I have never heard a good argument against this.
If God is perfectly just, eternal judgment cannot simply track belief, disbelief or character traits without correcting for how strongly those outcomes were shaped by conditions the person never chose.
First premise, belief is heavily affected by luck
Nobody chooses where they are born. Their parents and childhood religion. Which religious arguments they encounter. Their early education, intelligence. The evidence that happens to be available to them.
These factors do not completely determine belief, but they clearly affect its probability greatly.
Research found that most people identify with the religion in which they were raised, and around 80% of people live in a country where their religious group forms the majority. In the US, 74% of people raised in religious, practicing families retained their childhood religion, compared with fewer than half of those raised in minimally religious families. Pew’s global study and U.S. Religious Landscape Study.
Therefore, if God judges the resulting belief itself, he appears to be judging an outcome substantially influenced by circumstances he selected or knowingly permitted.
The simplest, most common response is that God is not really testing intellectual belief. He is testing what produces belief or disbelief: humility, pride, sincerity, openness to truth.
But this just moves the goalpost rather than resolve the problem.
Personality is also influenced by unchosen biology and environment. A meta-analysis involving more than 100,000 participants estimated that genetic differences accounted for approximately 40% of population-level variation in personality, with environmental factors accounting for the remainder. Personality differences cannot reasonably be treated as entirely self-created. Vukasović and Bratko
A person raised with constant praise and protection from consequences will be more disposed toward entitlement than someone raised around humility. Another may inherit greater impulsivity, anxiety, openness or agreeableness.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on moral luck.
In the end, no matter how deep we dig, there is simply, no personality aspect that is completely devoid of pure utter luck which the Divine Test can hold justly enough to establish Heaven/Hell for eternity. Your exam result can be affected by luck by 20%, 10%, 1%, 0.000000000000000000001%, doesn't matter, any slight nudge renders the exam a tad bit unfair, which of course, can't be said about an All-Justful All-Knowing God.
In research, we try to hold relevant factors constant, change one variable and observe whether the distribution of outcomes changes.
Suppose two comparable groups receive different environments and genetics. If the factors substantially increase a particular outcome, we infer that it causally contributes to that outcome.
Consider the Pharaoh of Moses
He is presented as a ruler surrounded by power, hierarchy and deference. Consider 2 scenarios for him:
- In World A, he's raised as an absolute ruler, surrounded by people who reinforce his superiority.
- In World B, he's raised without political power in a humble monotheistic family, surrounded by kindness, accountability and credible religious instruction.
Remember that it's God who chose World A, surely the two environments alter the probability of arrogance, receptivity and belief.
If someone says that Pharaoh would reject God in every possible environment, then the real object of judgment is apparently some context-independent property of his soul. That raises the central question: what exactly is that property, and did the Pharaoh choose that property of his soul? If yes, why? If no? It's indetermined and luck based.
TLDR; There's no personality aspect completely devoid of luck that God can use to completely justly whether someone deserves Hell or Heaven for eternity.