Is it offensive that the Bible compares us to sheep?
Video version!

Matt. 12:12 How much more valuable is a man than a sheep!

Skeptics allege that this and other passages that compare men to sheep (like Ps. 23) are "repulsive" -- which reflects nicely our modern disgust for sheep, but not how sheep were viewed in ancient times, where they were valued and often beloved pets as well. It didn't matter that they may have smelled bad (men did, too, since soap was still not invented yet), or that they followed their leader unwaveringly (men did as well; loyalty was a paramount virtue) or that they were often ultimately eaten or deprived of wool (we provide God our service as well, to the point of giving Him our lives). The ancients did not view sheep in as bad a light as we do, so these passages are hardly denigrating; indeed they are complimentary to men.

Let's reinforce this point with some data from the Anchor Bible Dictionary and it's article on sheep (V. 5, 1187-1190):

Objection: It's still a horrifying analogy because sheep were raised to be eaten.

No, they weren't. As Glenn Miller has noted in this article: Sheep were raised for their wool and milk, not for meat and hides (although hides and bone were obviously re-cycled wherever possible). The average person rarely ate meat in the ancient world, since animals were far more valuable for their secondary products.

Sheep were regarded as too valuable to kill for food in the ancient world -- obviously this is no longer the case today.