The following, while a meme, is (1) an accurate extrapolation of comments from his recent debate with Kwaku El and (2) one of the many logical results of holding to the anti-biblical theology of Calvinism:
To be fair to Aaron “the yellow” Shafovaloff, he is being consistent with John Calvin, who, in his Institutes of the Christian Religion 1.18.1, responding to those who claimed sins are merely "permitted" by God in His decree (e.g., rapes; murders) instead argued that God actively decreed them from the eternal past:
1. From other passages, in which God is said to draw or bend Satan himself, and all the reprobate, to his will, a more difficult question arises. For the carnal mind can scarcely comprehend how, when acting by their means, he contracts no taint from their impurity, nay, how, in a common operation, he is exempt from all guilt, and can justly condemn his own ministers. Hence a distinction has been invented between doing and permitting because to many it seemed altogether inexplicable how Satan and all the wicked are so under the hand and authority of God, that he directs their malice to whatever end he pleases, and employs their iniquities to execute his Judgments. The modesty of those who are thus alarmed at the appearance of absurdity might perhaps be excused, did they not endeavour to vindicate the justice of God from every semblance of stigma by defending an untruth. It seems absurd that man should be blinded by the will and command of God, and yet be forthwith punished for his blindness. Hence, recourse is had to the evasion that this is done only by the permission, and not also by the will of God. He himself, however, openly declaring that he does this, repudiates the evasion. That men do nothing save at the secret instigation of God, and do not discuss and deliberate on any thing but what he has previously decreed with himself and brings to pass by his secret direction, is proved by numberless clear passages of Scripture. What we formerly quoted from the Psalms, to the effect that he does whatever pleases him, certainly extends to all the actions of men. If God is the arbiter of peace and war, as is there said, and that without any exception, who will venture to say that men are borne along at random with a blind impulse, while He is unconscious or quiescent? But the matter will be made clearer by special examples. From the first chapter of Job we learn that Satan appears in the presence of God to receive his orders, just as do the angels who obey spontaneously. The manner and the end are different, but still the fact is, that he cannot attempt anything without the will of God. But though afterwards his power to afflict the saint seems to be only a bare permission, yet as the sentiment is true, “The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; as it pleased the Lord, so it has been done,” we infer that God was the author of that trial of which Satan and wicked robbers were merely the instruments. Satan’s aim is to drive the saint to madness by despair. The Sabeans cruelly and wickedly make a sudden incursion to rob another of his goods. Job acknowledges that he was deprived of all his property, and brought to poverty, because such was the pleasure of God. Therefore, whatever men or Satan himself devise, God holds the helm, and makes all their efforts contribute to the execution of his Judgments. God wills that the perfidious Ahab should be deceived; the devil offers his agency for that purpose, and is sent with a definite command to be a lying spirit in the mouth of all the prophets (2 Kings 22:20). If the blinding and infatuation of Ahab is a Judgment from God, the fiction of bare permission is at an end; for it would be ridiculous for a judge only to permit, and not also to decree, what he wishes to be done at the very time that he commits the execution of it to his ministers. The Jews purposed to destroy Christ. Pilate and the soldiers indulged them in their fury; yet the disciples confess in solemn prayer that all the wicked did nothing but what the hand and counsel of God had decreed (Acts 4:28), just as Peter had previously said in his discourse, that Christ was delivered to death by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God (Acts 2:23); in other words, that God, to whom all things are known from the beginning, had determined what the Jews had executed. He repeats the same thing elsewhere, “Those things, which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he has so fulfilled,” (Acts 4:18). Absalom incestuously defiling his father’s bed, perpetrates a detestable crime. God, however, declares that it was his work; for the words are, “Thou midst it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun.” The cruelties of the Chaldeans in Judea are declared by Jeremiah to be the work of God. For which reason, Nebuchadnezzar is called the servant of God. God frequently exclaims, that by his hiss, by the clang of his trumpet, by his authority and command, the wicked are excited to war. He calls the Assyrian the rod of his anger, and the axe which he wields in his hand. The overthrow of the city and downfall of the temple, he calls his own work. David, not murmuring against God, but acknowledging him to be a just judge, confesses that the curses of Shimei are uttered by his orders. “The Lord,” says he, “has bidden him curse.” Often in sacred history whatever happens is said to proceed from the Lord, as the revolt of the ten tribes, the death of Eli’s sons, and very many others of a similar description. Those who have a tolerable acquaintance with the Scriptures see that, with a view to brevity, I am only producing a few out of many passages, from which it is perfectly clear that it is the merest trifling to substitute a bare permission for the providence of God, as if he sat in a watch-tower waiting for fortuitous events, his Judgments meanwhile depending on the will of man.
One should compare the above from Calvin with the following from the 1647 Westminster Confession of Faith:
Our first parents, being seduced by the subtilty and temptation of Satan, sinned in eating the forbidden fruit. This their sin God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory. (6:1)
Aaron is being consistent with his Calvinism. The problem for Aaron (and other Calvinists) is that their theology is anti-biblical, notwithstanding the eisegesis Aaron engages in frequently (cf. my review of his 2018 debate with Kwaku, Review of Kwaku El (LDS) vs. Aaron Shafovaloff (Reformed) Debate: Does God Have Glory that He Will Not Share?)
For more on the anti-biblical nature of Reformed theology, see:
For more on the anti-biblical nature of Reformed theology, see:
An Examination and Critique of the Theological Presuppositions Underlying Reformed Theology (one also includes an exegesis of Gen 50:20, a favourite "proof-text" by Reformed apologists to support compatibilism).
Calvinism is the "Planned Parenthood" of false religions--not only is it anti-biblical, it results in spiritual murder and destruction by its originators (Calvin; Beza; Westminster Divines, etc) and apologists (e.g., Shafovaloff; Durbin; White; Bowman; Zins).
Update: Aaron has been trying to engage in some "damage control" by claiming it is unethical to create this meme and the like. I will urge one to watch this video by Kwaku El where he reproduces the relevant sections of the debate.
Further Update: I believe Kwaku is the creator of this meme (which again, is an extrapolation of what Aaron said in this debate). Aaron thinks I created it (I can't meme to save my life)--I got it from Kwaku (I am assuming he was the creator). However, I decided to update the meme to reflect it is a summary of Aaron's theology (an accurate summary, I will note).