Day 54 — Book 1, Chapter 10, §2

Yesterday Calvin built a fence and promised us a kind of index. Today he delivers the index — and it is the single most important paragraph in Book 1 for the doctrine of God. Look at what he does. He does not open a dictionary of attributes. He opens three passages of Scripture — Exodus 34, Psalm 145, Jeremiah 9 — and lets God name himself.

But the sentence that will follow you for the rest of your life is S3. Here it is:

he is described not as he is in himself, but in relation to us

Underline it twice. That is the hinge of Calvin's whole theological method, the thing the scholastics call quoad se / quoad nos — God as he is in himself versus God as he is toward us. Calvin picks the second. Not because the first is false, but because the first is not the business of creatures. And he gives the reason in the same breath, in a comparative that is easy to skim right past: in order that our acknowledgement of him may be more **a vivid actual impression** than **empty visionary speculation**. Knowledge of God that does not land on you is not knowledge of God. It is speculation. Day 5's qualis ≠ quid — remember? — now cashed out with a proof text.

Then watch the architecture. S4–S5: the attributes Moses lists are just those which we saw shining in the heavens, and on the earth — the Chapter 5 list, verbatim recall. That is yesterday's thesis being paid off: Scripture's God and creation's God are one sitter, and here is the receipt. S8 states it as a formula so tight it is almost a proverb: such as we feel him to be when experience is our guide, such he declares himself to be by his word. Experience and word converge. Same God, two witnesses.

Then Jeremiah narrows the three to a triad — loving-kindness, Judgment, righteousness (S10–S11) — and Calvin, sensing the objection before you can raise it (but what about truth? power? holiness? goodness?), fires four rhetorical questions in a row (S13–S17) to show the triad entails the rest. That's not padding. That's a man defending a short list against the charge of being short.

And S18 lands the plane where Book 1 always lands: the purpose is not information. It is worship him with perfect integrity of heart and unfeigned obedience, and also to depend entirely on his goodness. Knowledge → piety. Chapter 2's thesis, restated at the end of Chapter 10's centerpiece.

The shape in one breath:

   S1        SETUP      ── some passages paint God's "genuine countenance"
   S2–S3     MOSES ⭐    ── Ex. 34 quoted → TWO observations:
                            (a) name twice repeated = eternity + self-existence
                            (b) described NOT in himself BUT in relation to us
   S4–S5     BRIDGE     ── that list = the Ch. 5 list (creation) + Jehovah = power
   S6–S8     DAVID ⭐    ── prophets do the same; Ps. 145 omits nothing;
                            SUCH as experience → SUCH by his word
   S9–S11    JEREMIAH ⭐ ── Jer. 9:24 → the THREE: loving-kindness,
                            Judgment, righteousness
   S12       CLAIM      ── know these three = amply furnished for glorying
   S13–S17   DEFENCE ⭐  ── objection pre-empted: truth? power? goodness?
                            holiness? — 4 rhetorical questions, all entailed
   S18       PURPOSE ⭐  ── same end as creation's knowledge:
                            worship + obedience + dependence

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

1. The correlative such ... such — a fronted comparison with the pivot hidden in the middle. S8: **such as** we feel him to be when experience is our guide, **such** he declares himself to be by his word. The frame is such as S V, such S V = as X, so Y. ⚠️ Two traps in one sentence. First, such is a complement, not a determiner — there is no noun coming. Second, we feel him to be ___ is a five-pattern with to be (S + V + O + to-be-C), and the gap after to be is exactly what the first such fills. Restore it and the sentence reads: we feel him to be [such]; he declares himself to be [such]. Same predicate, two roads.
2. Negative fronting and elliptical rhetorical questions — Calvin's argumentative artillery. S13: **Nor is there** here any omission of his truth ... — nor fronted forces auxiliary–subject inversion (Nor is there, not ~~Nor there is~~). S16: **Whence, too, his loving-kindness, but from his goodness?** — a verbless question: the whole does ... come has been ellipted. ⚠️ The exam will offer you Nor there is or Whence comes too his loving-kindness as "corrections." Both wrong for different reasons. Know which.
3. Impersonal it + extraction: the attributes which it is most necessary for us to know. S11. The relative which is not the subject of is; it is the object of to know, dragged out of the infinitive clause across the dummy it. Restore: it is most necessary for us to know the attributes → relativize the object → the attributes **which** it is most necessary for us to know ___. ⚠️ And then the main verb is are these three — plural, agreeing with attributes, not with it. S7 runs the same machine (it may suffice at present to refer to ...) and S15 runs the passive version (could **it** be believed that ...).

