Day 93 — Book 1, Chapter 13, §19

For four days we proved the Spirit is God. Today Calvin stops proving the Persons one at a time and puts all three in ONE sentence of Jesus — the baptismal command. Go and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Look at the noun. the NAME. Singular. Three Persons, one name. That's the whole section. Everything else is the chain Calvin hangs on it.

Second — the chain runs backwards, and that's where students crash. ⚠️⚠️ Paul (Eph 4:5) lists one Lord, one faith, one baptism. Calvin reads it as an inference ladder: one baptism → one faith → one God. The premise is at the bottom (baptism, a thing you can see). The conclusion is at the top (God, whom you can't). If you flip the ladder — because there is one God, there is one baptism — you have written a true sentence and a wrong answer. Period 2, trap (2).

Third — the monster word of the day is six letters long. were there various kinds of faith, there **behaved** also to be various gods. ⚠️⚠️⚠️ behaved has nothing to do with manners. It is behoved — old English behōfian, "to be needful". there behoved to be = there would have had to be. Beveridge was a Scot, and behove to = must is Scots idiom. Read behaved as behaved well and the sentence collapses. And it sits inside Day 91–92's favourite machine: were there … = if there were …. Formula 2.

Today's 3 Big Points

1. as …, so … — the correlative frame, and the other jobs of as. But **as** God has manifested himself more clearly …, **so** he has made himself more familiarly known in three persons. (S1) · For **as** wisdom … proceed from the Spirit, **so** he is the one Spirit … (S15). ⚠️ Today has FOUR ass and they don't all do the same job: S1/S15 = correlative (just as … so); S8 as the baptism of faith is a sacrament = causal (since); S16 as the Apostle assures us = comment clause (according as). Which as you're holding decides whether you read a comparison or a reason. Formula 1.
2. The subjunctive family: were there … / if it be not that … / however they be divided. ⚠️ Three old subjunctives in one section: if-less conditional (S7), rhetorical if … be not = unless (S10), concessive however … be = no matter how (S16). Plus the archaism there behaved to be = there must have been. Formula 2.
3. Fronting for rhetoric: Of many proofs let this one suffice · Nothing could be more stupid than … · Equally extravagant were the ravings … · by the Spirit were only meant the gifts …. ⚠️ Two inversions in one sentence (S14): complement-fronting in the main clause, PP-fronting inside the that-clause — and the real subject is at the END both times. Agreement follows the real subject: were … the ravings, were … the gifts. Formula 3.

But as God has manifested himself more clearly by the advent of Christ, so he has made himself more familiarly known in three persons. Of many proofs let this one suffice. Paul connects together these three, God, Faith, and Baptism, and reasons from the one to the other—viz. because there is one faith he infers that there is one God; and because there is one baptism he infers that there is one faith. Therefore, if by baptism we are initiated into the faith and worship of one God, we must of necessity believe that he into whose name we are baptised is the true God. And there cannot be a doubt that our Saviour wished to testify, by a solemn rehearsal, that the perfect light of faith is now exhibited, when he said, “Go and teach all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,” (Mt. 28:19), since this is the same thing as to be baptised into the name of the one God, who has been fully manifested in the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Hence it plainly appears, that the three persons, in whom alone God is known, subsist in the Divine essence. And since faith certainly ought not to look hither and thither, or run up and down after various objects, but to look, refer, and cleave to God alone, it is obvious that were there various kinds of faith, there behaved also to be various gods. Then, as the baptism of faith is a sacrament, its unity assures us of the unity of God. Hence also it is proved that it is lawful only to be baptised into one God, because we make a profession of faith in him in whose name we are baptised. What, then, is our Saviour’s meaning in commanding baptism to be administered in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, if it be not that we are to believe with one faith in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit? But is this any thing else than to declare that the Father, Son, and Spirit, are one God? Wherefore, since it must be held certain that there is one God, not more than one, we conclude that the Word and Spirit are of the very essence of God. Nothing could be more stupid than the trifling of the Arians, who, while acknowledging the divinity of the Son, denied his divine essence. Equally extravagant were the ravings of the Macedonians, who insisted that by the Spirit were only meant the gifts of grace poured out upon men. For as wisdom understanding, prudence, fortitude, and the fear of the Lord, proceed from the Spirit, so he is the one Spirit of wisdom, prudence, fortitude, and piety. He is not divided according to the distribution of his gifts, but, as the Apostle assures us (1 Cor. 12:11), however they be divided, he remains one and the same.

