Blaise Pascal, the brilliant Christian author of Pensees, believed that studying the nature of man was one of the most important things a person could do.  He was shocked to find that most people disagreed: "I thought I should at least find many companions in my study of man, since it is his true and proper study.  I was wrong.  Even fewer people study man than mathematics."[1]

More than 300 years later, Pascal's words still ring true-in fact, they hold a special condemnation for modern Christians because today many believers often ignore or misrepresent the nature of man.

What is man?  According to Pascal, "Man is nothing but a subject full of natural error that cannot be eradicated except through grace."[2]  Put simply: man is inherently sinful.  All orthodox Christians would agree with this statement, but unfortunately not all of them would be able to tell you what it means.

Other worldviews also speak of the sinfulness of man: Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Jews and even Muslims will label certain actions as "sinful."  Some modern Christians recognize this and assume that the Christian view of the nature of man is the same as that of false religions, which implies that there's not much use thinking about the nature of man since other religions answer this question well and still draw bad conclusions.

Pascal saw things differently.  He believed that the Bible's portrait of humanity was diametrically opposed to other views: "No religion except our own has taught that man is born sinful, no philosophical sect has said so, so none has told the truth."[3] Obviously, if he is right, then the study of man matters very much.

And it should come as no surprise that Pascal was right.  The only surprise is that the church has allowed so many Christians to forget this truth.

We need to be reminded of the biblical portrait of man's condition.  Romans 3:23 assures us that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God"-that is, each of us is unrighteous.  But not just because we behave badly!  Scripture tells us that we are innately sinful; that by virtue of being a descendant of Adam we have the seed of rebellion in us from the moment we exist (Romans 5:12-17).  No one can be good enough to please God because everyone begins with the stain of Adam's sin.

As Pascal explains, every other worldview denies this truth.  Every other worldview claims that man is good enough-or at least neutral enough-to rescue himself by behaving well.

On the surface this might seem like a reckless generalization, especially when one remembers that some worldviews don't even promise heaven or immortality.  What about the Humanist or the Marxist who denies the existence of the supernatural?  Does it make sense to say that they claim man can "rescue" himself?  Isn't salvation a purely religious concept?

Well, salvation might be a "religious" concept, but we should remember that all worldviews are religious-that is, all worldviews attempt to answer the most foundational questions, and all require faith (just think of how much faith the atheist must muster to believe that life arose from non-life by chance!).  Once we recognize that all worldviews are religious, it makes sense that each worldview would provide an answer about how man can "rescue" himself.

The Marxist says that man may rescue himself by initiating global communism.  This won't make man immortal, of course, but it will be paradise.  V.I. Lenin, the founder of the Soviet Union, actually claimed that global communism would require neither laws nor governors, because no one would ever behave in the wrong way![4]

Humanists make similar claims.  B.F. Skinner imagined a perfect community he called Walden Two where one genius manipulated the environment so that everyone else behaved perfectly all the time.[5]  Other more conventional worldviews feature more conventional paradises: Mormons promise exaltation (where human beings become gods), Muslims promise a sensual paradise, and most Buddhists and Hindus promise nirvana.  A close scrutiny of worldviews reveals that all of them promise their adherents some form of earthly or spiritual paradise.

What's more, every worldly worldview promises that man can save himself.  Does the Marxist expect any supernatural help in achieving global communism?  Of course not.  He expects that men conscious of the ways in which economic conditions determine circumstances can manipulate those conditions and usher in paradise.  Likewise, the Humanist expects man to pull himself up by his own bootstraps.

Even worldviews that give lip service to "sin" ultimately assume that man is basically good or neutral.  Sin, according to these views, is merely bad behavior and not something intrinsic to the human condition.

Consider the Muslim.  He believes that when he dies Allah will weigh his deeds on a scale.  If his good deeds outweigh his bad deeds, then he will enter paradise.  Who performs the good and bad deeds?  The human being.  Who determines whether or not he is saved?  The human being.  Thus, we find an orthodox Muslim professor assuring us that "The idea of Original Sin or hereditary criminality has no room in the teachings of Islam...To put the matter in terms of modern thought, human nature is malleable; it is the socialization process...that is crucial."[6]

Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses wind up saying much the same thing.  Although both of these worldviews claim that it mattered that Christ died on the cross, neither would claim that Christ's blood alone atones for our sins.  According to these pseudo-Christian cults, man must live a good enough life to be worthy of Christ's sacrifice.  And if God expects man to be good enough, then man must have the potential for goodness within, as Mormon apostle M. Russell Ballard suggests: "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints discounts the notion of Original Sin and its ascribed negative impact on humanity."[7]

Even traditional Jews, who would acknowledge that the Old Testament is the Word of God, must ultimately deny the doctrine of Original Sin.  Because Jews must rely on themselves to keep the Law to please God, they must assume that they have the basic capacity for goodness within themselves.  Rabbi David J. Wolpe puts it this way: "Judaism is a faith that believes in the renewal and change of the human being.... We can remake ourselves because more than anything else, what we are is a product of our own choice and our own work."[8]  According to Judaism, men are good enough to "remake" themselves so that they are acceptable to God.

The Christian view of the nature of man stands in sharp contrast to these hopeful perspectives.  While the world promises that man can save himself, scripture makes it clear that man can do nothing to save himself.  No matter how hard we work or how well we behave, our very natures create an infinite gulf between ourselves and God.  The news, according to Christianity, is very bad: man has displeased his Creator and can do nothing to erase the debt.

But this horribly bad news, if we accept it, causes us to consider the possibility that the very best news-the gospel-is true.  Once we face the fact that we can't save ourselves, we must begin to cast about for some One Who can rescue us in spite of ourselves.  And in all the worldviews in all the world, only One Person promises to rescue us even though we are completely unworthy.

The nature of man matters very much, because properly understood it points us to Jesus Christ.  If we are guilty and cannot achieve innocence, then we need an Innocent Man to sacrifice Himself in our place.  Mohammed didn't do that; neither did Buddha, Confucius, Joseph Smith or Mary Baker Eddy.  Only one Man, God Incarnate, was pure and willing to take our punishment.

The nature of man is really one half of the most important news in the world: it is the bad news that causes us to hunt for hope outside of ourselves-a hope that rests in the nature of God.  Until we really understand the nature of man, we are doomed to bounce from religion to religion seeking to save ourselves-a pursuit every bit as unrealistic as flapping our arms to fly to the moon.  Once we understand the nature of man, we may also fully understand the nature of God and His abundant grace, as Pascal explains: "Knowing God without knowing our own wretchedness makes for pride.  Knowing our own wretchedness without knowing God makes for despair.  Knowing Jesus Christ strikes the balance because he shows us God and our own wretchedness."[9]

What you believe about the nature of man and the nature of God forms the foundation for your entire worldview.  If Christians are going to effectively communicate all the hope and the joy contained in the gospel, they must begin by understanding their foundation, and the fact that it differs radically from other worldviews.  The world may claim that some religions like Mormonism or Christian Science are very similar to the Christian view, but they are wrong.

Christianity is distinct, and that distinctiveness makes all the difference in the world for otherwise hopeless sinners.

[Jeff Baldwin, author of The Deadliest Monster, is the research director for Worldview Academy.  For more information about Worldview Academy, visit their website at www.worldview.org or call 800-241-1123.  This essay is excerpted from Jeff's latest book, The Twelve Trademarks of Great Literature.]