, ,

Theological Anthropology and Human Cultural Identity

·

A diverse group shares crafts, scholarship, grain, and conversation around a wooden table, including a participant using a wheelchair.

ARTICLE GUIDE

At a Glance

This essay constructs a theological account of human cultural identity—operationalized across vocation, race and ethnicity, and disability—by reading Joshua R. Farris’s treatment of culture in

Read moreShow less

This essay constructs a theological account of human cultural identity—operationalized across vocation, race and ethnicity, and disability—by reading Joshua R. Farris's treatment of culture in

(2020, ch. 7) within Walter C. Kaiser Jr.'s promise-plan theology. Against secular reductions of culture to social construct, evolutionary utility, or biological determinism, and against post-Enlightenment dualisms that exile labor, ethnicity, and embodiment from “spiritual” life, the argument recovers the Hebraic installation of humanity as God's living image in the cosmic temple (Gen 1:26–28). The

What This Study Explores

Theological Anthropology

How Does Biblical Anthropology Shape Work, Ethnicity, and Disability?

Human cultural identity is grounded first in God’s declaration that all human beings are his living images. The imago Dei is an endowed ontological status, not a capacity earned through intelligence, productivity, independence, or bodily performance. That foundation protects dignity across every stage and condition of life while locating culture within humanity’s royal-priestly vocation in creation.

Work, ethnicity, and disability are therefore neither spiritually irrelevant nor ultimate identities. Work is creaturely stewardship corrupted by toil but renewed toward service; ethnic diversity is gathered and reconciled without flattening difference or superseding Israel; disability must be distinguished from ordinary finitude and included within resurrection hope without erasing the personal histories of disabled image-bearers.

Key Claims

  • The image of God is bestowed rather than achieved. Human dignity does not rise or fall with presently exercisable capacities.
  • Culture belongs to sacred vocation. The garden commission frames labor, creativity, governance, and community as extensions of royal-priestly service.
  • Work is good before it becomes toil. Redemption restores labor’s orientation toward neighbor, creation, and God without making occupation an idol.
  • Ethnic plurality can persist without hierarchy. The nations are gathered in Messiah while Israel’s historical and covenantal particularity remains intact.
  • Resurrection heals without depersonalizing. Christian hope opposes the idolization of ability while anticipating transformed embodied life.

Interpretive Context

The essay engages Joshua Farris on culture, Carmen Imes and John Kilner on the image of God, and ancient Near Eastern image and temple backgrounds. These sources clarify Genesis’s public anthropology without permitting comparative materials to control the canon.

The promise-plan traces humanity’s cultural vocation through creation, cosmic rebellion, Abraham, Israel’s priestly calling, Messiah, and the New Jerusalem. Romans 11 and Revelation’s multinational city together resist both ethnic erasure and tribal domination.

Selected Scholarship

  • Farris, J. R. (2020). An Introduction to Theological Anthropology. Baker Academic.
  • Imes, C. J. (2023). Being God’s Image. IVP Academic.
  • Kilner, J. F. (2015). Dignity and Destiny. Eerdmans.
  • Middleton, J. R. (2005). The Liberating Image. Brazos Press.
  • Volf, M. (2001). Work in the Spirit. Wipf & Stock.

Scripture Connections

Genesis 3:15; Jeremiah 31; Ezekiel 36; Genesis 1:26–28; Genesis 6:1–4; Deuteronomy 32:8–9; Genesis 5:1–3; Genesis 9:6

Originally published September 9, 2026. This WordPress page is a discovery guide; the complete article is hosted on Substack.


Help Keep the Lamps Burning

If this work has helped you, consider making a voluntary one-time contribution toward future research and production.

Continue the Conversation

Questions, corrections, and thoughtful disagreement are welcome. Keep the discussion focused on the evidence and arguments.