Sentence count: 16 (S1–S16). One paragraph, four movements: the frame — clearer revelation in three Persons (S1–S2) · the baptism argument, first pass — Eph 4:5 and Matt 28:19 (S3–S7) · the baptism argument, second pass — sacrament, profession, the one name (S8–S12) · two heresies refuted — Arians and Macedonians, and the one Spirit of many gifts (S13–S16).

⚠️ Day 92: 14 sentences. Today: 16. Seven ★★★, eight ★★, one ★.

Text note (not a correction to the quotation). Six features of the printed page, all handled as follows. (i) Page break removed. Page number 128 and the two-line running head (CHAPTER 13. - THE UNITY OF THE DIVINE ESSENCE … / IN…) fall mid-sentence, between into the name of the one and God, who has been fully manifested (source lines 5543–5548). Rejoined with a single space. ⚠️ This is inside S5 — the sentence does not end at the page foot. (ii) Footnote marker 44 removed — printed as Holy|Spirit?44 (line 5557). The footnote reads: "The French entirely omits the three previous sentences, beginning, 'Then, as,' &c." ⚠️⚠️ So S8, S9 and S10 are absent from the French edition. See Period 6 — it matters for how you weigh them. (iii) Marginal number 125 removed — at the right edge after however (line 5565), a reference to the Latin page, not prose. The blank line that follows is a layout gap; S16 reads on: however they be divided. (iv) ⚠️ wisdom understanding — comma missing (S15). Printed so; quoted as printed. Read it as a list: wisdom, understanding, prudence, …. Don't read wisdom as an adjective modifying understanding. (v) Punctuation and spelling kept as printed: the other—viz. (em dash, no spaces); Holy Spirit,” (Mt. 28:19), (comma inside the quotation mark, a second after the reference); Hence it plainly appears, that (comma before a that-clause); Father, Son, and Spirit, are (comma between subject and verb — old heavy pointing); any thing (two words, old spelling); British baptised / baptising / Saviour. (vi) ⚠️ Section numbering. Our §19 = Beveridge printed §16, entire (source lines 5530–5566). The printed marker 17. follows immediately after today's last sentence. Label offset still +3 (printed §14 was split across Days 90–91). BH's decision remains open (A: keep our labels / B: re-map SCHEDULE.md). Reading order is unbroken.

                 ─── I. THE FRAME (S1–S2) ───
[AS … SO]        S1    AS God manifested himself MORE CLEARLY by Christ's advent,
                       SO he made himself MORE FAMILIARLY known IN THREE PERSONS
                        ⚠ degree (more), not first-time
[ONE PROOF]      S2    "Of many proofs LET this one SUFFICE"
                 ─── II. BAPTISM, FIRST PASS (S3–S7) ───
[LADDER]         S3    Eph 4:5 — ONE FAITH → ONE GOD ; ONE BAPTISM → ONE FAITH
[STEP]           S4    initiated by baptism into worship of ONE God
                        → he INTO WHOSE NAME we are baptised = the TRUE God
[THE COMMAND]    S5    Mt 28:19 "in the NAME of Father, Son, Spirit"
                        = baptised into the name of THE ONE GOD
[CONCLUSION 1]   S6    HENCE the three persons SUBSIST in the Divine ESSENCE
[REDUCTIO]       S7    faith → God ALONE ; WERE there many faiths,
                        there BEHAVED (=behoved) to be many gods
                 ─── III. BAPTISM, SECOND PASS (S8–S12) ── ⚠ S8–S10 absent in French
[SACRAMENT]      S8    AS (=since) baptism = sacrament → its unity ASSURES unity of God
[PROFESSION]     S9    lawful ONLY to be baptised into ONE God (profession of faith)
[RHETORICAL Q]   S10   What is Christ's meaning … IF IT BE NOT that we believe
                        with ONE faith in the name of Father, Son, Spirit?
[RHETORICAL Q]   S11   Is this ANY THING ELSE than: Father, Son, Spirit = ONE God?
[CONCLUSION 2]   S12   one God, not more than one → Word and Spirit are
                        OF THE VERY ESSENCE of God
                 ─── IV. TWO HERESIES (S13–S16) ───
[ARIANS]         S13   NOTHING more stupid: divinity YES, essence NO
[MACEDONIANS]    S14   EQUALLY EXTRAVAGANT: "Spirit" = only the GIFTS
[ISA 11:2]       S15   AS gifts PROCEED from the Spirit, SO he is the ONE Spirit of them
[1 COR 12:11]    S16   NOT divided by his gifts, BUT one and the same

