Calvin On Predestination

By Arthur Miskin

Calvin’s doctrine of predestination has been the occasion for concern for many people. Some see it as a source of worry because of the uncertainty of final salvation. Others find it unacceptable because of its apparent contradiction of human freedom. Ironically, Calvin himself saw this doctrine as possessing great practical benefit. He insisted that it bears “sweet fruits” for the believer; only by accepting this biblical doctrine of predestination can the believer find genuine assurance and comfort in his salvation.

Errors Opposed By Calvin

John Calvin faced his fair share of heretics in his day and was scathing in his attack upon their errors. It would appear that two of his main opponents in the area of predestination were Albertus Pighius and George of Sicily, whom he brands as “a pair of unclean beasts” (Lev. 11:3). According to Calvin, both sought to undermine the doctrine of predestination but differed in the “figments” that they advanced. [1] Pighius, according to Calvin, taught that God, by His immutable counsel, created all men to salvation without distinction; but, as He foresaw the fall of Adam and in order that His election might remain firm and unaltered, He applied a remedy which might, therefore, be common to all: the election of the whole human race in Christ so that no one can perish but he who, by his own obstinacy, blots out his name from the Book of Life. Because God foresaw that some would remain determinedly in their malice and contempt of divine grace, He by His foreknowledge reprobated such. The wicked then deprive themselves of the benefit of universal election, irrespectively and independently of God altogether. Further, he went on to teach that all who hold and teach that certain persons are positively and absolutely chosen to salvation, while others are as absolutely appointed to destruction, think unworthily of God, and impute to Him a severity utterly foreign to His justice and His goodness. Pighius goes on to mention Augustine as one who promotes such a view of God.

Calvin spares no effort in defending the good name and teaching of this great stalwart of the Christian church. Pighius held, in line with Nicolaus of Cusa, that God’s foreknowledge in eternity did not include knowledge of future events. There certainly is nothing new under the sun (Eccl. 1:9). The implication is that the fall of Adam took Him by surprise. Calvin slates Pighius for substantiating his heresy by formulating a twofold knowledge in God. [2] This implies that all men were created unto life before the foreknowledge of the fall; the thought of man’s salvation preceded the foreknowledge of his death. This must then issue forth in the notion that Christ was provided as an emergency measure or an afterthought in the mind of God. It naturally follows that the whole human race is chosen in Christ, which is what Pighius believed. [3] Calvin dismantles the entire argument of the heretic by expounding three critical passages of Scripture: Ephesians 1:4; John 6:37-38, 44; and Romans 9:10-13.

The false teaching of Georgius is also thoroughly dealt with by Calvin. [4] This man taught that no man is predestined to salvation, but that God pre-appointed a time when He would save the whole world. Calvin refutes three arguments that were put forward by this monk who denied the truth that men are given over to blindness and obstinate hardness of heart and are therefore unable and unwilling to believe the gospel. This proves too much for Georgius. How can it be that man is given over to blindness of heart by God, and from this evil heart of unbelief proceed all manner of wickedness? Calvin refers to Pharaoh who is said to have been hardened by God. Moses testifies that Pharaoh had been raised up “for this very purpose,” i.e., that the glory of God be manifested in his destruction. Paul confirms that Pharaoh was one of the reprobate (Ex. 9:16; Rom. 9:17). Georgius would have us believe that it is the sin of the wicked that condemns them to hell. Calvin in no way denies this fact: “All those who, being destitute of the Spirit of adoption, precipitated themselves into eternal destruction by their own sin and fault.” But these vessels of wrath were “afore prepared unto destruction,” so there is something that precedes and that is the eternal counsel of God which has ordained it to be so.

