God’s Relationship with Man Sample Essay

The Book of Genesis can be described as a narrative. a historical history. or merely as a written set of replies to inquiries that may look unanswerable. Aside from which class this subdivision of The Bible this may fall into. it has been one of the most influential texts of all clip. For this ground. it is polar that we examine the text more closely in order to find certain forms which may take to a valid reading of a book that has an infinite sum of readings. One of the most critical forms to place is the growing of God’s relationship with adult male. By analysing the transitions in The Book of Genesis and how they intertwine. one can see that the relationship is positively progressing in footings of trust and assurance.

The text begins depicting an history of creative activity. This is of important value in set uping God’s relationship with adult male as it marks the beginning and gives insight refering to his purposes with adult male. As this piece of The Bible unfolds. there is an implicit in inquiry that is ne’er steadfastly answered in the text. That is. “Did God physique adult male for Earth or Earth for adult male? ” The latter reading seems to hold more textual support. Some grounds that leads to this decision is in Genesis 1:26 when God says ‘”Let us do adult male in our image. after our similitude ; and allow them hold rule over the fish of the sea. and over the birds of the air. and over the cowss. and over all the Earth. and over every crawling thing that creeps upon the Earth. ” It seems logical that if God gave adult male rule over Earth and all that inhabit it that he would hold intended for it to be a gift to adult male. A less obvious piece of information that points to the latter reading is found in Genesis 1:6-8 while presenting the “firmament. ”

God creates the celestial sphere. besides known as Heaven. on the 2nd twenty-four hours before he creates any life or even any land. Heaven is subsequently determined as the brooding topographic point for adult male in hereafter ( as seen in Revelation 21:3 ) . This besides implies that Earth was created for adult male because it is unlogical that God would make the dwelling topographic point for adult male before Earth if earth itself were non made for adult male every bit good. Lastly. Chapter 2 in the Book of Genesis is based around adult male. In the 2nd history of creative activity ( although it is non specified as that in the original text ) merely verses 4-6 are based around Earth and 7-25 is about adult male. The fact that the 2nd history of creative activity is much more closely concerned with and focused on the creative activity of adult male is echoing grounds that Earth was created for adult male. These pieces of grounds support that God created Earth for adult male. which in bend agencies God is set uping a relationship with adult male for man’s interest. instead than the earth’s interest. This reveals the importance God is puting on adult male. and how much he is willing to put in adult male.

Despite ho much God has shown he is willing to put ( created a whole planed for adult male ) . the relationship must get down someplace. Chapter 3 of The Book of Genesis discusses the autumn of adult male. The debut of the snake leads to another possible split in readings as the serpent’s actions arguably indicate an intended “plan” for adult male. I would differ with this impression for a few grounds. The narrative of creative activity pointed out that God separated the visible radiation from the darkness – he ne’er really free the universe of the darkness. Whether this is a actual or nonliteral statement is another inquiry wholly. but allow us presume the latter. The fact that darkness was separated implies that it still exists. Darkness is a metaphor for immorality. which. harmonizing to the anterior statement. would intend immorality still exists. The snake in The Bible Acts of the Apostless as the merchandise of darkness or its life leftover.

God besides warns Adam of the dangers of immorality when he commands him to ne’er eat from the tree of cognition of good and evil. God would non hold warned Adam if he were non cognizant that there would be an unfavourable result to man’s association with immorality. Furthermore. he wouldn’t have punished the snake along with Adam and Eve ( Genesis 3:14 ) if God had planned for the snake to defile adult male. For that ground. the snake was non created with purpose of presenting adult male to the wicked. Disproving the belief that the snake was all a portion of God’s program is indispensable in turn outing the theory of the world of adult male. This theory reveals that all the events go oning on Earth are non merely projections of God’s program. God acts as the Godhead and superintendent of adult male. but he is non “pulling the strings. ” This is besides a positive displacement in the relationship because it shows that God is non a operator of adult male. which would non advance a healthy relationship.

Because God is an superintendent. instead than a accountant. it leaves chance for adult male to move in ways that God does non O.K. of. This brings forth the epoch of Noah. By the clip Noah is introduced. God has a turning dissent with adult male. He has experienced huge letdowns from Adam and Eve. every bit good as Cain and Abel. and is fundamentally ready to give up on adult male. as seen in Genesis 6:5-6. “The Lord saw the evil of adult male was great in the Earth. and that every imaginativeness of the ideas in his was merely evil continually. And the Lord was regretful that he had made adult male on Earth. and it grieved him to his bosom. ” Noah saw this unhappiness in God took that chance to deter him from his program to “blot out man” from being.