Eighteen sentences. Two long Scripture quotations. Four rhetorical questions. Let's go.

2. There are certain passages which contain more vivid descriptions of the divine character, setting it before us as if his genuine countenance were visibly portrayed. Moses, indeed, seems to have intended briefly to comprehend whatever may be known of God by man, when he said, “The Lord, The Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation,” (Ex. 34:6, 7). Here we may observe, first, that his eternity and selfexistence are declared by his magnificent name twice repeated; and, secondly, that in the enumeration of his perfections, he is described not as he is in himself, but in relation to us, in order that our acknowledgement of him may be more a vivid actual impression than empty visionary speculation. Moreover, the perfections thus enumerated are just those which we saw shining in the heavens, and on the earth—compassion, goodness, mercy, justice, Judgment, and truth. For power and energy are comprehended under the name Jehovah. Similar epithets are employed by the prophets when they would fully declare his sacred name. Not to collect a great number of passages, it may suffice at present to refer to one Psalm (145) in which a summary of the divine perfections is so carefully given that not one seems to have been omitted. Still, however, every perfection there set down may be contemplated in creation; and, hence, such as we feel him to be when experience is our guide, such he declares himself to be by his word. In Jeremiah, where God proclaims the character in which he would have us to acknowledge him, though the description is not so full, it is substantially the same. “Let him that glorieth,” says he, “glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the Lord which exercise loving-kindness, Judgment, and righteousness, in the earth,” (Jer. 9:24). Assuredly, the attributes which it is most necessary for us to know are these three: Loving-kindness, on which alone our entire safety depends: Judgment, which is daily exercised on the wicked, and awaits them in a severer form, even for eternal destruction: Righteousness, by which the faithful are preserved, and most benignly cherished. The prophet declares, that when you understand these, you are amply furnished with the means of glorying in God. Nor is there here any omission of his truth, or power, or holiness, or goodness. For how could this knowledge of his loving-kindness, Judgment, and righteousness, exist, if it were not founded on his inviolable truth? How, again, could it be believed that he governs the earth with Judgment and righteousness, without presupposing his mighty power? Whence, too, his loving-kindness, but from his goodness? In fine, if all his ways are loving-kindness, Judgment, and righteousness, his holiness also is thereby conspicuous. Moreover, the knowledge of God, which is set before us in the Scriptures, is designed for the same purpose as that which shines in creation—viz. that we may thereby learn to worship him with perfect integrity of heart and unfeigned obedience, and also to depend entirely on his goodness. ✅ Text note. Our source file source/Institutes_Beveridge_FULL.txt carries §2 at lines 3991–4035. Page furniture removed and nothing else: the page-88 marker (mid-S2, right after long-suffering, and), the page-92 marker, and the two-line running header CHAPTER 10. - IN SCRIPTURE, THE TRUE GOD OPPOSED, EXCLUSIVELY, TO ALL / THE… — all of which fall inside the Exodus quotation and have been lifted out. Two hyphenation repairs across line breaks: exer- + cised → exercised (S11), and loving- + kindness → loving-kindness (S17 — the hyphen is kept, because the word is genuinely hyphenated everywhere else in the section). ⚠️ selfexistence (S3) is printed exactly so in our source — an artefact of the original typesetting/scan where self-existence lost its hyphen. Left verbatim. Not our typo. Likewise acknowledgement (S3) with the medial e, and capital-J Judgment throughout (Beveridge's house style; five occurrences) — left as printed. The parentheses around (Ex. 34:6, 7), (145), and (Jer. 9:24) are the source's own, as is the em-dash before compassion (S4) and before viz. (S18). The section is a single paragraph in the source — kept as one block above. ⚠️ Now run the standing Day 42 checks. Every stranded comparative, every so/too/such without a partner, every pronoun without an antecedent. Correlatives: **more** vivid descriptions (S1) — ⚠️ comparative with no than. Not an orphan: the implied comparison is than the general run of Scripture passages just described in §1 (In every part of Scripture we meet with descriptions...). Supply it. **not** as he is in himself, **but** in relation to us (S3) ✓ — closed, and this is the day's theological hinge. may be **more** a vivid actual impression **than** empty visionary speculation (S3) ✓ — closed, and note it is a noun-phrase comparison (more A than B where A and B are both NPs), not an adjective one. **so** carefully given **that** not one seems to have been omitted (S7) ✓ — closed so ... that result clause. **such as** ... , **such** ... (S8) ✓ — the day's Big Point 1; the pair is such as/such, and it is easy to miss because the second such is stranded at the head of its own clause. **not so** full (S9) — ⚠️ another stranded so: not so full as the Mosaic description, the comparison recoverable from the sentence's own topic. a **severer** form (S11) — ⚠️ comparative, no than: severer than the daily exercise of Judgment just mentioned. the **same** purpose **as** that which shines in creation (S18) ✓ — same ... as closed. No true orphans. Pronouns: S1 **which** contain = certain passages; setting **it** before us — ⚠️ it = the divine character, not the passages; **his** genuine countenance = God's. S2 **he** said = Moses; inside the quotation **that** will by no