Day 53 — Book 1, Chapter 10, §1

New chapter. And the first thing Calvin does is draw a boundary around his own subject — out loud, in public, for a whole paragraph. Look at what that means. Chapters 6 through 9 fought a war: Scripture is necessary (6), the Spirit seals it (7), the evidences confirm it (8), the fanatics who ditch it are frauds (9). War over. Now the smoke clears and the question returns — the original question, from Chapter 1: what do we actually know about God? S1 says it in so many words: We formerly observed that the knowledge of God ... is more clearly and familiarly explained by the word. That's the handshake back to Chapter 6. Then S2 states today's thesis, and it is a claim about identity: in Scripture the Lord represents himself in the same character in which we have already seen that he is delineated in his works. Same God, two galleries. The creation portrait and the Scripture portrait are of one sitter.

Then — and this is why the section exists — Calvin fences the topic four times in a row. S3: a full treatment would occupy a large space. S4: so instead, a kind of index — a pointing finger, not an encyclopaedia. S5: not the covenant with Abraham's race — put that down. S6: because covenant-God is Redeemer-God, and we haven't earned that word yet. S7: today's knowledge stops short at the creation of the world, without ascending to Christ the Mediator. S8: yes, New Testament texts will get quoted — don't let that confuse you about the purpose. S9: the whole assignment in one line — how God, the Creator of heaven and earth, governs the world which was made by him.

⚠️ Don't misread the fence as a wall. Calvin is not saying you can know God apart from Christ. He is saying: for the length of Book 1, I am describing only the Creator's face, and Book 2 will turn the page to the Redeemer's. That's the famous duplex cognitio Dei — Day 4's phrase, now doing structural work. And notice S10, which refuses to let the "Creator" half go cold: what we meet in Scripture is his paternal kindness and also examples of severity — Father and Judge, in the same sentence, at the very moment the topic is supposedly "just creation."

The shape in one breath:

   S1        RESUME     ── ch.6 recalled: creation's knowledge, clearer by
                           the WORD
   S2        THESIS     ── Scripture's God = the SAME character seen in
                           his works
   S3–S4     METHOD     ── full treatment too large → "a kind of INDEX"
                           for the pious reader
   S5–S6     FENCE (1)  ── NOT the Abrahamic covenant — that was God acting
                           as REDEEMER
   S7        FENCE (2)  ── today's knowledge stops short of Christ the
                           Mediator
   S8        CAVEAT     ── NT texts will appear (power + providence) —
                           don't lose the purpose
   S9        ASSIGNMENT ── how the Creator of heaven and earth GOVERNS
                           the world
   S10       PREVIEW    ── everywhere: paternal kindness + severity on the
                           obstinate

Today's 3 Big Points — write them down now:

1. The anticipatory it chain — four times in ten sentences, and adverbs wedged in every time. S2 It may now be proper to show, that ...; S3's cousin A full discussion ... would occupy; S4 But it will here be sufficient to furnish ...; S9 it will be sufficient for him at present to understand .... The frame is It + be + ADJ + to V, where it is a placeholder and the real subject is the infinitive. ⚠️ The wedge is the trap: it will **here** be sufficient, it will be sufficient **for him at present** — an adverbial (and in S9 a for-phrase = the infinitive's own subject) sits between the adjective and the to. Strip the wedge, and the skeleton snaps back.
2. Pied-piping: the preposition travels with which — and today it travels in a caravan. S2 in the same character **in which** ...; S5 the peculiar covenant **by which** God distinguished ...; and the monster, S4: **by attending to which** the pious reader may be enabled ... — preposition + gerund + preposition + which, all fronted as one block. ⚠️ And S2 hides the deeper trap: the gap the relative fills is inside an embedded clause — in which we have already seen [that he is delineated ___ in his works]. Two clause-walls between the relative and its hole.
3. The nominative absolute — NP + being + past participle, no conjunction, no relative. S8: (**proofs being there given** both of the power of God the Creator, and of his providence ...). It is not a fragment. It is a whole clause with its own subject, hooked to the main sentence by nothing but a comma and a participle. ⚠️ The exam will offer you proofs are there given as a "correction." Refuse it — you'd be splicing two finite clauses with a comma.