This marks the first major measure in the development of God’s relationship with adult male. Noah initiated a tendency throughout The Book of Genesis in which God had a respondent on Earth who fundamentally acts as a courier. retainer. and letter writer to God ( first Noah ; so Abram ) . God foremost saw that the adult male was “blameless in his generation” and so “chose” him. Noah established himself blameless when he found “favor in the Lord’s eye” and was able to salvage world. which evidently was considered blameless. Abram gave Lot the pick between lands in Genesis 13:8-12 so God gave him the chance to turn out himself. He did so by following God’s waies and non taking any gifts from the King of Sodom after delivering Lot in Genesis 15:1. From there God makes a compact with those he entrusts. All of this is important because it marks the first clip throughout the text that God is happening good in his creative activity and establishes the beginning of a positive relationship between God and adult male.

One transition that seems out of topographic point or non-cohesive is Chapter 11. the narrative of The Tower of Babel. The narrative seems out of topographic point because it doesn’t include any of the characters from the chapter prior to it nor does it from the chapter following it. However. when looking through a lens that analyzes the relationship. one can see the significance of its arrangement. God has merely become comfy with a adult male. Noah. It can be interpreted that adult male is besides acquiring comfy with God. as Noah Acts of the Apostless as as a representative of adult male in a manner. This can be seen in Chapter 9 when God makes a compact with Noah. The creative activity of a linguistic communication barrier by God can be characterized as an action of authorization. By adding the narrative of The Tower of Babel in that topographic point. the writer of the text took that opportunity to set up God’s high quality over adult male. which once more. tag a new measure in the development of this relationship. He is willing to hold a relationship with adult male as seen by his compact with Noah but he must besides guarantee adult male that he is different than God and adult male can ne’er be at the same degree as God. This may sound negative but the relationship between adult male and God is eventually deriving some definite features.

The relationship between adult male and God is undeniably turning. Noah found favour in the Lord’s eyes but yet ; the Lord is still disbelieving. as made obvious in the narrative of the Tower of Babel. This incredulity induces understanding with adult male. God will execute some action contingent upon the fact that adult male must carry through his terminal of the trade. This relationship adulthood is really pretty outright. The first compact with adult male was more of a bid but it still marked an understanding. Genesis 2:16-17 reads. “And the Lord God commanded the adult male. stating. ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden ; but of the tree of cognition of good and evil you shall non eat. for in the twenty-four hours that you eat of it you shall decease. ’” This transition shows an obvious deficiency of trust in adult male because of that fact that he gave a bid and a menace. instead than a suggestion or petition. Then Noah comes into being and brings about a greater trust for adult male. After closely analyzing the compact between God and Noah a little misgiving is still apparent. In Genesis 8:21. God says “in his heart” ( non out loud ) that he will ne’er once more destruct the Earth AS he had done. The word “as” is likely the most of import word in that phrase based upon the fact that God is obscure in stating “as” – he could still destruct the Earth in another manner than a inundation without interrupting the compact.

Wouldn’t he hold merely state he would non destruct the Earth once more if had had full trust that adult male would non once more disappoint as they had before? With Abram’s compact. the vagueness seen in Noah’s compact surely disappears. One could easy construe God’s compact with Abram to be more specific and hence portraying less assurance in adult male to follow waies. A more reasonable analysis would demo that God is still developing his sentiment of adult male and what type of relationship they are traveling to hold. Specifically sketching Circumcision is a trial of dedication to God. so by being specific. he is proving man’s committedness to non interrupting the footings of his compact. A much more in depth analysis of compacts in the Book of Genesis would uncover legion other positions but in analysing a growing or gradual adulthood of God’s relationship with adult male. this analysis clearly outlines the spread outing complexness and sheer presence of said relationship. This relationship reaches its concluding phases of development as we approach Chapter 22.

Abram seems to be the adult male that genuinely has a connexion with the Lord. He has gotten to a point of comfort where he can even negociate footings with God. This can been seen when Abram attempts to protect the righteous people of Sodom and Gomorrah when the Lord decides he should state Abram of his program ( Genesis 18:22-33 ) . In contrast. Abram seemed afraid of God in a manner in old narratives. For illustration. God tells Abram to go forth his place and literally merely roll the state without any ground. Abram follows without vacillation. while non even weighing the branchings of remaining ( Genesis 12 ) . Not merely does stating Abram this program show patterned advance in trust of adult male. but besides the program itself. When Noah confronted God. he wanted to destruct all of Earth. Now God merely wants to destruct a metropolis of the non-righteous. This promotion in the relationship leads into what can be seen as Abram’s concluding trial. every bit good as the concluding trial for adult male. Chapter 22 Acts of the Apostless as this concluding trial.

