Who is man?

The key questions in philosophy are 'who is man?' and 'who is god?' (i.e. what is the nature of ultimate reality) In this post I'll briefly compare the Humanist with the biblical (creation) view, and show why the Christian view is superior.

By defining man as 'homo sapiens' (man the wise) Humanism goes wrong from the very start. The idea that the essence of man is reason, goes back to the ancient Greek philosophers. This basic notion has come down to us through the writings of Plato and Aristotle. The biblical view is that man is made in the image of God. [1.]

This definition is a disaster for a number of reasons. The best you can say about it is that it's a partial definition. The worst you can say about is that it's a meaningless abstraction. i.e. there is no such thing as reason (despite the frequently heard cry of atheists we must decide things only on the basis of reason). People reason, but there is no such entity as reason. (If there were Ludwig von Mises and Karl Marx would have come to the same conclusions about economics.)

This definition degrades man, and especially degrades people who are not intellectuals. It's based on a fallacious cosmology, where man partakes of some cosmic mind... shares a little of this thing called Reason that permeates the universe. It leads to the idea that all men lack is knowledge; that moral evil is simply the result of ignorance. It thus denies the biblical doctrine of of man's fallenness, of sin, and of man's rebellion against god. The biblical view of moral evil is that man is a selfish creature who desires to be god.

The biblical definition of man is a well rounded one that doesn't stress one aspect of personality over another. Unlike Greek philosophy which denies individuality, biblical teaching stresses individuality. (e.g. we will all stand before god as individuals.)

This idea was formulated by intellectuals, for the benefit of intellectuals. It's alive and well today in the idea the the most knowledgeable people are best fitted to rule over everyone else. (i.e. since they supposedly epitomize reason to the greatest degree) It was once a rationalization for slavery, and in our day it's a defense for the paternalistic welfare state. It's a fallacious and obsolete notion that needs to be abandoned.

Notes;
1. People who aren't familiar with Christianity sometimes ask, 'what is this image of God you talk about?'
The easiest and best way to answer this is to point to the Gospels, and the picture of Jesus that's presented. Jesus was the perfect man, and in him we see the image of God beautifully and fully expressed.
2. "He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God..." (Col. 1 :15)
- Paul is speaking here of Jesus. As I understand Biblical theology, the first man Adam, was given the same 'nature' as the one possessed by Jesus. (What has happened to that original image over time is a matter of much controversy.)
3. 'False doctrines of human nature arise whenever thinkers try to define this heart or ego of man, since theoretical thought is limited to temporal things. Whenever man's essential nature is thus theoretically defined, one aspect of that nature is absolutized.' - The Christian philosophy of law, politics and the state - E.L. Hebden Taylor [p.283 in pdf]