"People enter hell trough no fault of their own" is true.

Background- I am taking the con/against side for this debate, and personally, I do believe that there is a real concept of heaven and hell, and I believe that the definition of justice provided by the Christian religion does not contradict the idea of a loving and just God, unlike my opponent. Through this debate, I will try to provide a non-theological and pragmatic argument; however, in reference to the basic idea of the nature of the Christian God, and other such points, I will go to a more theological argument. Opening Statement- I would like to start off by stating that I understand the axioms provided and will try to use these words as defined. First, I understand that you are using the idea of “randomness” and all of these things are just taking place by chance and that people are by chance doing “evil things beyond their control”. By this, it is my understanding that you mean things like deaths, births, car accidents, etc. I would like to take out the word “randomness” from this argument because of a theory called Causal determinism, which is the theory that every event has a cause. If there is a cause for the event, and effects are found after it, then nothing is really “random” because something had to cause it. By definition, “random” means proceeding, made or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern (Dictionary.com). Nothing proceeds as “random” because of how life proceeds on after events happen, when something had to happen for the event to occur. For example, a car accident. If a car got T-boned leaving a driveway, a cause for the crash could be a driver forgot to look back at the oncoming lane before merging into traffic, and so an oncoming driver could not stop in time and hit the other driver due to his error of pulling out in front of him when he forgot to look back at the oncoming lane. Therefore, let’s be cautious when using the word. So, with this in mind, I believe people are responsible for their actions. We, as human beings, have free will to do what we want, when we want, if we so chose to do so. One may respond, but what about the law? And in that, I would say you don’t have to follow it if you didn’t want to. However, if you break the law, you will face the punishment, or justice will be served, due to your transgression. Let’s look at the Christian Religion for a second. In the Bible, the compilation of books (the Bible is not a traditional book with chapters, but a compilation of 66 books written by 40 authors, on 3 continents over a span of 1,500 years all basically telling the same story of God’s love, God’s law, what happened to the transgressors of said law, and the story of Jesus and his place in God’s “plan”. Look it up) that the Christian religion uses as the basis for its organization and beliefs, is a set of laws that Christians follow. “Evildoers” are people who break this law, and are thrown into hell for their transgressions. But those who believe in Jesus and repent of their “sin” (a transgression of divine law [Dictionary.com]) will be saved and go to heaven. This is just the basis of the Christian religion, I will tie this back in soon. So, just as a person is thrown in prison for their transgression of our law in America, people are thrown into hell for their transgression against God’s law. Now to argue his point, as I said earlier, people have free will. My opponent makes the point of “All choices are made because of prior cause…”. I would like to say that while a person might not be able to control events, as people are born into certain circumstances, it IS our choice on how to deal with a situation. So to use your example, if Brian killed someone because his father did, and many of his friends also had killed someone, and he was violent because he had been a drug dealer at a point in his life, then according to your argument, the law doesn’t quite matter due to “randomness”, and no justice should be served for Brian because his upbringing was rough. I like to think of myself as a logical person, and I have to say, this is quite absurd. I’ll go through by situation. His father killed someone, did he take that as normal? More importantly, did he learn that since his father was imprisoned for his murder, did he not see that there was a consequence for his action? That his father’s action was wrong and against the law? What about his friends? We choose our friends, do we not? If you hang with a bunch of murderers by choice, and you end up killing someone with them or because they did too, is it not your fault you chose to hang by those people? And what about the drug dealing? Maybe Brian picked it up from his friend or his father. Did he choose to be a drug dealer? Yes. He saw the money they were making and he knew it was illegal (every dealer does, drugs aren’t sold in broad daylight illegally) and yet proceeded to transgress the law for personal gain. And finally, in the murder situation itself. Killing comes from a hatred or want for personal gain, hence why the motives are usually overreaction to an event, or a chance to cash in on life insurance. Does this sound “random” to you? You choose to respond to different situations. For example, I saw this debate and chose to respond over others on the same topic. Is it “random” that I chose to take the time to respond to this? No. It was out of my own free will that I chose to respond to this. Now, on the issue of souls. I believe we have them, and I believe it is our consciousness. Out of our consciousness and awareness to our surroundings, we have the will to react in certain ways. Hence, free will. Relationships of any kind are built on free will, since you must choose the other person or living creature and be nice or mean and they must choose you to be nice or mean, to build a good or bad relationship with each other. As asked by my opponent, “Why do some souls in Brian his situation choose to murder and other souls in that same situation choose to not murder?”. I would have to answer that by using your own evidence. People have different morals based on their upbringings, personality, genes, situation etc. and so they choose with their free will to act differently based on their current situation. Now, what about the law? The law is established and is the same all around that particular area. Same with God’s law. It is established. If you break it, punishment, if you are pardoned by Jesus (Christians believe in the Trinity, or God in 3 parts, God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and God the Holy Spirit (which is basically part of God sent to Christians and lives within them, and with this spirit, they live out the Bible and its ways, regardless of how well they choose to do so), you receive eternal life. Souls in humans are not necessarily different, everyone has one, it’s just what a person believes in the consciousness and free will. It is not the strength of the soul, but rather the reaction to uncontrollable events in our lives (which are controlled events in other people’s lives, based on their choices and reactions to previous situations) that determines the outcome of an event. As humans, we learn by experience to such events, which end up shaping who we are. So, our reaction to events (our experiences) with our free will changes our morals. Different experiences bring different morals, which cause some to murder and others to not. So, technically, these “factors” of Brian, are really all in his control based on his reaction to his earlier and current experiences. So, in conclusion, in terms of Brian, he IS accountable for his deeds because of the way he chose to respond to previous events. If he is ever thrown into hell, it is because in that moment he chose to transgress God’s law(which is like any law, if you break it, you break it), which is what the decision of what life or death comes to in Christianity. By his choices, he would be cast into hell for breaking God’s law, just as he would be thrown into jail for breaking the law here.