means clear the guilty — the relative's head is the Lord, not sin (see S2's surgery). S3 **his** eternity, **his** magnificent name, **his** perfections, **he** is described, **he** is in himself = God; **our** acknowledgement, **us** = we readers. S4 **those which** we saw = the perfections. S6 **they** would fully declare = the prophets; **his** sacred name = God's. S7 **which** in in which a summary ... is given = Psalm 145. S8 **every perfection there set down** — ⚠️ there = in that Psalm, an adverb of place, not an existential there; **him** ×2 and **himself** = God; **his** word = God's. S9 **where** = in Jeremiah (locative relative on a book, not a place); **he** would have us = God; **it** is substantially the same = the description. S10 **says he** = the prophet/God speaking through him; **me**, **I** = the Lord. S11 **which** it is most necessary for us to know = the attributes; **on which alone** = Loving-kindness; **which** is daily exercised = Judgment; **them** = the wicked; **by which** = Righteousness. S12 **these** = the three attributes; **you** — ⚠️ second person, the only one in the section: Calvin lifts Jeremiah's address and points it at the reader. S13 **there** = existential this time (contrast S8); **his** = God's. S14 **it** in if **it** were not founded = this knowledge; **his** inviolable truth = God's. S15 **it** could be believed = dummy it anticipating the that-clause; **he** governs = God. S16 no verb, no pronoun but **his** = God's. S17 **his** ways, **his** holiness = God's; **thereby** = by that very fact. S18 **which** is set before us = the knowledge of God; **that which** shines in creation = the (other) knowledge of God; **him**, **his** goodness = God; **thereby** = by means of that knowledge. Trap words on patrol: vivid (S1) = lifelike, living (vivere). countenance (S1) = face — and it is deliberate: Ex. 34 is the passage where Moses asks to see God's face. as if ... **were** visibly portrayed (S1) = ⚠️ past subjunctive after as if — counterfactual. Calvin is not saying God is visible. comprehend (S2) = ⚠️ sum up, take in together (com + prehendere, grasp together) — not "understand." Moses is compressing, not comprehending. long-suffering (S2) = slow to anger (μακρόθυμος / Heb. erek appayim, "long of nostrils"). clear the guilty (S2) = acquit the guilty. selfexistence (S3) = aseity — God's existing a se, from himself. ⚠️ Note the missing hyphen; it is the source's. magnificent (S3) = great-making, majestic (magnus + facere). enumeration (S3) = the listing out one by one. acknowledgement (S3) = ⚠️ recognition, owning-as-true — a relational word for Calvin, not a cognitive one. vivid actual impression (S3) = a living, real impress — press a seal into wax; that is the metaphor. empty visionary speculation (S3) = ⚠️ hollow, dreamy theorizing; visionary here is pejorative (given to unreal visions), not "far-sighted." Trap word. thus enumerated (S4) = listed in this way. Judgment (S4, S10, S11, S14, S15, S17) = ⚠️ judicial rule, the executing of justice (Heb. mishpat) — not "an opinion" and not merely "the Last Judgment." comprehended under (S5) = included under. epithets (S6) = descriptive titles (Gk. ἐπίθετον, "added on"). **would** fully declare (S6) = ⚠️ archaic wished to / were minded to — volitional would, not future-in-past. Not to collect (S7) = ⚠️ rather than amass, an absolute infinitive used as a discourse-marker; not a command. suffice (S7) = be enough. set down (S8) = written down, recorded. contemplated (S8) = beheld, gazed at. such as we feel him to be (S8) — see Big Point 1. experience is our guide (S8) = when we go by experience. would have us to acknowledge (S9) = ⚠️ archaic wants us to acknowledge (have + O + to V; modern English drops the to). substantially (S9) = in substance, essentially — not "considerably." him that glorieth (S10) = the one who boasts (that = who; glory = boast, καυχάομαι). the Lord **which** exercise (S10) = ⚠️ who exercise — which for persons is normal 17th-c. English (cf. "Our Father which art in heaven"), and exercise is uninflected because it agrees with I. loving-kindness (S10, S11) = covenant-love (Heb. ḥesed). Assuredly (S11) = certainly. benignly cherished (S11) = kindly nurtured (benignus = well-born → kind; cherish < carus, dear). amply furnished with the means of (S12) = abundantly equipped with the grounds for. glorying in God (S12) = boasting in God — the Pauline reflex of Jer. 9:24. Nor is there (S13) — Big Point 2. inviolable (S14) = ⚠️ that cannot be violated/broken (in + violare) — of God's truth: unbreakable. presupposing (S15) = assuming beforehand. Whence (S16) = from where. In fine (S17) = ⚠️ in conclusion, finally (Fr. enfin) — nothing to do with "fine." Trap phrase. conspicuous (S17) = plainly visible (con + specere, to look at). viz. (S18) = namely (Lat. videlicet, "it is permitted to see"). unfeigned (S18) = ⚠️ not pretended, sincere (fingere, to shape/feign — the same root as Day 9's figment). depend entirely on (S18) = rely wholly upon. All in Period 5. ℹ️ On the count. Eighteen sentences, one paragraph — Calvin's longest section since Ch. 8. Structurally it is a triptych with a defence attached: Moses (S2–S5), David (S6–S8), Jeremiah (S9–S12), then the objection-and-answer (S13–S17), then the purpose clause (S18). Two block quotations of Scripture, both closed with a parenthetical reference — the first (Ex. 34) is 66 words long and swallows a page break; the second (Jer. 9:24) is broken by says he in the middle, an old-fashioned interpolation that will trip you if you are reading fast. Four consecutive question marks (S14, S15, S16 — and S17 answers them all): the only cluster of questions in the whole chapter. And exactly one second-person address, in S12 (when you understand these, **you** are amply furnished) — lifted from Jeremiah and aimed at the reader. The count stands at 18.