The spine in one line: God is now known more clearly — as three → one baptism, one faith, one God; and the baptism is into ONE name of three → so the three subsist in one essence; many faiths would mean many gods → so the Word and Spirit are of God's very essence → so Arius (divinity without essence) and the Macedonians (Spirit = gifts) are both wrong: many gifts, one Spirit.

Examiner's Eye. ⚠️⚠️⚠️ Five traps. (1) S1 — degree, not origin. more clearly, more familiarly. ⚠️ Calvin does NOT say the Trinity was unknown before Christ — he spent §§7–10 and Day 90 proving the Son and Spirit from the Old Testament. Any option saying the three Persons were first revealed at Christ's coming is scope overreach. (2) S3 — the direction of the ladder. Premise → conclusion: one faith → one God; one baptism → one faith. ⚠️ Options that run one God → one faith have flipped the inference (a true proposition, but not what Paul "infers" in Calvin's reading). (3) S5 — the name, not the names. ⚠️ The argument lives in the singular. An option that says baptism in three names shows three gods to be worshipped inverts the proof. (4) S13 — what the Arians granted. ⚠️⚠️ Calvin says the Arians ACKNOWLEDGED the Son's divinity and DENIED his divine essence. An option saying the Arians denied that the Son was in any sense divine flips half the sentence. (What "divinity" meant to them — Period 6.) (5) S16 — divided vs. distributed. ⚠️ The GIFTS are divided; the SPIRIT is not. An option saying the Spirit is divided among believers according to his gifts is the Macedonian error Calvin is refuting.

Formula 1 — The four jobs of as (correlative · causal · comment clause)

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  (A) CORRELATIVE   AS [clause], SO [clause]   = just as …, so …      │
│      AS God has manifested himself more clearly …,                    │
│      SO he has made himself more familiarly known …            (S1)  │
│      AS wisdom … proceed from the Spirit, SO he is the one Spirit (S15)│
│        ⚠ SO ≠ therefore  →  delete the AS-clause: SO-clause dangles  │
│                                                                       │
│  (B) CAUSAL        AS [clause], MAIN          = since, because       │
│      AS the baptism of faith is a sacrament, its unity assures … (S8)│
│        ⚠ no SO, no comparison  →  reason                              │
│                                                                       │
│  (C) COMMENT       …, AS X says/assures us, …  = according as        │
│      but, AS the Apostle assures us (1 Cor. 12:11), however …  (S16) │
│        ⚠ fenced by commas → delete it, the sentence is whole          │
│                                                                       │
│  TEST:  SO follows?  → (A)   ·   verb of saying?  → (C)   ·  else (B) │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

⚠️ Trap. In (A), so looks like therefore — and translating it that way turns a proportion into a cause. S1 does NOT say because God revealed himself more clearly, therefore he is three. It says in step with the clearer revelation came a more intimate knowledge of the three.

Transformation drill. Combine with correlative as … so: The gifts of the Spirit are many. The Spirit who gives them is one.