Ten sentences, one paragraph, four of them doing nothing but marking off territory. The heavy lifting is in S2, S4, S6, S8, S10. Let's go.

1. We formerly observed that the knowledge of God, which, in other respects, is not obscurely exhibited in the frame of the world, and in all the creatures, is more clearly and familiarly explained by the word. It may now be proper to show, that in Scripture the Lord represents himself in the same character in which we have already seen that he is delineated in his works. A full discussion of this subject would occupy a large space. But it will here be sufficient to furnish a kind of index, by attending to which the pious reader may be enabled to understand what knowledge of God he ought chiefly to search for in Scripture, and be directed as to the mode of conducting the search. I am not now adverting to the peculiar covenant by which God distinguished the race of Abraham from the rest of the nations. For when by gratuitous adoption he admitted those who were enemies to the rank of sons, he even then acted in the character of a Redeemer. At present, however, we are employed in considering that knowledge which stops short at the creation of the world, without ascending to Christ the Mediator. But though it will soon be necessary to quote certain passages from the New Testament (proofs being there given both of the power of God the Creator, and of his providence in the preservation of what he originally created), I wish the reader to remember what my present purpose is, that he may not wander from the proper subject. Briefly, then, it will be sufficient for him at present to understand how God, the Creator of heaven and earth, governs the world which was made by him. In every part of Scripture we meet with descriptions of his paternal kindness and readiness to do good, and we also meet with examples of severity which show that he is the just punisher of the wicked, especially when they continue obstinate notwithstanding of all his forbearance. ✅ Text note. Our source file source/Institutes_Beveridge_FULL.txt carries §1 at lines 3970–3990 — and today, for once, the page furniture stays out of the way: the page-88 marker and the running header fall after our section, inside §2. One hyphenation repair across a line break: remem- + ber → remember (S8). The section is a single paragraph in the source — kept as one block above. The chapter head lists §1 as: "Explanation of the knowledge of God resumed. God as manifested in Scripture, the same as delineated in his works." Chapter title verbatim: "IN SCRIPTURE, THE TRUE GOD OPPOSED, EXCLUSIVELY, TO ALL THE GODS OF THE HEATHEN." One archaism preserved exactly as printed: S10's notwithstanding of all his forbearance — Beveridge's Scots-inflected notwithstanding **of**, not our typo. Parentheses in S8 are the source's own. ⚠️ Now run the standing Day 42 checks. Every stranded comparative, every so/too/such without a partner, every pronoun without an antecedent. Correlatives: **more** clearly and familiarly explained (S1) — ⚠️ comparative with no than. Not an orphan: the comparison is to the first half of the same sentence (not obscurely exhibited in the frame of the world → more clearly than that). Supply it mentally; the exam will ask what the comparison is against. the **same** character **in which** (S2) ✓ — same ... in which is the pair (Beveridge's older equivalent of the same ... as). **both** of the power ... **and** of his providence (S8) ✓ — closed, and note that both/and are yoking two of-phrases, not two nouns; the of repeats, which is your bracket marker. **not** ... **but**? — none today. No orphans. Pronouns: S1 **which** = the knowledge of God (and the relative is non-restrictive — commas — so it comments, it does not narrow). S2 **himself** = the Lord; **he** is delineated = the Lord again; **his** works = the Lord's. S4 **which** in by attending to which = the index — not the discussion, not the subject: the reader attends to the index. **he** ought chiefly to search = the pious reader. S5 **which** = the peculiar covenant. S6 **he** admitted ... **he** even then acted = God; **those who were enemies** = Abraham's race, described from their side. S7 **which** stops short = that knowledge. S8 **it** will soon be necessary = the empty it (Big Point 1); **what he originally created** — he = God; **I** wish = Calvin, first person singular, only here; **he** may not wander = the reader. S9 **him** = the reader (carried over from S8 — the sentence has no other candidate); **which** was made by **him** — which = the world, him = God: two hims in adjacent sentences with different referents. ⚠️ Mark that. S10 **his** paternal kindness ... **he** is the just punisher ... **his** forbearance = God; **which** show = examples of severity; **they** continue obstinate = the wicked — not the examples, not the descriptions. Trap words on patrol: formerly (S1) = previously, earlier — not "in the past, as opposed to now." in other respects (S1) = in other ways, otherwise. obscurely (S1) — under a litotes: not obscurely exhibited = displayed quite plainly. Don't read the negative flatly. frame of the world (S1) = the structure/fabric of the universe (machina mundi — the Ch. 5 phrase, Day 10's family). familiarly (S1) = ⚠️ intimately, close-up (familia) — not "in a casual manner." character (S2, S6) = ⚠️ the stamped mark / role (Greek χαρακτήρ, engraver's die) — not "personality"; in the character of a Redeemer (S6) = acting in the role of. delineated (S2) = drawn in outline (de + linea) — a portrait word, deliberately paired with character. occupy a large space (S3) = take up a great deal of room (on the page). index (S4) = ⚠️ a pointer, a forefinger (indicare, to point out) — Calvin is offering a finger, not a back-of-book listing. attending to (S4) = paying attention to. pious (S4) = godly, reverent (Ch. 2's pietas). be directed as to (S4) = be given guidance concerning. adverting to (S5) = ⚠️ turning my attention to (ad + vertere, turn toward) — not "advertising," not "alluding slyly." peculiar (S5) = ⚠️ special, belonging to one alone (peculium, private property) — not "odd." gratuitous (S6) = ⚠️ free, unearned, of sheer grace (gratia) — NOT "uncalled-for." This is the theological jackpot word of the day. to the rank of sons (S6) = into the standing of sons — and mind where the phrase attaches (see S6). employed in (S7) = occupied with. stops short at (S7) = goes no further than. ascending (S7) = climbing up — the ladder metaphor Calvin will not climb today. wander (S8) = stray (vagari — Calvin's standing verb for undisciplined minds, Day 8's vague wanderings). paternal (S10) = fatherly. readiness to do good (S10) = eagerness to be beneficent (beneficentia). severity (S10) = strictness in punishing. obstinate (S10) = stubbornly unyielding (ob + stinare, to stand against). notwithstanding of (S10) = ⚠️ archaic in spite of — the of is redundant to modern ears; leave it. forbearance (S10) = patient restraint from punishing (Rom. 2:4's ἀνοχή). All in Period 5. ℹ️ On the count. Ten sentences, one paragraph. No question marks, no quotation marks, no semicolons — this is Calvin in administrative voice, laying out a syllabus. One parenthesis (S8), one first-person singular (I am not now adverting, S5; I wish, S8) — Calvin steps out from behind the plural we exactly when he is issuing a procedural instruction, and steps back into we (S7, S10) when he is teaching. Watch that pronoun shuttle; it is not random. The count stands at 10.

