I still think that you're getting off on a side road. Does God control EVERY SINGLE HUMAN ACTION or does He NOT? It's a really simple question.
I don't think so, and follow with me a short paragraph:
It is, and the answer is that nothing is 'out' of His control. He isn't just a manager of a plant, for instance. He is God very God. "Instead we ought to say 'if the Lord wills'" is an important verse. "Who can resist His will?" in Romans 9. In short, I think the side roads and discussion 'qualify' control. Air traffic control does control planes, but it takes pilots. We want to know instead, in what way they 'control' planes then. God does control and has complete control of us. It does not mean it is exercised as if He is the pilot. It means He guides and gives instructions.
Like you, I very much believe scripture that God is good, and doesn't tempt anyone, and is desirous that all men come to Him through Christ. Like you, I believe in a will that is able to do other than God asks/demands. Such necessarily means that 'control' is loose in the sense that air traffic is control in a similar sense. It is control but, with you, not over every single action else there is no need for further instructions like our Bible. Maybe a better word for 'control.' God has the option to take over a plane and completely negate pilots that He does not exercise, thus He 'has' or 'has the option' of complete control which does make Him in 'complete' control like the master chess player analogy. I still think, on TOL, for many years, we were always arguing over semantics rather than over the full theological content. I think, all along, we had to agree on every scripture we held to, we just were (likely) talking past each other.
So... back to the question.... Does God control EVERY SINGLE HUMAN ACTION or does He NOT?
No. Not like you and conversely a double-pred Calvinist means. No.
Ok, you again you seem to be agreeing that God does NOT control every single human action.
Correct.
But our resident Calvinists believe that some people are accountable to God for actions that they have NO CONTROL over.
Right, we assumed control of even more than we were given at the Fall. It is because we are inept, unable, and negligent, that we need a Savior.
It still is difficult with semantics: Is it more accurate to say "God took control to save us" or "God exercised His control to save us"? In such, did He 'have' control already as God and Sovereign, or did He 'take' up a control that we alternately had and took? I 'think' answering these and qualifying the terms has at least everybody following, if not all yet in agreement on what was going on in us and God for the pertinent discussion of our Salvation and our walk with our Savior (among a few other important notes).
There are a least two Calvinists here that think that God controls EVERY SINGLE HUMAN ACTION, including causing people to sin. They also think that God somehow holds people accountable for actions over which they had NO CONTROL. They blaspheme the Lord as someone that will punish people unjustly.
You are correct and I think they take 'control' and 'within His complete control' to mean pilots never land a plane. It is where the 'robot' accusation against Calvinists has always come in.
This is why I've tried to spend time discussion terms and the implications of them. I'm fairly sure that our definition of words, held differently in our heads within scripture contexts, is often culprit. Granted some will believe God really is the author of sin. That is a definition of 'control' that most of us cannot embrace. There is every sense of autonomy of some sort given in our Imago Deo. At the beginning, I'd always said that 'Free" will was not given at creation, not in the sense that it led to sin, but having talked over this on TOL over the years, there is indeed a sense that we are 'like' God in our actions at the beginning of Creation such that there is a sense of 'autonomy' like naming the animals and instructions to continue.
These two or more Calvinists need to read the rest of God's word and wrestle over that, as I did. There is every indication in Genesis that man was autonomous (qualified as is "control" in these discussions) to carry out instructions. I guess a robot could do the same, but in that sense, a robot also works autonomously. My computer works autonomously when I'm not there, doing updates, running virus checkers, posting reminders, etc. It cannot have a relationship with me, but Siri, Google, Cortana, and Alexa try. We obviously aren't as good as God at making independent thinking entities. I cannot even make my dog do tricks when he doesn't want to do so. Calvinists need to see that God has made man in some senses, 'free.' Sin caused a further gap in that autonomy and that was/is always the part I want to be careful about when discussing and qualifying being self-aware somewhat autonomous beings. I do think we (at least me anyway) will always need to have a paragraph when discussing the "free" of freewill because the term alone, until everyone is on page and agrees and this is all talked out and remembered, will always be vague for discussion point, as is 'robot' and 'control.'
Thanks for the discussion. Even if nobody listens, I do think the content 'can' draw denominations together in mutual understandings and at the very least, have a good grasp on what is needed for discussion. I imagine councils of old needing to go this way and discuss theology and ensure a God-honoring statement between members. In Him -Lon