Model: As the gifts of the Spirit are many, so the Spirit who gives them is one. (✓ correlative — contrast by proportion; ⚠️ if you write "As the gifts are many, the Spirit is one" without so, a reader will take as as causal — nonsense.)

Formula 2 — The old subjunctive family + behove

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  (A) IF-LESS CONDITIONAL   WERE / HAD / SHOULD + S …                  │
│      WERE there various kinds of faith, there behaved to be …   (S7) │
│      = If there were various kinds of faith, …                        │
│        ✗ If were there …   (inversion REPLACES if)                   │
│                                                                       │
│  (B) IF … BE NOT (THAT)   = unless (formal/archaic)                   │
│      What is his meaning …, IF IT BE NOT THAT we are to believe…(S10)│
│        ⚠ BE = subjunctive, not imperative ("be not afraid")          │
│                                                                       │
│  (C) HOWEVER + S + BE   = no matter how S is/may be   (concessive)   │
│      HOWEVER they BE divided, he remains one and the same      (S16) │
│        ⚠ no comma after HOWEVER → concessive, not "but"              │
│                                                                       │
│  (D) BEHOVE (printed "behaved")                                       │
│      it behoves us to V      = we ought to V     (impersonal, std.)   │
│      there behoved to be N   = there had to be N  (Scots/archaic) (S7)│
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

⚠️ Trap. (A) were there is inversion with existential there — the subject slot is there. And (D) behaved is a spelling of behoved, not the verb behave. Two unfamiliar surfaces on one line of S7.

Transformation drill. Rewrite with (A) + (D): If there were two Spirits, there would have to be two Gods.

Model: Were there two Spirits, there behoved to be two Gods. (modern: Were there two Spirits, there would have to be two Gods.)

Formula 3 — Fronting for rhetoric (and agreement with the delayed subject)

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  (A) FRONTED PARTITIVE + LET                                          │
│      OF MANY PROOFS  let this one suffice                        (S2) │
│        no inversion; LET + O + bare V                                 │
│                                                                       │
│  (B) NEGATIVE + COMPARATIVE = SUPERLATIVE                             │
│      NOTHING could be MORE stupid THAN the trifling of the Arians(S13)│
│                                                                       │
│  (C) COMPLEMENT FRONTED → BE + SUBJECT                                │
│      EQUALLY EXTRAVAGANT  WERE  the ravings of the Macedonians  (S14) │
│                                                                       │
│  (D) PP FRONTED (+ passive) → BE + (only) + p.p. + SUBJECT            │
│      BY THE SPIRIT  WERE only MEANT  the gifts of grace         (S14) │
│                                                                       │
│  AGREEMENT: find the subject AFTER the verb                           │
│      were ← the ravings (pl.) · were ← the gifts (pl.)               │
│        ✗ by the Spirit WAS only meant the gifts                       │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

⚠️ Trap. In (D), the noun right after the preposition (the Spirit, singular) is a decoy. The verb agrees with the noun at the END.

Transformation drill. Front the complement and invert: The error of those who make the Son a creature is no less dangerous.

Model: No less dangerous is the error of those who make the Son a creature.

Where we are. Our §§16–19 proved the Spirit's deity from Old and New Testament texts (Genesis 1:2, Isaiah 48:16, works, will, name). Today (printed §16) summarises: all three Persons at once, from the baptismal formula. Tomorrow (printed §17) the direction turns — from one essence to real distinction: Father, Son and Spirit are not three names for one Person. So today is the hinge of the chapter: unity nailed down before distinction is opened up.

The baptism argument has a pedigree. It is the Nicene fathers' favourite proof for the Spirit. Basil of Caesarea, On the Holy Spirit (c. 375), argues that as we are baptised, so we believe; as we believe, so we give glory — the baptismal formula governs faith and doxology, and a Spirit who is a creature could not be named in it beside the Father and the Son. Athanasius, Letters to Serapion (c. 358–361), makes the same move against those who called the Spirit a creature. ⚠️ Calvin doesn't cite them here; he stands in their line.