The Biblical Source Of Predestination [5]

Contrary to what many believe, the doctrine of predestination is not one that Calvin himself devised. For Calvin, Scripture is the inspired and inerrant Word of God. As the revealed will of the living God, Scripture is the single source of Calvin’s theology and so it is evident that his entire teaching on this unpopular doctrine was drawn exclusively from Scripture. In examining the doctrine, Calvin warned against two dangers, namely, excessive curiosity where there is speculation beyond what Scripture teaches, and excessive timidity that dares not speak where the Scriptures do speak. Concerning the first he says: “[T]he moment we exceed the bounds of the word, our course is outside the pathway and there we must repeatedly wander, slip and stumble.” Concerning the latter, he warned against being “so cautious or fearful that [we] desire to bury predestination in order not to disturb weak souls.”

Definition

In two comprehensive definitions, Calvin summarized his doctrine of double predestination:

We call predestination God’s eternal decree, by which he determined with himself what he willed to become of each man. For all are not created in equal condition; rather, eternal life is foreordained for some, eternal damnation for others. Therefore, as any man has been created to one or the other of these ends, we speak of him as predestined to life or death. [6] 

As Scripture then clearly shows, we say that God once established by his eternal and unchangeable plan those whom he long before determined once for all to receive into salvation, and those whom, on the other hand, he would devote to destruction. We assert that, with respect to the elect, this plan was founded upon His freely given mercy without regarding human worth; but by his just and irreprehensible but in incomprehensible judgment he has barred the door of life to those whom he has given over to damnation. Now among the elect we regard the call as a testimony of election. Then we behold justification another sign of its manifestation, until they come into the glory in which the fulfilment of that election lies. But as the Lord seals his elect by call and justification, so, by shutting off the reprobate from knowledge of his name or from the sanctification of the Spirit, he, as it were, reveals by these marks what sort of judgment awaits them.

These summaries indicate that Calvin considered both election and reprobation sovereign works of God rooted in His eternal and immutable decree. Thus Calvin emphasized both a sovereign election and sovereign reprobation. In speaking of both, he used adjectives that cannot be applied to both equally. He followed Paul in saying: “[I]n the case of the elect he would have us contemplate the mercy of God, but in the case of the reprobate acknowledge his righteous judgment.” [7] Election displays the free mercy and the goodness of God, or His grace. Reprobation, on the other hand, displays the righteous judgment of God, or His justice. The incomprehensibility of God is called to our attention again and again, but the three attributes most mentioned in Calvin’s discussions are sovereignty, grace, and justice.

Sovereign And Gracious Election

The Divine Decree Of Election

In setting forth the doctrine of election in his Institutes, Calvin begins with Ephesians. In that great Trinitarian passage (Eph. 1:3-6), Paul refers to God’s “good pleasure of his will” as the source of grace received.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

When one pays careful attention to the separate clauses of this passage, there is no reason to doubt the doctrine of election. “Paul declares all virtue appearing in man is the result of election…. Besides they were elected ‘to be holy’, which refutes the error that election is derived from foreknowledge.” [8]

In his commentary on Ephesians, Calvin summarized the doctrine of election by referring to four causes of our salvation. “The efficient cause is the good pleasure of the will of God; the material cause is Christ; the final cause is the praise of his grace…the formal cause is the preaching of the gospel, by which the goodness of God flows out to us. Calvin emphasizes three factors in the area of election:

1. Election is God’s work.
2. Election is God’s decretive work.
3. Election is God’s decretive work relating to individuals.

Election Is God’s Work

According to Calvin, election is God’s sovereign work from beginning to end and concerns the eternal counsel made before the foundation of the world. Although all three persons of the Trinity are involved in this divine decree, Calvin understood it as primarily the work of the first two Persons. This he based on John 6:37, 39: “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me…. And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing.” [9] But Calvin also considered Christ Himself as the author of the decree.

When Christ declares, “I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen” ( John 13:18), He makes Himself the author of election. [10] Calvin also saw the elect as elect in Christ and Christ as “the mirror of our election,” but at this point it is important to note that Christ Himself is the author of our election.