A thesis, then a fence built four planks high, then the assignment:

   S1     RESUME     ── [ch.6 recalled] creation's knowledge — NOT obscure —
                        but the WORD makes it clear + familiar
   S2     THESIS ⭐   ── Scripture's self-representation = the SAME character
                        as the works' delineation
   S3     LIMIT      ── full treatment = too large
   S4     METHOD ⭐   ── "a kind of INDEX": what to seek + HOW to seek it
   S5     FENCE 1    ── NOT the peculiar covenant (Abraham's race)
   S6     REASON ⭐   ── because gratuitous adoption = God acting as REDEEMER
   S7     FENCE 2    ── today: knowledge that STOPS SHORT of Christ
                        the Mediator
   S8     CAVEAT ⭐   ── NT quotations coming (power + providence) —
                        (absolute clause) — reader: don't wander
   S9     ASSIGNMENT ── how the CREATOR governs the world he made
   S10    PREVIEW ⭐  ── everywhere in Scripture: paternal kindness
                        AND severity on the obstinate

Examiner's Eye — three traps live in this section:

1. The "Calvin excludes Christ" trap. A comprehension option will say: "Calvin argues that God can be truly known apart from Christ the Mediator." ✗ Scope overreach. S7 says we are employed in considering that knowledge which stops short at ... — that's a statement about what this book is doing right now, not a claim about what suffices for salvation. Calvin restricts his topic, not his theology. Mark the difference and you'll never lose this point.
2. The index trap. An option will render S4 as "Calvin promises a complete catalogue of the divine attributes." ✗ Direction flip. S3 and S4 are a matched pair: full discussion → too large; therefore only a kind of index. The word means a pointing finger. He is promising less, not more.
3. The S6 attachment trap. he admitted those who were enemies to the rank of sons — an option will gloss this as "those who were hostile to sonship." ✗ Wrong hook. to the rank of sons completes admitted (admit X to Y), not enemies. See S6 for the surgery.

