I confess it is a horrible decree; yet no one can deny but God foreknew Adams fall, and therefore foreknew it, because he had ordained it so by his own decree.
(Calv. Inst., b. 3, c. 23, sec. 7.)
God of his own good pleasure ordains that many should be born, who are from the womb devoted to inevitable damnation. If any man pretend that Gods foreknowledge lays them under no necessity of being damned, but rather that he decreed their damnation because he foreknew their wickedness, I grant that Gods foreknowledge alone lays no necessity on the creature; but eternal life and death depend on the will rather than the foreknowledge of God. If God only foreknew all things that relate to all men, and did not decree and ordain them also, then it might be inquired whether or no his foreknowledge necessitates the thing foreknown. But seeing he therefore foreknows all things that will come to pass, because he has decreed they shall come to pass, it is vain to contend about foreknowledge, since it so plain all things come to pass by Gods positive decree.
(Ibid., c. 23, s. 6.)
The devil and wicked men are so held in on every side with the hand of God, that they cannot conceive, or contrive, or execute any mischief, any farther than God himself doth not permit only, but command. Nor are they only held in fetters, but compelled also, as with a bridle, to perform obedience to those commands.
(Calv. Inst., b. 1, c. 17, s. 11.)
Once one accepts Calvin's logic, which one is by no means constrained to do, one must find innumerable ways to make plainly stated scriptural passages mean something radically different than what they plainly state--simply to make them become somewhat consistent with the extra-Biblical logic of a human conceptual scheme. One must also devise various ways to reinterpret common human experience to fit the logic even though it contradicts what we know; such as this: God has his secret will by which he has decreed that someone will be doomed to hell. Because that person has been, by the decree of God, reprobate, he is impelled to sin. But the revealed will of God says that man should choose to follow righteousness and not sin. From the human's point of view he finds himself violating that revealed will of God, and that violation is sin and, from the standpoint of the revealed will of God, God is spared the charge of having compelled the sin which, according to the hidden will of God, was the way he had laid out throughout all eternity for that human to act regardless of what that person happened to believe (for that matter, all his thoughts as well as actions are preordained as well). The human's final perdition is not because he sinned, but because God had ordained, in a way independent of foreknowledge, that he would be. The sin was, for the final state, merely an attendant circumstance, though one decreed and brought to pass by the hidden will of God*.
Thus, the living word of God is either stretched or chopped back to fit on the Procrustean bed of systematic theology.
*"Nor, nevertheless, does it follow that God unjustly complains of men when they sin, though they do nothing but what God wishes to be done by them. For, first, that distinction is to be kept in mind between God's secret will (called voluntas beneplacti) which is always done, and his revealed will (called voluntus signi) which is to us the rule of life and action. And, secondly, it is to be remarked, that the sins of men are to be judged, not by the secret, but by the revealed will of God. Therefore, though man, when he sins, does only what God by his secret and most just will has ordained, nevertheless he cannot be excused, because he acts in opposition to the revealed will of God, which he knows to be the rule of duty" (Thesis 7 de Reprobationa)., p. 571).
I would agree that they sinned because God created the conditions necessary for them to surely sin, but I'm not sure I'm on board with the idea of God giving a command. I see no command given and no command obeyed. IMO, in the way we use the words today there can be no obedience without a known command given and a known command followed. I know that seems to disagree with your Calvin quotes, but I think I am just coming at the issue from a different angle than he is. But Calvin and I would surely agree that whatever God wants, God gets and in one form or another He ordains. All that happens is ultimately to His glory.
Even Calvin recognized the horror of this position: I confess it is a horrible decree; yet no one can deny but God foreknew Adams fall, and therefore foreknew it, because he had ordained it so by his own decree. (Calv. Inst., b. 3, c. 23, sec. 7.)
I don't know if it's so horrible in the big picture, for by this decree the need for Christ was born. How's that for optimistic!? :) God obviously wanted our brief existence in this world to be like ......... THIS. So, next to eternity whatever little problems and trials we have here are nothing.
Calvin is right that "eternal life and death depend on the will rather than the foreknowledge of God". As the Creator, that is God's decision to make. If God passed the buck on those decisions, it would show He doesn't care.
Because that person has been, by the decree of God, reprobate, he is impelled to sin. But the revealed will of God says that man should choose to follow righteousness and not sin.
The revealed will of God is revealed only to the elect, not to the reprobate, so this makes perfect sense vis-a-vis Calvin. There is no contradiction.
The human's final perdition is not because he sinned, but because God had ordained, in a way independent of foreknowledge, that he would be.
That's just an artificial transfer of responsibility away from the actual sinner onto God. That is improper UNLESS the commentator can show a duty on God to prevent the sin. God can ordain that something DOES happen through the negative, by NOT doing something. Critics then blame God for what God DIDN'T do, but where I think they come up short is in explaining why God had a duty to act in the first place.