"Rude" does not even begin to describe it, POARW, but I will answer you anyway...this time.
If by "author" you mean to say "God is responsible", you would be incorrect, for responsibility assumes accountability. God is not accountable to anyone, hence is not responsible. If by "author" you mean just as Shakesphere is the author of the play, the writer of history in which characters within that drama play out according to what the "author" wrote, then yes, God is the "author".
In Macbeth, who killed King Duncan? Shakesphere or Macbeth?
One could argue they both did...at different levels of reality. But when we look at the way we use language, we find the language that we typically use in such contexts as this one, it seems clear to me that we would not normally say that Shakespeare killed Duncan. Yes, Shakespeare wrote the murder into his play. But the murder took place in the world of the play, not the real world of the author. Macbeth did it, not Shakespeare. We sense the rightness of Macbeth paying for his crime. But we would certainly consider it very unjust if Shakespeare were tried and put to death for killing Duncan. And no one suggests that there is any problem in reconciling Shakespeare’s benevolence with his omnipotence over the world of the drama. Indeed, there is reason for us to praise Shakespeare for raising up this character, Macbeth, to show us the consequences of sin.
The difference between levels, then, may have moral, as well as metaphysical, significance. It may explain why the biblical writers, who do not hesitate to say that God brings about sin and evil, do not accuse him of wrongdoing. The relationship between God and us, of course, is different in some respects from that between an author and his characters. Most significantly, we are real and Macbeth is not. But between God and us there is a vast difference in the kind of reality and in relative status. God is the absolute controller of and authority over nature and history. He is the lawgiver, and we receive his laws. He is the head of the covenant; we are the servants. He has devised the creation for his own glory; we seek his glory, rather than our own. He makes us as the potter makes pots, for his own purposes. He has many rights and prerogatives we do not. Do these differences not put God in a different moral category as well? (see addendum below for more on this point)
The transcendence of God plays a significant role in biblical responses to the problem of evil. Because God is who he is, the covenant Lord, he is not required to defend Himself against charges of injustice. He is the judge, and we are not. Very often in Scripture, when something happens that calls God’s goodness into question, He pointedly refrains from explaining. In fact, He often rebukes those people who question him. Simply put, God is not subject to the ignorant evaluations of his creatures, like you and I!
Now you have your answer.
Lastly, for the above example, I am indebted to Wayne Grudem, who suggested the Shakesphere analogy in his Systematic Theology.
AMR
addendum:
To say God is in a different moral category is not to adopt the view of Gordon H. Clark, who argued that God, being above the moral law, is not subject to it. Certainly God has some prerogatives that he forbids to us, such as the freedom to take human life. But, for the most part, the moral laws that God imposes upon us are grounded in his own character. For example, see Ex. 20:11; Lev. 11:44–45; Matt. 5:45; 1 Pet. 1:15–16. God will not violate his own character. Yet, what Scripture clearly teaches is that man has sufficient understanding of God’s character and his eternal plan (not to mention sufficient authority) to bring accusations against him. Hence, I am within the teaching of Scripture to assert that God has ordained evil, for He must have a morally sufficient purpose for so doing. You, on the other hand, have no warrant to assign the sin of His creatures directly to God Himself. You may poorly reason your way to that conclusion. You are entitled to your opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.