Election Is God’s Decretive Work

Both election and reprobation refers to the sovereign eternal counsel of God. “We call predestination God’s eternal decree, by which he determined with himself what he willed would become of each man.” [11] “Scripture…clearly shows that…God once established by his eternal and unchangeable plan those whom he long before determined once for all to receive unto salvation and those whom he on the other hand would devote to destruction.” [12] The eternal decree or eternal plan precedes the person elected. God’s counsel precedes all of His activities in history as an eternal plan; however, that is carried out in history. Calvin sees an intimate relationship between God’s decree and God’s providence. “God [is] the ruler and governor of all things, who in accordance with his wisdom has from the farthest limit of eternity decreed what he is going to do, and now by his might carries out what he decreed to do.” [13] All creatures are governed by God’s secret plan in such a way that nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by Him. [14] “God’s providence, therefore, [is] the determinative principle for all human plans and works not only to display its force in the elect, who are ruled by his Holy Spirit, but also compel the reprobate to obedience.” [15]

Election Is Particular

The decree is specific and particular; it concerns specific individuals. The decree does not concern some general concern on the part of God to save those who believe. Rather, it concerns individuals, not yet existent, whom God destines for eternal salvation. It determines and provides the means for the accomplishment of this end for each elect individual.

This view did not lead Calvin to individualism; he did not refer to individual election alone. He spoke also of national election of Israel—election to office in distinction from election to salvation. These other species or degrees of election do not necessarily involve salvation. Esau was part of the elect nation but broke covenant and showed that he was not elect unto salvation. Judas was of the elect nation and was elected to office, but was not elected to salvation. God not only offers salvation, but so assigns it that the certainty of its effect is not in doubt or suspense. [16] Not the whole nation of Israel but only the elect within the nation are engrafted into their Head, Jesus Christ, so they are never cut off. These elect are bound together in communion: “the Heavenly Father has gathered his elect together and has joined them to himself in indissoluble union.” [17]

Particular election brought with it the objection that God was then a respecter of persons. Calvin answered this by asserting that the Creator has sovereign right over His creation. There is nothing in a person as such that accounts for his election or reprobation. The elect to whom God shows mercy are as guilty as the reprobate. The reprobate are eventually condemned for their sins, but the sovereign act of God in preterition was not occasioned by their sin. With Augustine, Calvin said: “The Lord can give grace to whom he will…because he is merciful and not give to all because he is just judge. For by giving to some what they do not deserve…he can show his free grace…. By not giving to all, he can manifest what all deserve.” [18] Those elected are not more worthy than those rejected; it is a matter of God’s sovereignty alone. “God chooses some and passes over others according to his own decision….” If anyone seeks a further cause than God’s free sovereignty, “let them answer why they are men rather than oxen or asses….” [19] “O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?” (Rom. 9:20). The decree of election makes a distinction between men where there is none by nature, e.g., Jacob and Esau, Isaac and Ishmael. In free and sovereign election God gives freely and generously where no merit is present in the recipient.

The Cause And Ground Of Election

The principal cause, highest reason, and foundation of our election is God Himself—His sovereign will and good pleasure. The cause is not good works. Election is unto good works and does not arise out of good works (Eph. 1:4). Election was decreed before the foundation of the world, so the elect did not yet exist to perform good works. Thus neither is the cause foreknowledge of works. “We were all lost in Adam; and therefore, had not God, through his own election, rescued us from perishing by his own election, there was nothing to be foreseen.” [20] Election cannot be pushed beyond the bound of God’s good pleasure; otherwise man begins to wickedly investigate the causes of God’s will. His will alone is the cause of all things. “God will have us use such soberness that his bare will may suffice us for all reasons…. It is wisdom in us to do whatever God appointed and never ask why.” [21]

The ground is Christ. Calvin emphasized that sovereign election unto salvation is “election in Christ.” There is a basis or ground for this election. When Paul teaches that we were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, he takes away all worth on our part, “for it is just as if he said: since among the offspring of Adam the Heavenly Father found nothing worthy of his election, he turned his eyes upon his Anointed to choose from that body as members those whom he was to take into the fellowship of life.” [22] Election in Christ in no way minimized or altered the decretive character of divine election for Calvin. On the contrary, election in Christ sets forth the ground for this eternal divine decree, or its ‘material cause.’ [23] Election in Christ is second proof of the freedom of election. If we are chosen in Christ, then it is outside of ourselves. The Father views us in Christ and all merit that He sees in us comes from Christ alone. If we are elect in Christ, it follows that we are ourselves unworthy.

