More Calvin on Permission...

As you can see there is quite a bit of material from Calvin's Institutes whereby we may clearly discern his mind in the area of God & evil. As has been shown in the previous articles Calvin was no friend to the idea of Permission and we shall continue with more selections from his writings here.  The careful reader might have observed that in the previous citation Calvin did indeed use the term 'permitted' with respect to the activity of Satan and the reprobate. Let us examine this here and see whether or not Calvin engaged in self contradiction!  Here is the continuation of the citation from
Book 1; chap 18;  section 2;

    I admit, indeed, that God often acts in the reprobate by interposing the agency of Satan; but in such a manner, that Satan himself performs his part, just as he is impelled, and succeeds only in so far as he is permitted.

Does Calvin mean to contradict himself here by telling us that Satan goes only so far as God 'permits' him to? He just finished telling us that, in the light of God's sovereign activity & control with respect to the evil that takes place, the answer of Permission, says Calvin, is  "altogether inadmissible".  Is Calvin then reneging on himself & teaching Permission after all?  Hardly.  It must be carefully observed that Calvin was in the midst of delivering a clear refutation of the idea of Permission in these sections. It would be completely out of character for him to engage in what amounts to self contradiction. His use of the word was not meant to exclude the sovereign activity of God in the actions of His creatures for Calvin tells us that this is indicative of God's  "acting IN the reprobate'!  Again this language hardly conveys the idea of Permission. Why then did Calvin use the word Permit here? In reading the context it can easily be seen that Calvin's use of it was meant to convey the very Biblical idea of second causation.  We see this plainly as we continue in this pericope.  Notice;

    The evil spirit that troubled Saul is said to be from the Lord, (1 Sam. 16:14,) to intimate that Saul's madness was a just punishment from God. Satan is also said to blind the minds of those who believe not, (2 Cor. 4:4.) But how so, unless that a spirit of error is sent  from God himself, making those who refuse to obey the truth to believe a lie?

Here Calvin makes reference to the following passage of Scripture... which is most troubling to many...

2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
 12  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Language such as this can hardly be understood in terms of Permission ladies & gentlemen! This passages teaches in no uncertain terms that it was the intention of God to damn people for their sins of unbelief & hedonism.  In order to execute His intentions it is said that God 'sends' people a strong delusion! The word for 'send' is used upwards of 80 times & nowhere ever conveys the idea of Permission. It is translated in the NT as..

- send (77 times)
- thrust in (2)
- again send (2)

It's basic meaning is the following;
  1) to send
  1a) to bid a thing to be carried to one
  1b) to send (thrust or insert) a thing into another

And in the 2Thes passage it is in the active voice folks! This passage no way teaches God 'permitting' something.  Rather it teaches that God 'actively sends' people a strong delusion to the intent that they would believe a lie! The purpose for which God engages in such an activity is so that these people might enter into damnation. This entire scenario  was intended by God... on purpose.  Wherefore then Permission? God is here said to deceive people on purpose & for a purpose;  not by way of Permission.  This is precisely what John Calvin has in mind in this section.  The idea that God actively deceives people on purpose.  We can know for sure that this was indeed Calvin's meaning because he goes on to cite one of the most powerful verses in the OT that conveys this in no uncertain terms.  Notice as Calvin continues;

  According to the former view, it is said, "If the prophet be deceived when he has spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet," (Ezek. 14:9.)

Here is the full verse;
Eze 14:9 And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the  LORD have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him,  and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.

Hence we see that it was Calvin's intention to show forth the deceiving activity of the living God... not some sort of Permission!
One cannot possibly arrive at any idea of Permission in these passages.  Calvin then was not repudiating his entire thesis against Permission simply because he happened to use the word 'permitted'. To make such a conclusion  is to miss Calvin's meaning.  But let us now conclude this section by noticing especially Calvin's final remark;

  According to the latter view,  he is said to have given men over to a reprobate mind, (Rom. 1:28,) because he is the special author of his own just vengeance; whereas Satan is only his minister, (see Calv. in Ps. 141: 4.) But as in the Second Book, (Chap. 4: sec. 3, 4,) in discussing the question of man's freedom, this subject will again be considered, the little that has now been said seems to be all that the occasion requires. The sum of the whole is this, - since the will of God is said to be the cause of all things, all the counsels and actions of men must be held to be governed by his providence; so that he not only exerts his power in the elect, who are guided by the Holy Spirit, but also forces the reprobate to do him service.

God... says John Calvin... *forces* the reprobate to 'do him service'!  Calvin most assuredly did not believe that God...  'Permits' evil!
 

Theodicy
Prove  All  Things