Three witnesses, one triad, four questions, one purpose:

   S1        FRAME       ── some passages = God's "genuine countenance"
                            (as if — counterfactual!)
   S2        MOSES ⭐     ── Ex. 34:6-7 quoted whole (66 words)
   S3        RULE ⭐⭐    ── (a) name twice = eternity + self-existence
                            (b) NOT as he is in himself / BUT in relation to us
                            purpose: vivid impression > empty speculation
   S4        RECEIPT     ── that same list already seen in heaven + earth
   S5        FOOTNOTE    ── "Jehovah" carries power + energy
   S6        DAVID (i)   ── prophets use similar epithets
   S7        DAVID (ii)  ── Ps. 145: so complete that nothing is omitted
   S8        AXIOM ⭐     ── SUCH as experience feels him — SUCH his word
                            declares him
   S9        JEREMIAH(i) ── less full, substantially the same
   S10       JEREMIAH(ii)── Jer. 9:24 quoted
   S11       THE THREE ⭐ ── loving-kindness / Judgment / righteousness
   S12       PAYOFF      ── know these → amply furnished for glorying
   S13       OBJECTION   ── (Nor is there...) truth? power? holiness? goodness?
   S14-S16   ANSWER ⭐    ── 3 rhetorical questions: truth grounds it,
                            power presupposed, goodness is the source
   S17       ANSWER (4)  ── holiness = conspicuous from all his ways
   S18       PURPOSE ⭐   ── same end as creation: worship + obedience
                            + total dependence