The Goal And Means Of Election

There is a twofold goal regarding election. The ultimate goal of election, according to Calvin, was the glory of God. This was the unique emphasis of both his teaching and his personal life. Soli Deo gloria was his well-known motto. In the Institutes, Calvin gave far more attention to the immediate goal of our election, which is the sanctification of the elect: “that we should be holy and without blame before him” (Eph. 1:4). That sanctification leads the believer to glorify his sovereign and gracious Lord. Divine election provides all of the means necessary to attain the goal of God’s sovereign purpose. Romans 8:29-30 provides the basic structure for these means by which God effectuates His eternal election: calling, justification, glorification. Election envelops the whole of the redemptive process from the eternal decree to its final accomplishment in glory. Election therefore ties in with the whole of soteriology and ultimately eschatology. This explains why Calvin places his discussion of predestination in Book III of his Institutes, where he deals with soteriology. It is in eschatology that soteriology ultimately terminates.

The means whereby God effects His decreed goal is through the preaching of the gospel. By divine command, the gospel must be preached to all, but not all will hear. Does the universal call of the gospel then conflict with particular election? Calvin answered carefully and scripturally. We may not say that the gospel is “effectually profitable to all.” [24] Relying on Augustine, Calvin explained how the gospel should be preached:

If anyone addresses the people in this way: “If you do not believe, the reason is that you have been divinely destined for destruction,” he not only fosters sloth but also gives place to evil intention. If anyone extends to the future also the statement that they who hear will not hear because they have been condemned, this will be cursing instead of teaching…. For as we know not who belongs to the number of the predestined or who does not, we ought to be so minded as to wish that all men be saved. So shall it come about that we try to make everyone a sharer in our peace…. It belongs to God to make that rebuke useful to those whom he…has foreknown and predestined. [25]

At the same time Calvin held that the preaching of the gospel, even for the reprobate, involves display of God’s “great benefit,” [26] or God’s common grace. A heavier judgment awaits the reprobate who have heard the gospel and rejected it than those who lived before the coming of Christ and never heard the gospel. Calvin referred to gospel preaching as streaming “forth from the wellspring of election.” [27] He explained: “The elect are gathered into Christ’s flock by a call not immediately at birth and not all at the same time but as it pleases God to dispense grace to them…but before they are gathered unto that supreme Shepherd they wander scattered in the wilderness common to all.”

Calvin further states that two errors need to be avoided concerning election and faith. The first error makes “man God’s co-worker to ratify election by his consent…for this makes man’s will superior to God’s.” [28] Man is not merely given the ability to believe; Scripture states that man is given faith itself (Eph. 2:8). The second error makes election dependent upon faith. Calvin states: “It is false to say that election takes effect only after we have embraced the gospel, and it takes its validity from this.” [29] Election is not doubtful and ineffectual until confirmed by faith. He did admit that election is confirmed “with respect to us,” sealed as it were with a seal, but we must not confuse cause with effect. The pipe through which the water runs must not be confused with the fountain from which it springs. Faith is fitly joined with election, provided it takes second place. [30]

Sovereign And Just Reprobation

Calvin admitted that reprobation raised questions that he could not answer, yet he felt compelled to defend the doctrine because Scripture requires it. Concerning Romans 9, he said “that hardening is in God’s hand and will just as much as mercy is…and Paul does not…labour anxiously, as do others to make false excuses in God’s defence.” [31] Calvin was thinking of those who accepted election but denied reprobation. Some of his friends, including fellow Reformers, urged him to soft-pedal the doctrine of reprobation.

The Divine Decree Of Reprobation

Calvin understood the eternal counsel of God as the expression of His sovereign will and purpose for the entire history of the world. Both His foreknowledge and His providence are rooted in His eternal counsel. Reprobation, as well as election, concerns the eternal decree or sovereign counsel of God.

