing DNA.
This raises questions about the transmission of souls, according to traducianism. For instance, a clone would have neither a “father” nor a “mother” in the normal sense. The resulting human would have DNA from only the single donor. Genetically, the clone’s “father” is the donor’s father, and the clone’s “mother” is the donor’s mother. But in terms of conception, the clone itself would have no such parents. If the biological joining of the parents’ essence is what creates souls, where could a clone’s soul come from?
The same line of questioning, through traducianism, would have to consistently account for the concept of the sin nature being inherited from the father. Traducianism holds, for example, that it was the lack of a biological human father that resulted in Jesus being born free from a sin nature. If a clone lacks a literal human father, would the clone also lack an inherited sin nature? Would the sin nature be duplicated through the clone’s DNA? Strictly speaking, the inheritance of a sin nature is a separate question from obtaining a soul and raises many other points of possible debate. The point is simply that, if traducianism is to hold that both soul and sin nature are passed along at conception, it must account for both occurring (or not) during cloning.
Note, of course, that one’s perspective on this issue must account for natural clones, such as MZ twins. At the moment of conception, there is one zygote. Later, there may be two, without any additional conception having occurred. Few (if any) traducians would suggest that only one of a set of twins or triplets actually has a soul, or that they share a single soul, so there needs to be some consistent way to account for the imparting of souls.
That covers all naturally made humans, which could then be compared to a cloning process.
In short, traducianism leaves room to question whether or not a human clone would have a soul if interpreted to mean souls are created by biological conception itself. Claiming that God decides when to imbue a soul would no longer be traducianism but soul creationism. In response, one who holds to traducianism might well argue that the creation of a soul is simply something that occurs when a human—of any type—is created, through whatever physical means. Whether or not this holds up to deeper scrutiny is subject to debate and better left to a separate discussion.
In a more practical sense, few Christians would suggest that how one is conceived impacts one’s spiritual or moral status. For example, the common claim that abortions should be allowed “in cases of rape or incest” implies that people conceived under those circumstances are not persons, less human or less valuable than those conceived in the “right” way. That’s more of a moral debate than a theological one, but our positions have to be consistent. If the circumstances of conception (or lack of conception) affect whether or not one has a soul, then one’s moral or spiritual worth is certainly up for grabs. Christians must carefully consider their stance on this issue.
There is no hard and fast, crystal-clear answer to the question of whether or not a cloned human would possess a soul. That being said, most interpretations of the Bible and the general sense of Christian theology would suggest cloned humans would, in fact, have souls. It’s possible to construct a theological framework where they would not. Yet most Christians would find that framework self-contradictory and unnecessary.
Lacking perfect understanding, we’re obligated to treat all human beings as persons, worthy not only of the value God places in His creations «O LORD, how manifold are thy works! In wisdom hast thou made them all: The earth is full of thy
Riches are mentioned in (Psalm 104:24), but the love that He expects us to show each other is highlighted in “If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:” as stated in (James 2:8). This love extends to artificially cloned humans, should they come to exist.
