Back
to top
Revising GCSE Religous studies
Watch
Announcements
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
I feel like I’m being undermarked by my RS teacher but unsure. I struggle in general to revise RE. In my last mock I got a strong 5. I can’t seem to improve and would really like an 8 in RS GCSE so it doesn’t look too bad in comparison to my other GCSEs(at 8-9). Below is an example of the 12 mark response I wrote in my last mock, which got me an 10/12
The incarnation has influenced Christians to use statues and art forms to portray God’s work. Personally, I agree that the incarnation has given Christians the right to use statues and art forms to depict God at work because for me, these art forms allow me to further understand God and his acts of love, like taking on human form. These artistic representations help me to understand and focus on spiritual ideas and God’s work, therefore positively impacting religious life.
An argument in favour of incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms would be that whilst there is little evidence as to what Jesus looked like, Jesus is understood to be a man with human qualities. This is evident throughout the new testament, like in John 1, ‘the Word became flesh”. Therefore any art form representing Jesus which captures his human qualities has value and is an acceptable representation of God.
A Christian would also share this point of view, as God has taken on the limitations of human nature and it would therefore make it acceptable to present Jesus in this limited form. As Jesus is God in flesh, it makes it acceptable to present God in the same limited form, human. This shows that Christians have the right to depict God at work in art forms.
On the other hand, an argument against giving the incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms to show God at work because of misleading elements to these art forms. This is often the case with young children, who may see a statue or image of God and question why is God an old man with a beard. Their lack of understanding of how images are used allows them to mistake the image of God for the real thing, which is transcendental.
SImilarly, A Jewish person may argue against the incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms as it is breaking the second commandment in Exodus 20, when God says you should not make for yourself an idol and bow down and worship them. The idea of art used to show God clearly contradicts this commandment, which is why a Jewish person would disagree with the statement. Additionally, when a person prays in front of a statue or image, whilst the art form is only being used as a stimulus for God, others can get the impression that the image is being worshipped as God, which is against the commandment.
A non-religious person, such as an artist, may agree with the statement, as they feel that art makes it easier to understand concepts such as the incarnation and God and therefore allow us to gain a deeper understanding of God’s love for us. Furthermore, depicting God as human would allow us to relate to God and his love shown when he took on human form.
In conclusion, I believe that there are valid sides to the argument of the incarnation’s role in depicting God at work and whilst I understand how artwork can sometimes be misinterpreted, it allows us to further our understanding of God taking on human form.
Does anyone have any advice on improving and having read examples of grade 8 responses from other students in other classes, I can’t Understand what I could do to improve. I do AQA . Thanks
The incarnation has influenced Christians to use statues and art forms to portray God’s work. Personally, I agree that the incarnation has given Christians the right to use statues and art forms to depict God at work because for me, these art forms allow me to further understand God and his acts of love, like taking on human form. These artistic representations help me to understand and focus on spiritual ideas and God’s work, therefore positively impacting religious life.
An argument in favour of incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms would be that whilst there is little evidence as to what Jesus looked like, Jesus is understood to be a man with human qualities. This is evident throughout the new testament, like in John 1, ‘the Word became flesh”. Therefore any art form representing Jesus which captures his human qualities has value and is an acceptable representation of God.
A Christian would also share this point of view, as God has taken on the limitations of human nature and it would therefore make it acceptable to present Jesus in this limited form. As Jesus is God in flesh, it makes it acceptable to present God in the same limited form, human. This shows that Christians have the right to depict God at work in art forms.
On the other hand, an argument against giving the incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms to show God at work because of misleading elements to these art forms. This is often the case with young children, who may see a statue or image of God and question why is God an old man with a beard. Their lack of understanding of how images are used allows them to mistake the image of God for the real thing, which is transcendental.
SImilarly, A Jewish person may argue against the incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms as it is breaking the second commandment in Exodus 20, when God says you should not make for yourself an idol and bow down and worship them. The idea of art used to show God clearly contradicts this commandment, which is why a Jewish person would disagree with the statement. Additionally, when a person prays in front of a statue or image, whilst the art form is only being used as a stimulus for God, others can get the impression that the image is being worshipped as God, which is against the commandment.
A non-religious person, such as an artist, may agree with the statement, as they feel that art makes it easier to understand concepts such as the incarnation and God and therefore allow us to gain a deeper understanding of God’s love for us. Furthermore, depicting God as human would allow us to relate to God and his love shown when he took on human form.
In conclusion, I believe that there are valid sides to the argument of the incarnation’s role in depicting God at work and whilst I understand how artwork can sometimes be misinterpreted, it allows us to further our understanding of God taking on human form.
Does anyone have any advice on improving and having read examples of grade 8 responses from other students in other classes, I can’t Understand what I could do to improve. I do AQA . Thanks
0
reply
Report
#2
(Original post by epicnm)
I feel like I’m being undermarked by my RS teacher but unsure. I struggle in general to revise RE. In my last mock I got a strong 5. I can’t seem to improve and would really like an 8 in RS GCSE so it doesn’t look too bad in comparison to my other GCSEs(at 8-9). Below is an example of the 12 mark response I wrote in my last mock, which got me an 10/12
The incarnation has influenced Christians to use statues and art forms to portray God’s work. Personally, I agree that the incarnation has given Christians the right to use statues and art forms to depict God at work because for me, these art forms allow me to further understand God and his acts of love, like taking on human form. These artistic representations help me to understand and focus on spiritual ideas and God’s work, therefore positively impacting religious life.
