The Apostate Gospel of works

Paul says that, but it is hypothetical. In other words you have taken the verse out of its context. Paul is contrasting the Jews position to the Gentile's position. He describes the Jews as they think they are--justified. But they are not--just as the Gentiles are not. He concludes by showing them that they are all--both Jew and Gentile guilty under the law, and that the law, or the keeping of the law, cannot save them. That is the context. One small proof text does not prove your point. Study the context.

Yes he did. And John backed him up:

We all transgress the law. We all sin. We are not as holy as God. An unholy man cannot stand before a holy God. God will not allow anything to defile his heaven. How do you think you will be able to stand before a holy God with sin on your soul? You cannot.

What James 2:10 and Gal.3:10 teach is that if you have broken the law at any point you have no Biblical justification to think that you will be able to stand before God. You are not justified.

Just one point will do.

Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
--Have you continued from birth to death in all things which are written in the book of the law and done them all, every day of your life, and never broken one of them, not even one day of your life.
When it comes to the law, God demands absolute perfection.

 

No. Paul means what he says and I am being entirely faithful to the context. I politely suggest that it is you who is not being true to the context. Note what Paul actually says leading up to verses 6 and 7:

You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2Now we know that God's judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. 3So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God's judgment? 4Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance? 5But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed.

Despite your implication to the contrary, Paul is not telling the Jew that he cannot be justified by good works, he is telling the Jew who is a hypocrite that the hypocritical Jew will not be justified. There is simply nothing in the context here that would sustain the claim that Paul is denying the possibility of justification by good works.

In other words, the fact that the Jew who is guilty of the things he judges other for will not be justified is hardly an argument that some people, whether Jew or Gentile will be justified by good works, just as he says here:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

 

No. All John actually says here is what he says – that people sin and sin is the breaking of the law. This is simply not a statement that such people cannot be transformed by the Holy Spirit and then be deemed to have led a life of good deeds. Like Dr. W, you are importing a standard of “perfection” in respect to justification by good works that is simply nowhere to be found in the New Testament.
Again, you will find no statement anywhere in the New Testament that you need to be “perfect” to “pass” a good works judgement.

 

Please explain the meaning of Gal.3:10

 

I have never said that one can be justified by doing the works of the Law of Moses. In fact, I agree that it is impossible to be justified by doing the works of the Law of Moses.

But this is not a statement that one needs to be perfect in respect to good works. This is a statement about the Law of Moses and the curse it brought to Israel.

Your question to me is not relevant. No one, least of all me - a non-Jew living 2 millenia after the Law of Moses was retired, is under the Law of Moses anymore.

I have no idea why so many people fail to understand that the Law of Moses is not a universal law - it was given to the Jews and was for them alone.

Yes, it carries a curse for those Jews who do not follow it. But that curse was borne by Jesus on the cross, so even the Jew who did not follow the Law perfectly is now "off the hook" from that curse.

 

Read on. The only good a man can do is to believe on Jesus. That results in him being justified by faith and faith alone. That is the example that he gives in Abraham. He takes all of chapter two and three to get there. He deals with their sin first. Yes, these are hypocritical Jews, and their works will judge them. They have rejected God, and hell awaits them.

Romans 2:8-9 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
--This is the plight of every man: both Jew and Gentile. The Jews don't get out of just because they are Jews, or because of their circumcision. They are just as wicked as the Gentiles, and will pay for. Hell awaits for them.

Romans 2:11-16 For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another. In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
--God is not prejudicial. He shows no respect to persons. The Gentiles which have the moral law written in their hearts cannot keep that law or light which were given to them. And the Jews certainly couldn't keep the light or law which were given to them. Both are condemned to the same destiny.

Romans 2:17-24 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege? Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God? For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

--They boast in the fact that they are called Jews. It doesn't do them any good.
The are instructed in the law.
They preach the law, and yet they are the ones that break the law more than any one, even more than the Gentiles. They are the hypocrites.
The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through the Jews.

