The answer is A just took the test and get it right
In the written "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" Jonathan Edwards compare God's wrath to holding a spider over a fiery pit, great waters, flood that will break over a dam and a bow and arrow, according to this the groups of option should be settle as follows:
1. Non Believers a. falling rock
e. chaff
f. rough
2. Wrath of god b. storm
c. bow
d. spider
Answer:
<u>The words to fill the space in the sentence would be:</u>
characteristics of Neoclassical poem
usage of heroic couplet
elevated style of language.
Explanation:
"Thought on the Works of Providence" is a poem written by Phillis Wheatley.
<u>The poem talks about the creation and works of God (Providence-word used to refer to God)</u>.
The characteristic of the poem relates to the Neoclassical Poem. The word 'Neoclassicism' means the 'rebirth of Classicism.' The Neoclassical Era appeared during the age of Pope and Dryden between 1680-1750. The characteristics of Neoclassical Poem is that it lacked passion or feelings. The Neoclassical poets were dependent upon the knowledge and learning for inspiration.
The other characteristic of a Neoclassical Poem was that it used Heroic Couplets. Heroic Couplets is a form of English Poetry widely used by Chaucer. The poetry written in Heroic couplet, consists of a pair of rhyming verses and iambic pentameter is used to create a poetic rhythm.
The style of language used in 'Thoughts on the Works of Providence' is an elevated style. The writers use 'elevated style of language' to create a formal tone which is free from dialect and idioms. This style of writiing is used to orate about dignitaries, or even God. An elevate style of writing is considered as the most noble one.
Answer: C) The author proves that he's biased when he uses terms like "silly" and "stupid."
Explanation: The words "silly" and "stupid" are the only instances of evidence among the options, since they were taken directly from the text that is being discussed. The closest example of bringing the text's content into the discussion is in option C (stating what the author has expressed), but that option doesn't present any conclusion. Option A is presented as a personal opinion with a vague origin ("I feel") and option B tries to back the presented conclusion with an assumption ("the author obviously hates [...] fast food") instead of evidence.
