A popular objection to reprobation is that God creates the reprobate for the purpose of damning them. I don't recall ever seeing an Arminian explain the process of reasoning by which he arrives at that conclusion. It's just one of many village Arminian objections to Calvinism. However, I'm guessing the unstated argument goes something like this:
i) According to Calvinism, everyone in hell was predestined to go there.
ii) The final state of a creature or artifact is the purpose for which it was made.
iii) When a person ends up in hell, then according to Calvinism, God made him for the purpose of damning him.
Assuming that's the argument, is that a valid inference? (i) is correct. But the wheels come off with (ii) the minor premise. That confounds a temporal end with a teleological ends. To take a few examples:
It's like saying: if broken coffeemakers wind up in the junkyard, then they were made for the purpose of going to the junkyard.
But, of course, that's a ridiculous inference. They were designed to make coffee.
Likewise, if the final destination of an automobile is the junkyard, that doesn't mean it was made for that reason.
By the same token, suppose the CIA plants a bomb on a terrorist courier, then detonates the bomb by remote control when the courier enters terrorist headquarters, thereby killing the upper echelon of the terrorist organization. Although getting blown up is the last thing that happens to the courier, the CIA didn't' plant a bomb on the courier in order to kill him, but to kill the upper echelon of the terrorist organization. Killing the courier wasn't the goal, but the means to that end. (Of course, as a terrorist courier, he got his comeuppance.)
The reprobate have a purpose to serve before they die.