保羅．田立克的人學觀點雖是無系統地散見在其文章各處，但他以具體的 靈之臨在的存有論人觀，已然建構了一套以人性中自然的宗教傾向為本的神 學人類學。然而，這種把神學人類學化的努力，卻遭受不少質疑與批判；這些 嚴正之詞，雖然凸顯了基督教啟示信仰的正統與獨特性，但卻忽略了田立克從 宣教神學轉向辯護神學的背景因素與實存困境。當我們了解田立克的歷史背景 後，便會發現這些批判往往過於苛責而略顯不公。作為一位牧者，田立克試圖 與那些能與教會堪稱相互匹敵的世俗對手，尋獲一個能夠相互關連、對話的共 同基礎，以合於時代的語言，而非重複聖經章節與教義，來宣揚福音。這正是 田立克神學人類學的努力與動機。而他刻意選擇終極關懷的術語，以及強調聖 靈臨在的動態教會觀，不僅為現代世界中緊張的宗教與文化關係，提供了對話 的平台與和平的契機，更是他與正統主義者常造成宗教間緊張對立、唯我獨尊 的最大不同。

Although the ideas of man are scattered in all of Paul Tillich’s writings, his ontological idea of person based on the concrete spirit presence obviously becomes a system of theological anthropology that religious life inclination is humans’ inherent life quality. However, Tillich’s effort to transform theological words into anthropological words incurred many critiques and suspicions. These solemn animadversions demonstrate the orthodoxy and uniqueness of revelation in Christianity; nevertheless, they usually ignored the realistic predicaments and historical background of Tillich’s attitude transition from kerygmatic theology to apologetic theology. Only if people realized the historical contexts would people find that these criticisms are often too severe and rather unfair. As a priest, Tillich attempted to find a common ground which can help Christianity to have dialogue and correlation with those emerging rival positions. It’s Tillich’s original purpose and endeavor to preach Good News in contemporary words and not to mug up disciplines or sections in the gospel. The most divergence between Tillich and orthodoxism is that the former chose the term “ultimate concern” on purpose and lays emphasis on the dynamic of faith and Ecclesiology based on the Spirit Presence, creating a possibility in peace and dialogue, but the latter held exclusive attitude, usually resulting in tense and opposition in this world.