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

1. The "God is knowable in himself" flip. A comprehension option will read: "Calvin holds that Scripture describes God as he is in his own essence." ✗ Direction flip — 180°. S3 says the exact opposite: not as he is in himself, **but** in relation to us. This is the single most likely test item in the section. If you get nothing else, get this.
2. The "experience is enough" overreach. An option will read: "Calvin teaches that experience gives us the same knowledge of God as Scripture does, so Scripture is unnecessary." ✗ Scope overreach. S8 says experience and the word yield the same character — it does not say either can be dropped. And §1 already ruled: the word explains it more clearly and familiarly. Convergence ≠ redundancy.
3. The as if trap. An option will render S1 as "Calvin claims some passages make God's face visible." ✗ The verb is subjunctive: **as if** his genuine countenance **were** visibly portrayed — a counterfactual comparison, and Chapter 11 (starting Day 56) will spend fourteen sections denying that God has any visible form at all. Read the mood.
4. The triad-is-exhaustive trap. An option will read: "Calvin lists three attributes and denies that God has truth, power, holiness, or goodness." ✗ Read S13. Nor is there here any omission of his truth, or power, or holiness, or goodness. The triad implies the rest; it does not exclude it. S14–S17 exist to make exactly this point.

Formula ① — The correlative such as ... , such ... (S8)

   ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
   │   SUCH  as  S₁ + V₁ (+ O + to be ___)  ,                     │
   │   SUCH      S₂ + V₂ (+ O + to be ___)                        │
   │                                                              │
   │   = "As X is, so Y is" / "Whatever X, that same Y"           │
   │                                                              │
   │   • both SUCH = COMPLEMENTS (no noun follows!)               │
   │   • NO auxiliary inversion after fronted `such`              │
   │   • `feel/hold/believe + O + to be + C` = formal 5-pattern   │
   └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

⚠️ Trap 1: your eye expects a noun after such. There is none — such fills the to be ___ slot. ⚠️ Trap 2: such he declares himself to be — ✗ NOT such does he declare. Such is not a negative/restrictive trigger, so no inversion. ⚠️ Trap 3: we feel him to be ≠ "we have feelings about him." feel = find by experience.

Transformation drill. Rewrite using Formula ①:

We find God to be merciful when we look at creation; he says in Scripture that he is merciful.

Model answer: Such as we find him to be when creation is our teacher, such he declares himself to be by his word.

Formula ② — Negative fronting → inversion; and elliptical rhetorical questions (S13, S16)

   ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
   │  (a) NEG/RESTRICTIVE FRONTED  +  AUX  +  S  +  ...           │
   │      Nor / Never / Seldom / Little / Not only / No sooner     │
   │                                                              │
   │      Nor  IS  THERE  here any omission ...        ✓          │
   │      Nor  there is  here any omission ...         ✗          │
   │                                                              │
   │      ⚠ existential: AUX + `there` + REAL SUBJECT             │
   │                                                              │
   │  (b) ELLIPTICAL RHETORICAL QUESTION                          │
   │      Whence, (too,)  NP ,  but from NP ?                     │
   │      = "Whence [does] NP [come], if not from NP?"            │
   │      ⚠ `but` = EXCEPT, other than                            │
   └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

⚠️ Trap 1: Nor there is — the single most common error. Nor always inverts. ⚠️ Trap 2: but after a Whence/Who/What ...? question = except, not "however." ⚠️ Trap 3: don't confuse S8's locative there (= in that Psalm) with S13's existential there.

Transformation drill. Combine into one sentence using both halves of Formula ②:

Calvin does not leave out God's mercy. God's mercy comes only from his goodness.

Model answer: Nor is there here any omission of his mercy; whence, indeed, his mercy, but from his goodness?

Formula ③ — Impersonal it + extraction from the infinitive (S7, S11, S15)

   ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
   │   BASE:       It is ADJ  (for X)  to V  +  NP                │
   │   RELATIVIZE: the NP [ which it is ADJ (for X) to V ___ ]    │
   │                                                              │
   │   the attributes [ which it is most necessary                │
   │                    for us to know ___ ]  ARE these three     │
   │                     └─ object of `to know`, not subject      │
   │                                                              │
   │   ⚠ MAIN VERB agrees with the HEAD NOUN (attributes → ARE)   │
   │   ⚠ `for X` = SUBJECT of the infinitive, not a beneficiary   │
   │   ⚠ adverbials WEDGE in: it may suffice `at present` to V    │
   └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

⚠️ Trap 1: a test will offer is for are. Bracket the relative clause out — the attributes ... are these three. ⚠️ Trap 2: the wedge (here, at present, again) sits between the verb and the to. Strip it before parsing. ⚠️ Trap 3: passive version — could **it** be believed **that** ... (S15): dummy it + extraposed that-clause. Don't hunt for a referent.