Reprobation Involves God’s Decretive Work

We call predestination God’s eternal decree, by which he compacted with himself what he willed to become of each man. For not all are created in equal condition; rather, eternal life is foreordained for some, eternal damnation for others. Therefore, as any man has been created to one or the other of these ends, we speak of him as predestined to life or to death. [32] 

As Scripture, then, clearly shows, we say that God once established by his eternal and unchangeable plan those whom he long before determined once for all to receive into salvation, and those whom, on the other hand, He would devote to destruction. [33] 

Jacob is chosen and distinguished from the rejected Esau by God’s predestination, while not differing from him in merits. [34]

Calvin made no specific reference to the distinct persons of the Trinity in connection with reprobation as he did with election. He did, however, contend that Christ Himself taught this doctrine. “Now how will those who do not admit that God condemns them dispose of Christ’s statement: ‘Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up’?” [35] He also appealed to Romans, knowing that one clear passage of Scripture would not silence the opponents: “What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory…” (Rom. 9:22-23).

Reprobation Is Particular

For Calvin, reprobation, like election, concerns specific individuals. It does not refer to a general class of people, as the later Arminians contended. Esau is named in clear distinction from Jacob. But though the decree clearly refers to individuals, Calvin insisted that we by no means know who the reprobate are. We are to preach the gospel to all and desire the salvation of all to whom we preach; we need never fear that by so doing we contradict the will of God by which He sovereignly decreed to reprobate some. [36]

The Cause Of Reprobation

The Ultimate Cause Is Not Sin

This is the most common and apparently most simple explanation for the cause of reprobation. Election is aimed at producing good works that glorify God (Eph. 1:4); hence human works are excluded from consideration as the cause of election. With regard to reprobation, however, the sinful actions of men are related to the final condemnation that proceeds from a righteous God. Though Calvin emphasized the fact that no one is finally condemned who does not deserve that condemnation, he emphatically contended that sinful works are not the ultimate cause or basis for God’s eternal decree of reprobation. Romans 9 is crucial in his argument: “For as Jacob, deserving nothing by good works, is taken into grace, so Esau, as yet undefiled by any crime, is hated.” Calvin add: “Now it is proved that he did not see it, since he specifically emphasizes the point that when as they had yet done nothing good or evil, one was chosen and the other rejected.” [37] This goes to prove that the ultimate cause of divine predestination does not lie in works.

The Cause Is Not Foreknowledge Of Sin

Calvin also rejected this argument on biblical grounds. God foresees future events only by reason of the fact that He decreed that they should take place. Here Calvin refers to Proverbs 16:4: “Behold! Since the disposition of all things is in God’s hand, since the decision of salvation or of death rests in his power, he so ordains by his plan and will that among men and women some are born destined for certain death, who glorify his name by their own destruction…both life and death are acts of God’s will more than of His foreknowledge.” [38] God “not only foreknew it, but ordained it.” [39]

The Ultimate Cause Is God’s Sovereign Will

If the decree of reprobation does not have its foundation in the sinful works of those reprobated or in the divine foreknowledge of such works, then, according to Calvin, it must have its ultimate foundations in the decree of God. Does this not then make God unjust? In Romans 9, Esau is not condemned because of his sinful actions. Paul concludes from this that God has mercy on whom He pleases: “So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy” (Rom. 9:13). Therefore God has mercy on whom He wants to have mercy, and hardens whom He wants to harden. The apostle Paul attributes both to God’s decision alone. When it is said that God hardens or shows mercy to whom He wills, men are warned by this to seek no ultimate cause outside His will. [40] Calvin also puts it this way: “[T]hose whom God passes over (praeterit) he condemns (reprobat); he does this for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which He predestines (praedestinat) for his own children.” [41] What is the ultimate cause of God’s decree of reprobation?