Eph 4:5 as a ladder (S3). ⚠️ Guardrail: Paul's list in Eph 4:4–6 is a confession of unity (one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father), not a syllogism. Calvin reads an inference chain out of the ordering — a legitimate theological use, but don't claim Paul "argues" in the syllogistic sense.

Footnote 44 — the French omission. ⚠️⚠️ Beveridge notes that the French edition "entirely omits the three previous sentences, beginning, 'Then, as'" — i.e. S8, S9, S10. Calvin's French translations were his own (1541) or made under his eye (1560), and he sometimes pruned repetitions for a lay audience. What that means for you: S8–S10 are Latin-edition reinforcements of an argument already complete in S3–S7 and S11–S12. Nothing in the proof depends on them alone. Don't make S8's "sacrament" or S9's "lawful" the load-bearing wall of an essay on this section.

Arians (S13). Arius (d. 336) taught that the Son was the first and highest creature — "there was when he was not" — though he could be called God in a derived sense. Nicaea (325) answered with ὁμοούσιος: of the same essence as the Father. Calvin's divinity / divine essence distinction is exactly the Nicene issue: a title without the essence. ⚠️ Guardrail: "Arians" covered several parties (e.g. homoians, heteroousians) with different formulas; Calvin's one-line summary is polemical shorthand, accurate to the core claim.

Macedonians (S14). Named after Macedonius, bishop of Constantinople (deposed 360); also called Pneumatomachi ("Spirit-fighters"). They accepted the Son's full deity (or near it) but denied the Spirit's, treating him as a creature or a ministering power. The Council of Constantinople (381) answered by confessing the Spirit as "the Lord, the giver of life … who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified." ⚠️ Guardrail: Calvin's summary — by the Spirit were only meant the gifts of grace — describes one form of the denial (the Spirit as impersonal gift/power). The historical Pneumatomachi more often called him a created being. Both deny a divine Person; don't treat Calvin's line as a full historical description of the party.

The seven gifts (S15). Isaiah 11:2 in Hebrew has six terms in three pairs (wisdom–understanding, counsel–might, knowledge–fear of the LORD). The Greek (LXX) and Latin (Vulgate) render the first "fear" as eusebeia / pietas and add "fear" separately — hence the medieval "seven gifts of the Spirit". Calvin's piety shows that tradition in his list. ⚠️ Guardrail: Calvin is not endorsing the seven-gift scheme; he is using the verse's genitives (Spirit OF) to show one giver behind many gifts.

Reception. Later Reformed dogmatics (e.g. Turretin, Bavinck) keep the baptismal argument as a primary New Testament proof of the Trinity. Modern NT scholarship debates whether Matt 28:19 reflects developed liturgical usage; notice that Calvin's argument does not depend on dating — it depends on the singular name and on who is named in it.

Over-reading guardrails, all in one place. ⚠️ (1) S1 is degree, not first revelation. (2) S8 "sacrament" is not baptismal regeneration. (3) S15 "proceed" is not the doctrine of procession. (4) S13–S14's historical summaries are polemical shorthand. (5) S8–S10 are absent in French — don't build on them alone.

The one-line takeaway. ⚠️ One baptism, one faith, one God — and one NAME for Father, Son and Spirit. Divinity without essence (Arius) and Spirit without Person (Macedonians) both fall to the same fact: God is one.

