He claims that, “...[N]atural men are held in the hand of God, over the pit of hell...God [is not] in the least bound by any promise to hold them up one moment…[A]ll that preserves them every moment is the mere arbitrary will...of an incensed God” (pg 46). Edwards reinstates this idea throughout his sermon along with the idea that only “the mere pleasure of God” keeps His people from being consumed by the burning flames and being overtaken by the devil. The anaphora, “the mere pleasure of God” has multiple effects on the audience. Primarily, the strategic placement of the word “mere” before “pleasure of God” diminishes the fact that we are not in Hell, but rather living peaceful lives among the living. The word makes it appear as though God’s pleasure is only a trivial matter that is not enough to preserve our health and wellbeing. Furthermore, the repetition of the phrase keeps this thought on the forefront of the audience’s mind and adds a sense of terror which aids in the achievement of the ultimate goal, which is converting the …show more content…
The repetition not only of the idea of residing in Hell for all eternity, but also of the word “nothing” increases the trepidation of the audience. Each time “nothing” is repeated it further implants the idea of eternity into the minds of the people, causing them to be more fearful and influenced.
In conclusion, though it may have sparked a great amount of controversy (“taos000001”), Jonathan Edwards’ Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God was largely successful in achieving its purpose of converting the non-believers to Puritanism. This success can be seen throughout the period of the Great Awakening. Edwards’ strategic use of rhetorical elements--particularly metaphors, diction, anaphoras, and repetition--was key to his success in the conversion of the unconverted in his church, and eventually spread throughout New