Quote
B57 quotes R.C. Sproul saying,

R.C sproul says in a statement under foreordination to reprobation

Theoretically He could know of a future act without ordaining it,
B57, WHERE is the term AUTHOR in Sproul’s statement? There is a difference between being the AUTHOR of something and ORDAINING something. I can ORDAIN that all heretics will be banned from this board, however, one of the other moderators in fact may be the actual AUTHOR of the banning. Now if you would have read the rest of R.C. Sproul’s article you would have discovered a very interesting paragraph or three:

Quote
This distortion of positive-positive predestination clearly makes God the author of sin who punishes a person for doing what God monergistically and irresistibly coerces man to do. Such a view is indeed a monstrous assault on the integrity of God. This is not the Reformed view of predestination, but a gross and inexcusable caricature of the doctrine. Such a view may be identified with what is often loosely described as hyper-Calvinism and involves a radical form of supralapsarianism. Such a view of predestination has been virtually universally and monolithically rejected by Reformed thinkers. …

If God, when He is decreeing reprobation, does so in consideration of the reprobate's being already fallen, then He does not coerce him to sin. To be reprobate is to be left in sin, not pushed or forced to sin. If the decree of reprobation were made without a view to the fall, then the objection to double predestination would be valid and God would be properly charged with being the author of sin. But Reformed theologians have been careful to avoid such a blasphemous notion. Berkouwer states the boundaries of the discussion clearly: “God's decree of reprobation, given in light of the fall, is a decree to justice, not injustice. In this view the biblical a priori that God is neither the cause nor the author of sin is safeguarded.…

Though this writer favors the infralapsarian view along the lines developed by Turrettini, it is important to note that both views see election and reprobation in light of the fall and avoid the awful conclusion that God is the author of sin.

Double Predestination by R. C. Sproul
One wonders why you did not quote as Paul Harvey use to say, "The rest of the story?" Were you being purposely misleading or did you just forget? Must you use deception to make your points? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" />

Though I am sure Pilgrim will reply to you, you state Eph 5:8 as a defense and then comment ever so briefly saying, “Notice that he said you were darkness , not in darkness ! God creates the reprobated.” But, whom is Paul speaking about; pre-fall man or post-fall man? Post-fall man of course. Man is in darkness because of sin for which he is responsible (see my post on Privation of the Good).

Reformed and Always Reforming,