1. Hebrews 1:1–2 — behind S1. God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son. How Calvin uses it (implicitly): the frame of more clearly — one God speaking, brighter at Christ's advent.
2. Ephesians 4:4–6 — S3, the ladder. There is one body, and one Spirit … One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all. Gk. εἷς κύριος, μία πίστις, ἓν βάπτισμα· εἷς θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ πάντων. ⚠️ Three genders of "one" (εἷς / μία / ἕν) — the unity word bent to each noun. How Calvin uses it: as an inference chain: baptism → faith → God.
3. Matthew 28:19 — S5 (cited), S10. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Gk. βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος. ⚠️⚠️ τὸ ὄνομα — singular "name"; εἰς — "into". How Calvin uses it: one name of three = one God; and into (S5's gloss) is the literal preposition.
4. Romans 6:3; Galatians 3:27 — behind S4, S5. So many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ / as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. εἰς Χριστόν. How Calvin uses it (implicitly): baptism into = incorporation into the one named — hence he into whose name we are baptised is the true God.
5. 1 Corinthians 1:13 — behind S9. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? How Calvin uses it (implicitly): baptism is a confession of faith in the one named — no one may be baptised into a creature's name. ⚠️ Also note Is Christ divided? — the "divided" theme S16 will pick up for the Spirit.
6. Deuteronomy 6:4 — behind S12. Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD. Heb. יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָד. How Calvin uses it: one God, not more than one — the premise that makes divinity without essence impossible.
7. Gal 4:6; Rom 8:15 — behind S1 familiarly. God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. How it lights S1: the Trinitarian revelation is family knowledge — Father, Son, Spirit of adoption. ⚠️ Calvin does not cite these here; the link is the word familiarly.
8. Joel 2:28; Acts 2:17–18 — behind S14 poured out upon men. I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh. How Calvin uses it: the Macedonians took the outpouring (gifts) for the Spirit himself; Calvin keeps giver and gift distinct.
9. Isaiah 11:2 — S15. The spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD. Heb. רוּחַ חָכְמָה וּבִינָה רוּחַ עֵצָה וּגְבוּרָה רוּחַ דַּעַת וְיִרְאַת יְהוָה. ⚠️ The construct rûaḥ + gift, three times — "spirit OF". How Calvin uses it: one Spirit named by many gifts → the gifts are his, not he.
10. 1 Corinthians 12:4–11 — S16 (cited 12:11). Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit … But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. Gk. τὸ ἓν καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ πνεῦμα, διαιροῦν ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστῳ καθὼς βούλεται. ⚠️ διαιροῦν — the SPIRIT is the one who divides (distributes) the gifts; he is not divided. And vv. 4–6 — same Spirit … same Lord … same God — is itself a Trinitarian triad. How Calvin uses it: gifts divided, Giver one and the same.
11. 1 Corinthians 12:13 — behind the whole section. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body. How it frames the section (not cited by Calvin): the same chapter that proves "one Spirit, many gifts" ties the Spirit to one baptism — exactly the two halves of today's paragraph.

① 어법 — 밑줄 넷 중 어색한 것 하나

(A) As God has manifested himself more clearly by the advent of Christ, so he has made himself more familiarly known in three persons. It is obvious that (B) were there various kinds of faith, there behaved also to be various gods. The Father, Son, and Spirit (C) are one God. Equally extravagant were the ravings of the Macedonians, who insisted that by the Spirit (D) was only meant the gifts of grace poured out upon men.

✨ 답안 보기 (클릭)정답: (D).

출제 의도. ⚠️ Formula 3(D) — agreement with the delayed subject. After PP-fronting (by the Spirit), the passive verb precedes its subject; the subject is the gifts of grace (plural) → were … meant. was agrees with the decoy the Spirit. ✗. Why the others are sound. (A) correlative as … so — Formula 1(A). (B) if-less conditional with existential there — Formula 2(A). (C) ⚠️ the "feels wrong, is right" option: verb agrees with the plural coordinated subject, not the singular complement one God (S11).

② 내용일치 — 다음 중 §19의 내용과 일치하는 것은?

(1) Calvin holds that the three Persons were entirely unknown until the advent of Christ. (2) According to Calvin, the Arians refused to call the Son divine in any sense. (3) From the unity of baptism Calvin, following Paul, infers the unity of faith, and from the unity of faith the unity of God. (4) Calvin grants that the Spirit is divided among believers according to the distribution of his gifts.

✨ 답안 보기 (클릭)정답: (3).

출제 의도. (1) ✗ Scope overreach. more clearly, more familiarly — comparatives: the revelation grew brighter; it did not begin (S1, and §§7–10 of this chapter). (2) ✗ Direction flip. The Arians acknowledged the Son's divinity and denied his divine essence (S13). (3) ✓ S3 exactly — because there is one baptism he infers that there is one faith and because there is one faith he infers that there is one God. (4) ✗ Direction flip. He is not divided according to the distribution of his gifts — the gifts are divided; he remains one and the same (S16).