Formula A — Anticipatory it + extraposed infinitive (with a wedge)

   It + BE + ADJ  (+ ADVERB)  (+ for + NP)  + to V ...
   ↑ placeholder subject                       ↑ the REAL subject

   Test:  un-extrapose  →  "To V ... + BE + ADJ."
                           "For NP to V ... + BE + ADJ."

   TODAY'S FOUR:
     S2  It may now be proper       to show that ...
     S4  It will HERE be sufficient to furnish ...      ← adverb wedge
     S8  it will SOON be necessary  to quote ...        ← inside "though"
     S9  It will be sufficient FOR HIM AT PRESENT to understand ...
                                    ↑ for-NP = SUBJECT of the infinitive

⚠️ Two traps. (1) The adverbial wedge (here, soon, at present) splits the frame — don't lose the to V. (2) for + NP is not "for the benefit of"; it is the infinitive's subject. If un-extraposing produces a sensible For X to V ... is ADJ, you've got it right.

Transformation drill. Turn this into the frame: Distinguishing the Creator from the Redeemer is necessary for the reader now. → ✅ It is now necessary for the reader to distinguish the Creator from the Redeemer.

Formula B — Pied-piping: the preposition travels with which

   BASIC:      ... the covenant  [ God distinguished them BY THAT COVENANT ]
               → the covenant  BY WHICH  God distinguished them ___

   CARAVAN:    ... the index  [ the reader is enabled BY ATTENDING TO THE INDEX ]
               → the index  BY ATTENDING TO WHICH  the reader may be enabled ___
                             └──┬──┘└───┬───┘└─┬─┘
                          governs the  gerund  preposition the VERB requires
                           gerund              (immediately before "which")

   DEEP GAP:   ... the character [ we have seen  ( that he is delineated
                                                   IN THAT CHARACTER ) ]
               → the same character  IN WHICH  we have already seen
                                     that he is delineated ___

⚠️ Two traps. (1) Dropping the verb's own preposition (attend **to**, delineated **in**) — the verb licenses it, so it must ride along. (2) Assuming the gap sits right after the relative. In S2 the gap is two clauses deep. Always locate the hole before you translate.

Transformation drill. Combine: This is the method. Calvin conducts the search by means of it. → ✅ This is the method by means of which Calvin conducts the search. → ✅ (caravan form) This is the method, by adhering to which the reader may conduct the search rightly.

Formula C — The nominative absolute

   [ NP  +  being / having been  +  p.p. / ADJ ] ,  MAIN CLAUSE
     ↑ its OWN subject (≠ main-clause subject)
     ↑ NO conjunction, NO relative pronoun, NO finite verb

   S8:  ( proofs BEING there GIVEN both of the power ..., and of his providence ... )
        → logical link supplied by context = CAUSAL
        → "since proofs of both are given there"

⚠️ The trap. Substituting a finite verb (proofs **are** there given) turns the construction into a comma splice. Also ⚠️ **both** of A, **and** of B — the repeated of marks the bracket; both yokes two phrases, not two nouns.

Transformation drill. Rewrite as an absolute: Since the evidence had been furnished by the prophets, Calvin proceeded to the attributes. → ✅ The evidence having been furnished by the prophets, Calvin proceeded to the attributes.

What this chapter is for. Book 1 has spent nine chapters clearing ground: the knowledge of God is innate (3), suppressed (4), blazing in creation (5), unreadable without Scripture's spectacles (6), sealed by the Spirit (7), corroborated by evidences (8), and defended against the fanatics (9). Chapter 10 finally turns to the content: given Scripture, what portrait of God does it hand us? And Calvin's answer is deliberately anticlimactic — the same portrait creation gave, only clearer. That "same" is not a throwaway. It is a swing at two enemies at once: the ancient Marcionite instinct (the Creator God is a lesser or different God from the God of the gospel) and the sixteenth-century radical instinct (Scripture reveals a God unrelated to the God of nature). One God, one face, two galleries.

