The reason I'm pressing you on the quote you used from Edwards is because I know how that quote ends. Here is Edwards words in context:
“They who object, that this doctrine makes God the author of sin, ought distinctly to explain what they mean by that phrase, ‘the author of sin.’ I know the phrase, as it is commonly used, signifies something very ill. If by ‘the author of sin,’ be meant ‘the sinner, the agent,’ or ‘actor of sin,’ or ‘the doer of a wicked thing’; so it would be a reproach and blasphemy, to suppose God to be the author of sin. In this sense, I utterly deny God to be the author of sin.
But if, by ‘the author of sin,’ is mean the permitter, or not a hinderer of sin; and, at the same time, a disposer of the state of events, in such a manner, for wise, holy, and most excellent ends and purposes, that sin, if it be permitted or not hindered, will most certainly and infallibly follow: I say, if this be all that is meant, by being the author of sin, I do not deny that God is the author of sin (though I dislike and reject the phrase, as that which by use and custom is apt to carry another sense). And, I do not deny, that God being thus the author of sin, follows from what I have laid down; and, I assert, that it equally follows from the doctrine which is maintained by most of the Arminian divines.
Notice that last line? That means that Edwards view lines up with Arminian scholars, which is exactly what I said. Remember?
This is why I continue to refer to Edwards view as being the same as mine in this regard, while you continue to read your interpretation (whatever that is) into his quotes. I say "whatever that is" not in jest, but in sincere frustration because I don't know what your view is since you refuse to define your terms.
Anyway, I know this is a difficult subject and I don't blame you if you want to move on to another topic. The issue of divine culpability is definitely the most uncomfortable subject for those of the Calvinist persuasion.