Abram is asked to blindly follow waies to kill his boy and he does merely that. Merely before he murders his boy. God recognizes his dedication. which seems to be the chief intent of the trial to get down with. and allows him to retreat from killing Isaac. From at that place on God takes a much less active function with adult male. This trial defines the relationship between God and adult male. The trust has grown plenty to this point where adult male has established himself and can populate a more independent life style on Earth. God can be seen taking an active function in Chapters 17-22 systematically. and after that he is non seen really moving on Earth until a brief minute in Chapter 26 and so Chapter 30. He is taking that more all-knowing function as God. which leads into how this development affects us today.

It is hard to confirm this with full assurance. but it seems the general consensus today is that God does non look on Earth and interact with people really frequently if at all. Although he may take an active function. this relationship between the Lord and adult male has gotten to the point where he no longer is every bit humanly as he is described in the Book of Genesis. That is non excessively state he doesn’t take portion in our every twenty-four hours lives but he at least doesn’t demo his face while making it for the most portion. unlike the Genesis epoch. This has shaped our society in that belief in God is. although still prevailing. much less common than it was throughout these narratives. How can our coevalss know God is existent if we have non seen his face? For this ground the Bible has become more of a usher to populating for a belief system. instead than a text looked upon as an history of history.

Therefore. the grounds of the evolving nature of God’s relationship with adult male is echoing. It began with creative activity and through the trail of posterities throughout The Book of Genesis ; the growing of this relationship can be traced for 100s. even 1000s of old ages. The feeling left resonant in my head is that our relationship with the Lord is dynamic and of all time altering. It took its major phases of adulthood through The Book of Genesis but still continues to germinate. The designation of such a relationship allows modern society to better understand The Bible and hopefully achieve cognition that may reply the unanswerable.

Instructor Feedback
Class: 94. 00 out of 100
Thankss for composing this first essay. Chris. From the first paragraph. it has the spirit of enquiry that I hope to happen in ACS documents. You are invariably inquiring inquiries and looking for grounds. Though there are plentifulness of countries where your work can acquire more refined over the twelvemonth. you’ve already got impulse in the right way. Your early probe of man’s topographic point in the universe is a all right illustration. We couldn’t cognize in progress whether the Earth was created for adult male or the other manner around. so you start roll uping grounds to happen out. As you argue. the 2nd history of creative activity appears to set human existences as the end. I’d reference. nevertheless. that you could travel even further in inquiring about this … if there’s a difference between Genesis 2-3 and Genesis 1. why have Genesis 1 at all. if it doesn’t someway right the thought that the universe is for us? Worth chew overing farther. Your essay as a whole is about the germinating relationship between human existences and God. It’s a great subject to concentrate on in the essay. and by the terminal you are making in a really interesting way.

You truly seek to notice on what each new narrative is demoing as a new development in that relationship. When you find it hard to suit a narrative in the overall patterned advance — notably the narrative of Babel. which comes between Noah and Abram — you treat it as a mystifier and seek to calculate it out. That’s really good. I’m non certain I’m ever convinced by your consequences ; they sometimes do look speculative instead than reasoned. As I said. nevertheless. this is a really good thing you’re seeking to make here. The best portion of the paper comes near the terminal. Although the treatment of Abra ( hour angle ) m is reasonably brief. you make a really all right observation when you note that non merely does Abraham differ from Noah. but God with Abraham differs from God with Noah. It’s a large trade that God reveals more alternatively of merely deciding things in His bosom. I think you could develop this thought much further.

What you do discourse at the terminal of the paper is besides good — viz. . the fact that God seems to hold gone back to uncovering less of himself. and that this poses challenges to our religion today. I’d love to see how your ideas about this continue to develop in old ages to come. My biggest advice would be to maintain working on analyzing the text all the more carefully. Sometimes cautious observation really leads to the biggest discovery. In any instance. do certain you can show what you say to the reader. e. g. . when you assert that Noah really intervened with God on behalf of the universe. I don’t yet see that he does ; but even if he doesn’t. detecting he doesn’t leads you to a clearer cognition of how Abram moves beyond Noah. Overall. thank you for your work. and welcome to ACS!