The structural key: duplex cognitio Dei. Day 4 met the phrase in Ch. 2 §1 — the twofold knowledge of God as Creator and as Redeemer. In the 1559 edition Calvin promoted that distinction from a remark to the architecture of the whole book: Book 1 = the Creator, Book 2 = the Redeemer. S5–S7 are that architecture speaking out loud. I am not now adverting to the peculiar covenant ... we are employed in considering that knowledge which stops short at the creation of the world, without ascending to Christ the Mediator. Calvin is not being coy; he is telling you which room of the house you are standing in. The scholarly landmark here is T. H. L. Parker's Calvin's Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (1952) and Edward Dowey's The Knowledge of God in Calvin's Theology (1952) — the two books that put duplex cognitio at the centre of Calvin studies, and then disagreed for thirty years about how tightly the two halves are joined.

Edition history, briefly. The 1536 Institutio had six chapters and no such architecture; it was a catechism with a preface to the King of France. Successive editions (1539, 1543, 1550) swelled it with loci — topical treatments in Melanchthon's manner. The 1559 edition is the one that rebuilt the material on the fourfold creedal plan (Father / Son / Spirit / Church) with the duplex cognitio running underneath Books 1–2. Chapter 10 as we have it is a 1559 arrangement of older material, and S4's a kind of index is the seam showing: Calvin is compressing what could have been a full locus de Deo into a pointer, because his new architecture has other work for the space.

The lineage. the same character in which ... he is delineated in his works stands in the Augustinian line of vestigia Dei — the traces of God in creation (De Trinitate VI.10, XI–XV). Aquinas takes the same conviction in a demonstrative direction (Summa I q.2 a.3, the five ways). Calvin's difference is not that he denies the traces — S1's litotes insists they are not obscure — but that he denies fallen eyes can read them rightly without the word. Hence the ordering: chapter 5 (the traces), chapter 6 (the spectacles), chapter 10 (the reading).

Later reception, and the fight. This is the neighbourhood of the 1934 Barth–Brunner explosion. Brunner's Natur und Gnade appealed to Calvin's Anknüpfungspunkt — a point of contact in creation; Barth's Nein! denied it. Both quoted Book 1 chapters 3–5 and 10. ⚠️ Read S7 before you take a side. Calvin's restriction is methodological — "we are employed in considering," i.e. this is the present topic — not epistemological triumphalism about natural knowledge. He has already said (Ch. 5 §§11–15, Ch. 6 §1) that this knowledge in fallen hands yields idolatry, not salvation.

⚠️ The over-reading guardrail — two fences. 1. stops short at the creation of the world ≠ "creation-knowledge is sufficient." It is a syllabus boundary, not a soteriology. Anyone quoting this sentence as Calvin's warrant for natural theology has mistaken a table of contents for a doctrine. 2. a kind of index ≠ "a complete doctrine of God." Calvin is explicitly declining to write a full locus de Deo here (S3–S4). What follows in §2 is a handful of texts — Exodus 34, Psalm 145, Jeremiah 9 — chosen as pointers, not as an exhaustive attribute-list. Do not build a Calvinian doctrine of the divine attributes out of two pages he warned you were an index.