According to Calvin, the answer is the sovereign good pleasure of God. No cause other than God’s sovereign will can be adduced. Calvin agreed with Plato who said that men who are troubled with lusts are in need of law; but the will of God is not only free of all faults but is the highest rule of perfection, the law of all laws. Calvin regarded God’s will as the highest rule of righteousness; whatever He wills, by the very fact that He wills it, must be considered righteous. When one asks why God has so done, we must reply because He has willed it. [42] When we ask why He has so willed it, we are seeking something higher than God’s will, which cannot be found. This is Calvin’s response to those who claim that God is unjust to hold us responsible for what He Himself has decreed. Yet God has supplied in His Word weapons against these objectors. Scripture makes it plain that God owes nothing to human beings, even less to those who are “vitiated by sin” and are all “odious to God.” [43]

The sovereignty of God’s will in reprobation could bring the objection that God is the author of sin. God so wills the reprobation of man without making Himself the author of sin yet without removing the sinner’s responsibility. Calvin fully admitted that God had willed Adam’s fall. He furthermore saw it as God’s decretive will and not merely His permission. God does not merely permit man to sin; He rules and overrules all the actions of the world with perfect and divine rectitude—even the sin of mankind is under His sovereign control. In other words, “man falls according as God’s providence ordains, but he falls by his own fault.” [44] How did Calvin respond to the charge that God’s decree of reprobation makes Him the author of sin? He was convinced that God’s will is the ultimate cause of all things and he was willing to leave the mystery there.

Calvin differentiated between the ultimate and proximate causes—God’s sovereign will is the ultimate cause of Adam’s fall and of reprobation, while human sin is the proximate cause. We are to examine what is clearly revealed, namely, man’s personal guilt, rather than seek to understand and scrutinize God’s will as the ultimate cause but which we cannot understand.

Some further points need to be made at this juncture. First, reprobation and election are equally ultimate in several ways. According to Calvin, the sovereign will of God is the ultimate cause of reprobation as it is of election. Human sin entered prominently into Calvin’s discussion of reprobation, but this he saw as the proximate cause, the ultimate cause being the will of God. Human responsibility for sin constitutes the judicial element of reprobation, namely, eternal damnation. Calvin urged his readers to look at the proximate cause or “evident cause of condemnation” because they could readily recognize and understand this. [45] God’s justice is apparent in His condemnation of the guilty unbeliever, but Calvin never allowed the proximate cause of reprobation (condemnation) to stand by itself. Compelled by the teaching of Scripture, he acknowledged that the ultimate or remote cause of reprobation is the sovereign will of God. However incomprehensible this is, he submitted to the authority of Scripture.

Second, reprobation and election are not completely parallel. Although the two are equally ultimate in the sense that the sovereign will of God is the ultimate cause of each, this does not mean, for Calvin, that they are in all respects parallel. While both election and reprobation are described as “sovereign” (indicating the co-ultimacy of the two), election is further described as “gracious” (gratuitous) and reprobation as “ just” (see Belgic Confession, Art. 16).

One of the most striking indications of the lack of parallelism is evident in Calvin’s insistence on distinguishing between the ultimate and proximate causes of reprobation. Human sinful action is the proximate cause of the condemnation aspect of reprobation, but Calvin never referred to it as even a proximate cause of election. The ground of election is Jesus Christ, and it is because of precisely this that nothing in anyone can ever be the ground of their election. With regard to reprobation, however, sinful human actions do come into the picture. Calvin did make a distinction between preterition and condemnation, but he did not regard sinful human action as the proximate cause of God’s sovereign passing by of some while electing others. This decision he credited solely to the freedom of God and His sovereign free will. It is not because of sinful actions that God decrees to pass some by with His grace. Works neither performed nor foreseen play any role as the proximate cause of the preterition aspect of reprobation. If this were the case, there would be no election.

Thus sin is the proximate cause of the condemnation aspect of reprobation alone. Said another way, condemnation, while sovereignly executed, is always the result of sin; “none undeservedly perish.” [46] The objects of God’s eternal election were unworthy of the grace He chose to give them, but God looked upon them in Christ. [47] In Calvin’s doctrine of reprobation there is no parallel to this key feature of election.

