Gregg Caruso: “If you think people possess Free Will, then you believe they justly deserve to be blamed and praised for their actions.”
Gregg Caruso: “Well, we can say the same thing for dangerous criminals, that is, even if you adopted the perspective that I’m advocating, and you believe that individuals are not ultimately responsible for becoming who they are, we could still justify detaining those individuals for the safety of society.” (emphasis mine)
Gregg Caruso: “And lastly, if you’re someone like myself, and you think it’s the causal circumstances that drive these behaviors in the first place, then Free Will Skeptics would put their money, their resources, and their focus on addressing the systemic causes that lead to criminality, wealth inequality, educational inequity. So instead of blaming people and punishing them on the tail end, you would try to prevent the criminal behavior in the first place.” (emphasis mine)
If criminals are not “ultimately responsible” for their behavior, and their malicious behavior is a factor of “wealth inequality” and “educational inequity,” then maybe sinners are not ultimately responsible for their sins, and God’s form of eternal justice is as equally broken as our own, since God would have otherwise failed to address the “systemic causes,” by blessing all men more equitably. However, America’s flaws are neither educational nor financial, but moral, as the corrective approach from TED would net an equally corrupt society, merely exchanging blue collar crimes for white collar crimes, as true conversion is independent of either education or wealth. America is not suffering from a lack of equitable Socialism, but a lack of hunger for God.
Evolutionists deny Free Will, because they believe that all of our flaws are biologically based, being genetically predetermined, and thus we are the sum of our genes. Therefore, the solution to our flaws would need to cater to our biological needs. However, if you unwind the Evolutionist’s views on God, then their views on Free Will must change also, and if there is a God, and God has a Hell (even despite a disproportionate number of detainees), the conclusion must be because they had Free Will, and could have done otherwise.
Hell therefore makes no sense in pure Calvinism, being similarly deterministic, in which Hell reflects the flawed expectations for man to have done otherwise, or is simply God’s delight in punishing those without Free Will, and couldn’t have done otherwise. Universalism is therefore the only way for Calvinists to salvage the fundamental goodness of God, as a more equitable distribution of divine remedies.