1. S1 — the frame of the world, and in all the creatures → Ps. 19:1–4 (The heavens declare the glory of God) and Rom. 1:20 (τὰ γὰρ ἀόρατα αὐτοῦ ... νοούμενα καθορᾶται — "his invisible things ... being understood are clearly seen"). How Calvin uses it: not as a proof, but as an already-settled premise he can name in passing. Romans 1:20's καθορᾶται (clearly seen) is precisely why S1 can say not obscurely.
2. S2 — represents himself in the same character → Heb. 1:3, χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ (the express image of his substance). How Calvin uses it: the vocabulary is borrowed, not cited. character in Beveridge's English carries the stamping metaphor Hebrews gives it — a die pressed into wax. Calvin's claim is that Scripture presses the same die creation pressed.
3. S5 — the peculiar covenant by which God distinguished the race of Abraham → Gen. 17:7 (an everlasting covenant ... to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed); Deut. 7:6 (KJV a peculiar people — LXX λαὸν περιούσιον); Ps. 147:19–20 (He hath not dealt so with any nation). How Calvin uses it: named only to be set aside — but the word peculiar is lifted straight from the Deuteronomy text, so the setting-aside is done in Scripture's own vocabulary.
4. S6 — those who were enemies → Rom. 5:10, ἐχθροὶ ὄντες κατηλλάγημεν τῷ θεῷ (when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God). How Calvin uses it: one word doing the work of a verse. enemies is not a description of distance but of hostility — which is why the adoption must be gratuitous.
5. S6 — gratuitous adoption ... to the rank of sons → Eph. 1:5 (προορίσας ἡμᾶς εἰς υἱοθεσίαν ... κατὰ τὴν εὐδοκίαν τοῦ θελήματος αὐτοῦ); Gal. 4:5; John 1:12. How Calvin uses it: υἱοθεσία is a legal term (Roman adoptio), and Beveridge's rank catches it exactly — a conferred standing with inheritance rights, not an affectionate gesture.
6. S7 — Christ the Mediator → 1 Tim. 2:5, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων. How Calvin uses it: as a title, unglossed — the reader is expected to know that Book 2 will unpack it.
7. S8 — the power of God the Creator, and ... his providence in the preservation of what he originally created → Heb. 1:3 (φέρων τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ); Col. 1:16–17 (by him all things consist); Acts 17:28. How Calvin uses it: these are the New Testament passages S8 is apologizing in advance for quoting. Power and preservation — the pair that becomes Book 1 chapters 14–18.
8. S9 — God, the Creator of heaven and earth → Gen. 1:1; Ps. 115:15; Acts 4:24; and the Apostles' Creed, first article. How Calvin uses it: creedal language dropped in without announcement — and immediately bent toward government (governs the world which was made by him), not manufacture.
9. S10 — his paternal kindness and readiness to do good → Ps. 103:13 (Like as a father pitieth his children); Matt. 5:45 (he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good). How Calvin uses it: paternal before severity — the order is doctrinal, not decorative.
10. S10 — the just punisher of the wicked → Ex. 34:7 (that will by no means clear the guilty) — ⚠️ the very verse §2 will quote at length tomorrow; Nah. 1:2–3. How Calvin uses it: S10 previews §2's proof-text in Calvin's own words before Moses supplies it.
11. S10 — notwithstanding of all his forbearance → Rom. 2:4–5 (the riches of his goodness and forbearance [ἀνοχῆς] and longsuffering [μακροθυμίας] ... but after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath); Rom. 3:25 (ἀνοχή again). How Calvin uses it: the whole logic of Rom. 2:4–5 compressed into a subordinate clause — the patience is what makes the punishment just, because contempt of forbearance is the aggravating sin.

① 어법 — 밑줄 넷 중 틀린 것 하나

But it will here be ⓐsufficient to furnish a kind of index, by ⓑattending which the pious reader may be enabled to understand what knowledge of God he ⓒought chiefly to search for in Scripture, and ⓓbe directed as to the mode of conducting the search.

✨ 답안 보기 (클릭)정답: ⓑ → attending **to** which

출제 의도. Formula B, trap (1). The verb is attend **to** X — the preposition is licensed by the verb, so when which is pied-piped forward the preposition must travel with it. Dropping it leaves attend transitive, which changes the meaning to "accompany / wait upon" and strands the sense. ⓐ is fine (it will be sufficient — Formula A with the here wedge). ⓒ is fine (ought to + embedded interrogative, statement order). ⓓ is the sneaky-looking one and it is correct: be directed shares the modal may with be enabled — one may, two passive predicates. Students who "fix" ⓓ to is directed have broken the coordination.

② 내용일치 — 다음 중 본문과 일치하는 것은?