The Goal And Means Of Reprobation

As with election, the goal of reprobation, in Calvin’s thought, is the glory of God. [48] Romans 9 indicates that even reprobation has the glory of God as its goal. “The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil” (Prov. 16:4). Three complex factors work together in contributing to God’s glory: the eternal decree of God, the wickedness of man, and the final condemnation of the unbeliever by a just God. The complex interrelationship between these three factors led Calvin to acknowledge the mystery of it all.

Godly minds cannot “reconcile the two matters, that man when first made was set in such a position that by voluntarily falling he should be the cause of his own destruction and yet that it was so ordained by the admirable counsel of God, that this voluntary ruin to the human race should be the cause of humility.” [49]

Because God’s decree always includes the means for its effectuation, there is a parallel between decree and means with respect to both election and reprobation. Yet the relation of decree and means in reprobation is the “reverse” of what it is in election. In other words, God withholds from the reprobate what He gives to the elect. He enlightens the hearts of the elect by His Spirit while He abandons the reprobate and withholds His grace from them. Calvin recognized that there is diversity in the means that God uses to execute His plan of reprobation. Some people may be deprived of the privilege of hearing the gospel; to others, He transmits His doctrine wrapped in enigmas and they are cast into greater stupidity. God’s use of these various means does not eliminate or reduce human responsibility. Man remains accountable and culpable for his sin.

Conclusion

The doctrine of double predestination has never been and never will be popular. It was not personal preference that led Calvin to teach these doctrines, but truth gleaned from Scripture. The unpopularity of this humbling doctrine is due in part, perhaps, to the fact that people do not readily submit to the full teaching of Scripture. This is the key to Calvin’s doctrine of predestination. He sought faithfully to echo what he heard the Scriptures say. He was also fully aware that indiscreet proclamation of these doctrines could lead to problems; that is why he said, “but I am not unaware that prudence should be shown in tempering everything to the building up of faith.” Even this, however, is not enough to lessen man’s rejection of this unpopular doctrine. Calvin adds: “But as I have studied in good faith to do just this, even…the niceties of some are not yet satisfied….” It is indeed a great challenge to any minister of the Word to preach this doctrine graciously, without detracting from its full scriptural import.

Notes

1. John Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism: Treatises on the Eternal Predestination of God and the secret Providence of God (Grand Rapids: RFPA), 27.
2. Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism, 28.
3. Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism, 45.
4. Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism, 157-86.
5. Fred H. Klooster, Calvin’s Doctrine of Predestination, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1977), 20ff. The writer is indebted to Dr. Klooster for very valuable insights into Calvin’s development of the doctrine of predestination.
6. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. Mc Neill, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960), 3.21.5.
7. John Calvin, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1993), 203.
8. Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.2.
9. Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.7.
10. Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.7.
11. Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.5.
12. Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.7.
13. Calvin, Institutes, 1.16.8.
14. Calvin, Institutes, 1.16.3.
15. Calvin, Institutes, 1.18.2.
16. Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.7.
17. Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.7.
18. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.11.
19. Calvin, Institutes, 3.24.17.
20. Ephesians (on 1:4), The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 125.
21. John Calvin, Sermons on the Epistles of Paul to Timothy and Titus (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1983), 703.
22. Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.1.
23. Calvin, Ephesians, 127.
24. Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.10.
25. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.14. Emphasis mine.
26. Calvin, Institutes, 3.24.12.
27. Calvin, Institutes, 3.24.1.
28. Calvin, Institutes, 3.24.3.
29. Calvin, Institutes, 3.24.3.
30. Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.10.
31. Calvin, Institutes, 3.24.1.
32. Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.5.
33. Calvin, Institutes, 3.21.7.
34. Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.6.
35. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.1.
36. Calvin, Institutes, 3.24.13.
37. Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.11.
38. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.6.
39. Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism, 199.
40. Calvin, Institutes, 3.22.11.
41. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.1. Cf. Calvin, Romans (on 9:11).
42. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.2.
43. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.3.
44. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.8.
45. Calvin, Institutes, 3.23.8.
46. Calvin, Institutes, 3.24.12.
47. Calvin, Institutes, 3.24.12.
48. Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism, 97.
49. Calvin, Calvin’s Calvinism, 98.