An argument in favour of incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms would be that whilst there is little evidence as to what Jesus looked like, Jesus is understood to be a man with human qualities. This is evident throughout the new testament, like in John 1, ‘the Word became flesh”. Therefore any art form representing Jesus which captures his human qualities has value and is an acceptable representation of God.
A Christian would also share this point of view, as God has taken on the limitations of human nature and it would therefore make it acceptable to present Jesus in this limited form. As Jesus is God in flesh, it makes it acceptable to present God in the same limited form, human. This shows that Christians have the right to depict God at work in art forms.
On the other hand, an argument against giving the incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms to show God at work because of misleading elements to these art forms. This is often the case with young children, who may see a statue or image of God and question why is God an old man with a beard. Their lack of understanding of how images are used allows them to mistake the image of God for the real thing, which is transcendental.
SImilarly, A Jewish person may argue against the incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms as it is breaking the second commandment in Exodus 20, when God says you should not make for yourself an idol and bow down and worship them. The idea of art used to show God clearly contradicts this commandment, which is why a Jewish person would disagree with the statement. Additionally, when a person prays in front of a statue or image, whilst the art form is only being used as a stimulus for God, others can get the impression that the image is being worshipped as God, which is against the commandment.
A non-religious person, such as an artist, may agree with the statement, as they feel that art makes it easier to understand concepts such as the incarnation and God and therefore allow us to gain a deeper understanding of God’s love for us. Furthermore, depicting God as human would allow us to relate to God and his love shown when he took on human form.
In conclusion, I believe that there are valid sides to the argument of the incarnation’s role in depicting God at work and whilst I understand how artwork can sometimes be misinterpreted, it allows us to further our understanding of God taking on human form.
Does anyone have any advice on improving and having read examples of grade 8 responses from other students in other classes, I can’t Understand what I could do to improve. I do AQA . Thanks
I feel like I’m being undermarked by my RS teacher but unsure. I struggle in general to revise RE. In my last mock I got a strong 5. I can’t seem to improve and would really like an 8 in RS GCSE so it doesn’t look too bad in comparison to my other GCSEs(at 8-9). Below is an example of the 12 mark response I wrote in my last mock, which got me an 10/12
The incarnation has influenced Christians to use statues and art forms to portray God’s work. Personally, I agree that the incarnation has given Christians the right to use statues and art forms to depict God at work because for me, these art forms allow me to further understand God and his acts of love, like taking on human form. These artistic representations help me to understand and focus on spiritual ideas and God’s work, therefore positively impacting religious life.
An argument in favour of incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms would be that whilst there is little evidence as to what Jesus looked like, Jesus is understood to be a man with human qualities. This is evident throughout the new testament, like in John 1, ‘the Word became flesh”. Therefore any art form representing Jesus which captures his human qualities has value and is an acceptable representation of God.
A Christian would also share this point of view, as God has taken on the limitations of human nature and it would therefore make it acceptable to present Jesus in this limited form. As Jesus is God in flesh, it makes it acceptable to present God in the same limited form, human. This shows that Christians have the right to depict God at work in art forms.
On the other hand, an argument against giving the incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms to show God at work because of misleading elements to these art forms. This is often the case with young children, who may see a statue or image of God and question why is God an old man with a beard. Their lack of understanding of how images are used allows them to mistake the image of God for the real thing, which is transcendental.
SImilarly, A Jewish person may argue against the incarnation giving Christians the right to use art forms as it is breaking the second commandment in Exodus 20, when God says you should not make for yourself an idol and bow down and worship them. The idea of art used to show God clearly contradicts this commandment, which is why a Jewish person would disagree with the statement. Additionally, when a person prays in front of a statue or image, whilst the art form is only being used as a stimulus for God, others can get the impression that the image is being worshipped as God, which is against the commandment.
A non-religious person, such as an artist, may agree with the statement, as they feel that art makes it easier to understand concepts such as the incarnation and God and therefore allow us to gain a deeper understanding of God’s love for us. Furthermore, depicting God as human would allow us to relate to God and his love shown when he took on human form.
In conclusion, I believe that there are valid sides to the argument of the incarnation’s role in depicting God at work and whilst I understand how artwork can sometimes be misinterpreted, it allows us to further our understanding of God taking on human form.
Does anyone have any advice on improving and having read examples of grade 8 responses from other students in other classes, I can’t Understand what I could do to improve. I do AQA . Thanks
0
reply
X
Page 1 of 1
Go to first unread
Skip to page:
Quick Reply
Today on TSR
-
Ofqual consultationTeachers to use 'mini-exams' and other work to decide grades
- Is it too late to do well in my A-levels?
- What Harry Potter house are you in?
- 2021 wellbeing blog launch
- Student tips on lockdown mental health