Philosophy/Religion Passage (grammar/writing)

Don’t read the passage first.

Identify important material if there is a stated question.

Read for context.

Examine the structure of the answers.

Choose the answer that best fits the context and, if applicable, the stated question.

Take time to review any questions you’ve flagged as difficult.

The answer is D. This sort of question is known as a “logical coherence” question. It focuses on the transition from one part of the sentence to the next; a good rule of thumb with these questions is to always look for contrast. Contrast between ideas often stands out more than agreement and therefore is easier to see. If there is contrast, the answer often presents itself quickly, but if there is not contrast, you can typically eliminate at least one and often two or three of the answers.

Is there contrast in this sentence? A key to understanding is the word “as” in the beginning of the sentence. This word typically indicates agreement between parts, so contrast is unlikely, Indeed, the author is making a comparison of similarity between two ways of understanding the unseen God. So we can eliminate not only choice A but also choice B, for “still” is typically a contrast word if used as a transition. Regarding choice D, is the second part of the sentence an example of the first? No: the second part gives a different way to seek to understand the unseen God. “So too” works best following “as” at the sentence’s outset. This is a form of the idiom “just as … so too”; Athanasius has simply left off the “just” at the beginning.

The answer is A. When offered (at least) a choice between a semicolon and a common, we need to perform the “Clause Test” and ask whether the two parts of the sentence are a) two complete ideas (independent clauses, which could each stand on their own as sentences) or else b) one complete and one incomplete idea. We can see a parallel structure in the two clauses here, both introduced by “if”; both parts are complete, offering a whole clause with an “if … then” logic. With two independent clauses, we cannot use a comma; this is the grammar error known as the “common splice”. And because the long dash known as the em dash (choice D) acts similarly to a comma, that choice is out as well. In this phrasing, we certainly need some punctuation to avoid a run-on sentence, so choice C can’t work. With two complete clauses, we need to use 1) a semicolon; or 2) a period; or 3) a comma plus a FANBOYS conjunction (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so). The semicolon works well here.

The answer is B. Here the author uses parallelism, a structure wherein two similar parts of speech (usually verbs but sometimes prepositions or other forms) line up in a sort of list. With parallelism, the forms must be expressed in a consistent way. If they are verbs, the second (and third, etc.) verb needs to be expressed in the same way as the first one. Athanasius has warned the reader not to mock but rather to recognize “and …” In this case, the next verb needs to be in same form as “recognize”. We’re not looking for “(he/she) marvels” or a continuing form like “marveling”, and certainly not an adjective like “marvelous”. Rather, the structure is, “Let him recognize and marvel.”

A good way to think of think of parallelism is to imagine you were making notes on this sentence in outline form. Athanasius, upon the presumption that the reader finds the things he observes to be from God and not from man, wants the reader to:

1. not mock
2. recognize
3. marvel

Structuring the list of actions this way helps us see more clearly how the verb forms should line up.

The answer is A. This is a word choice question, so we need to look at the context: “He, indeed, _____ humanity that we might become God.” Athanasius is referring to the person called “the Word” earlier in the paragraph and later as “Christ”. What did this person do to humanity? Some of the choices don’t even make sense grammatically because they would require additional words, such as a preposition. For example, we wouldn’t say “assented humanity” but rather “assented (agreed) to humanity,” and even that sounds awkward. We also can reject “associated humanity,” because the phrasing would have to be “associated humanity” with something else. Could it be “assigned”? Not here, because if humanity is assigned, it needs to be assigned to something. “Assumed” is best; the idea here is not “assumed” in the sense of taking something to be true but rather in the less commonly used sense of “taking on” something from someone else. An example might be, “To save his friend from suspension, the student assumed the blame for his friend’s action.” This is the idea here. Athanasius is talking about the incarnation, in which, according to Christian theology, God took on the form of humanity in the person of Jesus Christ.

The answer is B. With longer quotations, the issue is often sentence structure, in this case, the order of phrases. The sentence contains several phrases; we need to order them in such a way that the meaning is clear. In particular, the author makes a comparison here; he is not suggesting that the reader is actually looking at the open sea and trying to count the waves, but that trying to number the achievements of the Savior is compared with this action. Both actions are essentially impossible because what the person is trying to count is too numerous to be counted.

With this in mind, we eliminate answer choices C and D because, read carefully, they both describe the person doing the “counting” as actually looking at the sea, making that action the focus of the comparison rather than the real focus: numbering the achievements of the Savior. Choice A does something similar, starting out with the “waves” and thereby creating a confusing ordering that is hard to follow and puts the focus where it is not supposed to be. Only choice B starts out with the relevant focus: the Savior’s achievements. This answer then goes on to mention the open sea and the waves in the appropriate place, communicating that these images are introduced for the purposes of comparison.