③ 영작 — 다음을 오늘의 공식을 적용해 영어로

그리스도의 강림으로 하나님께서 자신을 더 분명히 나타내셨듯이, 그렇게 그분은 세 위격 안에서 자신을 더 친밀하게 알리셨다. 만일 여러 종류의 믿음이 있다면, 여러 신들도 있어야 했을 것이다. 성령에 의해서는 오직 은혜의 선물들만이 의미되었다(고 그들은 주장했다).

Model answer:

As God has manifested himself more clearly by the advent of Christ, so he has made himself more familiarly known in three persons. Were there various kinds of faith, there behoved also to be various gods. (They insisted that) by the Spirit were only meant the gifts of grace.

출제 의도. Three checks. ① Formula 1(A) — As …, so … — ⚠️ writing therefore for so turns the proportion into a cause. ② Formula 2(A)+(D) — Were there …, there behoved to be … — ⚠️ If were there ✗; behoved (or modern there would have to be) — never behaved in your own writing; that is Beveridge's print spelling. ③ Formula 3(D) — by the Spirit were only meant the gifts — ⚠️ was ✗; the verb agrees with the plural subject at the end.

One-line summary. as* God showed himself more clearly at Christ's advent, so he made himself more familiarly known in three persons; Of many proofs let this one suffice — baptism: one baptism → one faith → one God; Christ's solemn rehearsal baptises into the name (singular) of Father, Son and Spirit, the same thing as to be baptised into the name of the one God; faith cleaves to God alone, so were there various kinds of faith, there behaved (= behoved) also to be various gods; hence the Word and Spirit are of the very essence of God — and Nothing could be more stupid than Arius (divinity without essence), Equally extravagant the Macedonians (Spirit = gifts): the gifts are many, but however they be divided, he remains one and the same*.

The three grammar points, once more. ① Four ass — correlative as … so (S1, S15; so ≠ therefore), causal as = since (S8), comment as the Apostle assures us (S16). ② The subjunctive family — if-less were there … (S7), if it be not that = unless (S10), concessive however they be divided (S16); plus there behaved to be = there had to be (behove). ③ Fronting — Of many proofs let this one suffice; Nothing could be more stupid than; Equally extravagant were the ravings / by the Spirit were only meant the gifts — agreement with the subject at the END.

And the structural fact you now own: ⚠️ The baptismal formula = the faith formula = one name. That single noun (τὸ ὄνομα) carries the whole section. And S8–S10 are Latin-only reinforcements (French omits them).

Homework (10 minutes).

1. Structure restoration (4 min). Rewrite S14 in base (uninverted) order — both clauses: The ravings of the Macedonians were equally extravagant; they insisted that only the gifts of grace poured out upon men were meant by "the Spirit". Underline the two real subjects; check each verb's number.
2. Composition (4 min). Write one sentence with Formula 2(C) (however + S + be) about the Church, based on 1 Cor 12:12: No matter how many its members may be, the body is one. Check: no comma after however; subjunctive be.
3. Preview (2 min). Tomorrow (our §20 = printed §17) turns the page from unity to distinction: On the other hand, the Scriptures demonstrate that there is some distinction between the Father and the Word, the Word and the Spirit; Expect: (a) On the other hand — the hinge of the chapter; (b) Gregory of Nazianzus in Greek — I cannot think of the unity without being irradiated by the Trinity — ⚠️ cannot … without V-ing (Day 13's double negative returns); (c) distinction only, not division — the word-pair that answers today's S16. Today: one. Tomorrow: yet three.

Where we stopped: Book 1, Ch. 13, §19 끝. 다음은 Book 1, Ch. 13, §20 (= Beveridge 인쇄 §17, 위격의 구별 — 나지안주스의 그레고리우스: On the other hand, the Scriptures demonstrate that there is some distinction between the Father and the Word, the Word and the Spirit;).