The Servant of God as an Anthropological Figure in Theory of Education

Abstract

Surprisingly, the term “servant of God” is also used in educational science, namely as an anthropological metaphor for the medieval image of man. This term is not only associated with a negative image of man, but also with a similar image of God: man submits to God as his master. With this, man also loses his dignity, insofar as he renounces the independent use of reason (sacrificium intellectus). Only the Enlightenment reacted to this with a consistent detheologisation. Only in this way man is said to defend his dignity, based on his own reason. ‒ How can Old Testament biblical scholarship react to this? Is detheologisation necessary for the defense of human dignity? Or is there also a theologically based human dignity? Classical biblical testimonies (Gen 1:26; Ps 8) offer an almost postmodern theological concept of human dignity. It consists in God appointing man as his representative on earth. The Deuteronomic legal order can be understood in this way: God's law secures the dignity of all human beings in the form of human rights. The recognition of human rights characterises an “educated society”. According to the wisdom tradition (Prov; Sir), the application of the Torah presupposes human reason. So there is no question of the necessity of detheologisation to preserve human dignity, on the contrary: God’s law (Torah) secures universal human dignity. The dignity of the biblical servant of God (DtJes) ultimately consists in his mission to universalise the Torah.