Transformation drill. Rewrite using Formula ③:

It is most useful for the pious reader to contemplate these three attributes. They are loving-kindness, Judgment, and righteousness.

Model answer: The three attributes which it is most useful for the pious reader to contemplate are loving-kindness, Judgment, and righteousness.

1. The doctrine at stake: quoad se vs quoad nos. S3's not as he is in himself, but in relation to us is the medieval-scholastic distinction between God as he is in himself (quoad se / in se) and God as he is toward us (quoad nos). Calvin does not invent it; he weaponizes it. Aquinas had used the pair to organize what can and cannot be predicated of the divine essence. Calvin uses it to redirect the whole enterprise: not "what is the divine substance?" but "how does he stand toward me?" It is the same move he made in Ch. 2 §2 — Day 5's qualis ≠ quid — and Ch. 5 §9, and it will govern Book 1 to the end.

⚠️ Guardrail — do not turn Calvin into Kant. He is not saying the divine essence is unknowable-in-principle behind a veil of appearances. He is saying that God has chosen to reveal himself relationally, and that speculation past that choice is impiety, not impossibility. The limit is moral and pastoral, not epistemological-in-the-modern-sense. Battles renders the neighbouring idea as God "lisping" to us; that is Calvin's accommodation doctrine, and today's section is one of its clearest applications.

2. The three texts, and why these three. Calvin's choice is not random. Ex. 34:6-7 is Israel's own creedal self-naming of God, quoted back at God repeatedly inside the Old Testament (Num. 14:18, Neh. 9:17, Ps. 86:15, Joel 2:13, Jonah 4:2) — the nearest thing the Hebrew Bible has to a doctrine-of-God formula. Ps. 145 is an acrostic (א through ת), a formal claim to completeness — hence S7's not one seems to have been omitted. Jer. 9:24 is the verse Paul twice compresses into He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord (1 Cor. 1:31; 2 Cor. 10:17). So Calvin picks: the creed, the catalogue, and the compression. Three genres, one God.

3. Editions. Chapter 10 is small and stable across the editions. The 1536 Institutio had no such chapter — the whole knowledge-of-God architecture (Chs. 1–10 as we have them) is the fruit of the 1539 expansion and the 1559 final reorganization, in which Calvin split cognitio Dei Creatoris (Book 1) from cognitio Dei Redemptoris (Book 2). §2 belongs to that mature layer. The chapter head (Sections. 1. ... 2. ... 3. ...) is the editorial summary printed in Beveridge's edition, not Calvin's own.

4. Lineage. The "attributes described toward us" instinct is Augustinian in temper (De Trinitate is precisely a warning against speculative reach), and Calvin's insistence that knowledge terminate in worship (S18) is Ch. 1's cognitio Dei et nostri still driving. Later: Barth takes S3's relational emphasis as ammunition against natural theology, but ⚠️ note the awkwardness — S4 and S8 say creation and Scripture display the same perfections, which is precisely what Barth resisted in the 1934 exchange with Brunner. Read S8 carefully before you enlist Calvin on either side of that fight. Plantinga and the Reformed epistemologists are more interested in Ch. 3's sensus divinitatis than in this section. And the modern "divine attributes" literature (Charnock, Bavinck, and in our day Sonderegger and Duby) is still arguing about exactly where S3's line falls.

5. Over-reading guardrail. ⚠️ Three things this section does not say: - It does not say God's essence is unknowable simpliciter (see above). - It does not say the three attributes are the only ones — S13 exists precisely to deny that. - It does not say experience without Scripture suffices. S8 asserts convergence of content, and §1 already ruled on clarity of access. Keep those two questions apart and you will not misquote him.

