On Facebook, Jerry Walls recently said:
To me it is as clear as any moral intuition I have that not even a good God, let alone a perfectly good God, could determine people to sin and then consign them to eternal misery for their sin.
Let's compare that to another Arminian intuition: Calvinism reduces humans to robots.
Let's grant both these "intuitions" for the sake of argument. Now let's combine them:
To me it is as clear as any moral intuition I have that not even a good God, let alone a perfectly good God, could determine robots to sin and then consign them to eternal misery for their sin.
Problem is, it's hard to see how these two claims mesh. Presumably, Arminians think robots lack one or more essential human properties. Robots aren't real people. To be real people, they must have moral agency. And moral agency requires libertarian freedom. To be real people, they must be free to choose or to withhold love. In fact, according to Arminians, only free agents can truly sin.
But if robots aren't real people, then what's so bad about determining them to do wrong, then consigning them to everlasting hell for wrongdoing?
What they did was objectively wrong, but it wasn't subjectively wrong, for they lack that subjective dimension. That first-person perspective.
If a robot isn't a real person, you can't wrong a robot. It's just a machine. At best, a deluded machine. It may suppose it's human, because it's been programmed to think that, but because it isn't human, it can never know what it's like–really like–to be human. It lacks human experience from the inside out.