1. Calvin argues that the knowledge of God available in creation is too obscure to be of any use, and must therefore be replaced by Scripture.
2. Calvin sets aside the covenant with Abraham's race for the present, on the ground that in making that covenant God was already acting as Redeemer.
3. Calvin promises a complete and systematic account of the divine attributes, since a brief treatment would not do the subject justice.
4. Calvin states that Scripture presents God's severity toward the wicked, but says nothing in this section about his kindness.

✨ 답안 보기 (클릭)정답: 2

출제 의도. ① is a direction flip built on the litotes in S1: is **not obscurely** exhibited means creation's display is plain, and the word makes it clearer still — an addition, not a replacement. Anyone who read the double negative flatly will pick this. ③ is a direct reversal of S3–S4: full discussion → too large; therefore a kind of index. He promises less, explicitly. ④ is a half-truth trap: S10 gives both arms — descriptions of his paternal kindness and readiness to do good and examples of severity — and the kindness arm comes first. ② is S5 + S6 read together, including the causal For: the covenant is set aside precisely because he even then acted in the character of a Redeemer, and the Redeemer is not this book's subject.

③ 영작 — 오늘의 공식 적용

문제. 다음을 (a) Formula A(가주어 it + 외치 부정사, 부사 삽입) 와 (b) Formula C(독립분사구문) 를 둘 다 써서 한 문장으로 영작하시오.

지금으로서는 독자가 창조주와 구속주를 구별하는 것으로 충분할 것이다 — 두 지식이 성경에서 함께 제시되고 있으므로.

✨ 답안 보기 (클릭)모범답안: It will be sufficient for the reader at present to distinguish the Creator from the Redeemer, both kinds of knowledge being set forth together in Scripture.

출제 의도 · 채점 포인트. - It will be sufficient **for the reader** ... **to distinguish** — for-NP as the subject of the infinitive, not a benefactive. Un-extrapose to check: For the reader to distinguish ... will be sufficient. ✅ - **at present** wedged between the adjective phrase and the to-infinitive — the S9 pattern exactly. - **both kinds of knowledge being set forth** together in Scripture — nominative absolute: its own subject (both kinds of knowledge), a participle (being set forth), no conjunction. ⚠️ Writing both kinds of knowledge **are** set forth earns zero: comma splice. - Common miss: It will be sufficient **to the reader**. ✗ The construction takes for, not to.

One-line summary. Scripture's God and creation's God wear the same stamped character (S2) — and for the whole of Book 1 Calvin will sketch that face only as Creator and Governor (S7, S9), fencing off the Redeemer (S5–S6) not out of indifference but out of discipline, while promising no more than a kind of index (S4) that already shows both hands: paternal kindness and just severity (S10). Grammar: ① anticipatory it + extraposed infinitive with adverbial wedges and for-NP subjects (S2/S4/S8/S9) ② pied-piped which, up to a four-word caravan, sometimes with the gap two clauses deep (S2/S4/S5) ③ the nominative absolute NP + being + p.p. (S8).

Homework (10 minutes).

1. 구조 복원. Take S4 and rewrite it as three separate short sentences, each with a finite verb — un-extraposing the it, un-pied-piping by attending to which, and splitting the two may-predicates. Then compare: what does Beveridge's single sentence gain that your three lose? (Hint: the reader never loses sight of the index — it stays the grammatical hinge.)
2. 영작. Using Formula B's caravan form, render: 성경은 그 안에서 하나님이 자신을 보여 주시는 거울이며, 경건한 독자는 그것을 들여다봄으로써 창조주의 얼굴을 본다. (모범: Scripture is the mirror in which God exhibits himself, by looking into which the pious reader beholds the face of the Creator.)
3. 내일 예습 한 줄. §2 opens There are certain passages which contain more vivid descriptions of the divine character ... — and then Calvin does exactly what S10 promised: he quotes Exodus 34:6–7 in full, the mercy-and-no-clearing-the-guilty text, and reads off the attributes not as God is in himself, but in relation to us. Bring today's word character with you; §2 is where the portrait finally gets painted.

Where we stopped: Book 1, Ch. 10, §1 끝. 다음은 Book 1, Ch. 10, §2 — Moses, David, Jeremiah: the attributes of God as Scripture describes them.