1. Exodus 34:6-7 → S2 (quoted in full). Heb. יְהוָה יְהוָה אֵל רַחוּם וְחַנּוּן — YHWH YHWH El raḥum weḥannun. Calvin reads the doubled Name as declaring eternity + aseity (S3). ⚠️ Note raḥum (compassionate) is from reḥem, womb — the mercy-word is a body-word. Calvin's merciful and gracious renders the pair raḥum weḥannun; the AV's abundant in goodness and truth renders rav-ḥesed we'emet, i.e. the very ḥesed that returns as loving-kindness in S10-S11. Same Hebrew root, two English words, one section — worth marking.

2. Exodus 3:14 → S3 (behind selfexistence). Not quoted, but it is the reason Jehovah/YHWH can carry aseity at all: אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה — ehyeh asher ehyeh, "I AM THAT I AM." S5's power and energy are comprehended under the name Jehovah leans on the same etymology.

3. Psalm 145 → S7 (referenced, not quoted). The alphabetical acrostic of praise. Calvin's so carefully given that not one seems to have been omitted is a nod to the form: A-to-Z completeness. ⚠️ And Ps. 145:8 is itself a quotation of Ex. 34:6 — so Calvin's second witness is citing his first. He almost certainly knew that.

4. Psalm 145:17 → S17 (echo). The LORD is righteous in all his ways — Calvin's if all his ways are loving-kindness, Judgment, and righteousness picks up the Psalm's own phrase while ostensibly discussing Jeremiah. The loop closes.

5. Jeremiah 9:24 → S10 (quoted). Heb. חֶסֶד מִשְׁפָּט וּצְדָקָה — ḥesed, mishpat, ṣedaqah = loving-kindness, Judgment, righteousness. ⚠️ Note v. 23 (not quoted) is the negative half: let not the wise/mighty/rich glory in wisdom/might/riches. Calvin quotes only the positive half because his subject is what God reveals, not what man renounces.

6. 1 Corinthians 1:31 / 2 Corinthians 10:17 → S12 (unquoted reflex). ὁ καυχώμενος ἐν κυρίῳ καυχάσθω — Paul's double compression of Jer. 9:24. Calvin's amply furnished with the means of **glorying** in God is using Paul's verb (καυχάομαι) to gloss Jeremiah. ⚠️ He does not cite Paul here — because §1 said this section stays on the Creator side. He borrows the vocabulary and withholds the reference. Watch that discipline.

7. Romans 2:4 → §1 S10, still resonating in S18's his goodness. ἀνοχή/μακροθυμία — forbearance and long-suffering, the same field as S2's long-suffering.

8. Deuteronomy 5:9 / Exodus 20:5 → S2 (unto the third and to the fourth generation). The Decalogue parallel, which adds of them that hate me — the qualifier Calvin does not quote here but assumes.

① Grammar — one of the four underlined items is wrong. Find it.

Assuredly, the attributes ⓐwhich it is most necessary for us to know ⓑis these three: Loving-kindness, on which alone our entire safety depends; Judgment, which is daily exercised on the wicked; and Righteousness, ⓒby which the faithful are preserved. Nor ⓓis there here any omission of his truth.

Answer: ⓑ

Exam-setter's rationale. Formula ③, straight down the middle. Bracket the relative clause out and the skeleton is the attributes ... **are** these three — plural head noun, plural verb. The is is bait planted by the singular it sitting right before it inside the relative clause. ⓐ is correct: which is the object of to know, legitimately extracted across the dummy it, and for us is the infinitive's subject. ⓒ is correct pied-piping (preserved **by** righteousness). ⓓ is correct negative-fronting inversion — Nor obligatorily inverts, and in an existential the order is AUX + there + subject. ⚠️ If you picked ⓓ you fell for the S13 trap in reverse: you "corrected" a correct inversion.

② Comprehension — which one agrees with the section?

ⓐ Calvin argues that Scripture describes God as he exists in his own essence, apart from his relation to creatures. ⓑ Calvin holds that the three attributes named in Jeremiah exclude truth, power, holiness, and goodness from the knowledge of God. ⓒ Calvin maintains that the perfections listed by Moses are the very ones already visible in creation, and that the purpose of Scripture's knowledge of God is the same as creation's. ⓓ Calvin claims that certain passages of Scripture make God's countenance genuinely visible to the eye.

Answer: ⓒ

Exam-setter's rationale. - ⓐ — direction flip, 180°. S3 says not as he is in himself, **but** in relation to us. This is the single most-tested sentence in the section, and the flip is the easiest distractor to write. If you underlined S3 in Period 3, this cost you nothing. - ⓑ — direction flip via S13. **Nor is there here any omission** of his truth, or power, or holiness, or goodness — and S14–S17 then derive all four from the triad. The triad compresses; it does not exclude. - ⓒ — correct. First half from S4 (the perfections thus enumerated are **just those** which we saw shining in the heavens, and on the earth); second half from S18 (designed for **the same purpose as** that which shines in creation). Two sentences, forty words apart, both required. That is what a well-built comprehension item looks like. - ⓓ — mood error. S1 is **as if** his genuine countenance **were** visibly portrayed — past subjunctive, counterfactual. And Ch. 11 will spend fourteen sections denying God any visible form. Read the mood, not the noun.

③ Composition — apply today's formulas.

Translate into Beveridge-style English, using Formula ① (such as ..., such ...) and Formula ② (negative fronting). "우리가 창조 세계에서 그분을 인자하신 분으로 경험하는 그대로, 그분은 자신의 말씀으로 자신을 그렇게 선포하신다. 또한 여기서 그분의 공의가 빠진 것도 아니다."

Model answer:

Such as we feel him to be when creation is our guide, such he declares himself to be by his word. Nor is there here any omission of his Judgment.

Exam-setter's rationale. Three things are being marked. (1) such ... such with no noun after either such, and no auxiliary inversion in the second clause — such he declares, not ~~such does he declare~~. (2) feel + him + **to be** — the formal five-pattern with to be retained; dropping it (such as we feel him) is comprehensible but not the target structure. (3) Nor + inverted is there + the real subject any omission. ⚠️ Writing Nor there is any omission loses the whole second sentence. ✅ Bonus credit for by his word rather than through his word — Beveridge's preposition, and it matches S8 exactly.

One-line summary. Scripture paints God's genuine countenance in Exodus, Psalm 145, and Jeremiah — and paints him not as he is in himself, but in relation to us, so that such as we feel him to be in creation, such he declares himself to be by his word; the triad of loving-kindness, Judgment, and righteousness omits nothing, because truth grounds it, power is presupposed by it, goodness is its source, and holiness is thereby conspicuous — and the whole point is not information but worship ... with perfect integrity of heart and unfeigned obedience.

The 3 grammar points, restated:

1. such as S V, such S V — both such are complements (no noun follows), no inversion, and feel + O + to be + C is the formal five-pattern underneath.
2. Negative fronting → inversion (Nor **is there** ...), and elliptical rhetorical questions (Whence, too, his loving-kindness, but from his goodness? — verb deleted, but = except).
3. Impersonal it + extraction — the attributes **which** it is most necessary for us to know **are** these three: which = object of to know; main verb agrees with attributes; strip the wedged adverbial (at present, here, again) before parsing.

Homework (10 minutes).

1. Structure restoration. Take S11 and rewrite it as a modern bulleted list: one line for the frame (The attributes ... are these three:) and three bullets, each ATTRIBUTE — relative clause. Then answer in one line: why does Calvin change the preposition each time (on which / which / by which)? (Hint: ground / act / means.)

2. Composition. Write two sentences on Psalm 145 using Formula ③ (impersonal it + extraction) and Formula ② (negative fronting). Target something like: The single Psalm which it may suffice at present to consider is the 145th. Nor is there there any perfection left out. ⚠️ Then fix that ugly there there — one is locative, one existential. How would you rewrite it?

3. Preview of tomorrow. §3 opens Here it may be proper to give a summary of the general doctrine. — Chapter 10's conclusion, and it turns polemical fast: Scripture distinctly excludes and rejects all the gods of the heathen. Watch for Justin Martyr (On the Monarchy of God) and Tertullian brought in as witnesses that the unity of God is engraven on the hearts of all — Chapter 3's sensus divinitatis returning as a patristic argument — and then the hammer: those impressions have had no further effect than to render men **inexcusable**. Day 8's word. It has been waiting seven chapters.

Where we stopped: Book 1, Ch. 10, §2 끝. 다음은 Book 1, Ch. 10, §3 — "Scripture, in directing us to the true God, excludes the gods of the heathen, who, however, in some sense, held the unity of God."