Romans 2:25-29 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision. Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
--Their circumcision profits nothing. It means nothing in the sight of God. It is a meaningless rite. Why? They don't keep the law.
What does God want? He wants one who is circumcised in the heart (one who is saved or justified by faith not of works) rather than circumcised outwardly. He wants a change done by the Spirit of God not in the letter of the law whose praise is not of men but of God. Paul is speaking here of justification by faith, not of works.

 

You have agreed that the Mosaic law requires perfection in order to be justified and that every jew failed. However, you fail to deal with the explicit and specific Biblical consequence for failing the Law of Moses in every point:

Gal. 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

Hence, according to Paul in Galatians 3:10 those who do not continue in ALL points to do them are under the "CURSE" of the law. What is the "curse" of the law according to this context? Isn't it exactly what only Christ could satisfy by His life and death?

Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:

Therefore, it is not possible for the Jew to be justified by the law he is under. It is not possible for the Jew in Romans 2:17-29 to be justified by the law this context declares he is under:

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
17 ¶ Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,
18 And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law;
19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,
20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.
21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?
23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?
24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.
25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.
26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Do you agree that "the law" being described in the above verses in contrast to the Gentile is the JEWISH LAW? For example, three of out ten commandments are listed above. Circimcision is listed above is it not? Does not Paul say explicitly that the Jew "restest in the law"??? What law is that? The same law Galatians 3:10 and James 2:10 say unless you obey EVERY POINT you come under its "CURSE."

So, you are wrong! The jew cannot keep the law he is under in Romans 2:11-29 because it requires EVERY POINT and those who violate ONE POINT come under its "CURSE." You have admitted that no Jew can keep every point but what you haven't admitted is the consquence for failing ONE POINT of THIS LAW - or "the CURSE."

Now, you are faced with this impossible dilemman - How can a person who is under the curse for violating one point of THE JEWISH Law possibly be justified by the SAME LAW??? How can an object of wrath for violating ONE POINT and thus ALL POINTS be justified by keeping that same Law? He can't and therefore the Jew and the Jewish law of Romans 2:11-29 cannot possibly be interpreted to mean they CAN be justified under that law. Hence, this means he is talking hypothetical when it comes to what keeping it would obtain - justification. Hence, this means that Romans 2:8 is also talking hypothetical when it comes to what continuing in all things would obtain when the fact of the matter is that the Jew cannot be justified under the Jewish law at all any more than the SINFUL Gentile be justified by his works as both are under the SAME curse of sin that only Christ can atone.

 

gratia, fide, laboris !

 

If one is walking blameles before God, does the law condemn them? Was it ever or is it even now possible for one to be blameless concerning the law?

 

The term "blameless" does not mean without sin, but it translates a term used in wrestling that gives an opponent a grip on your person so as to pin them to the matt to disqualify them. In regard to the qualifications for bishop it means there are no skeletons in your closet or OPEN and OBVIOUS sins in regard to their PUBLIC walk that can be used to disqualify you for that office.

It is used to describe God's people who are walking in such a manner before God and men without OPEN and OBVIOUS public sins. However, it does not mean they are without sin (I Jn. 1:8-10).

It is never once used as a synonym for justification in regard to the law of God. It is used for lost unregenerate relgious people in the eyes of MEN or their PUBLIC witness. It is used for those already justified in regard to thier PUBLIC character.

 

I have read and studied Romans extensively.

You are making a statement here about what you believe. Fair enough. I do not think the textual evidence supports your belief.

This is not an explanation as to why we should take 2:6-7 as hypothetical. You have Paul making a statement that he believes is only hypothetically true - a remarkable assertion, and you need to make a case for this remarkable claim.

Interestingly, you omit the material about the "positive side" of the judgement. Why are you omitting that material? Is all the stuff I have bolded below all hypothetical? If so, what is your argument?:

God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 11For God does not show favoritism.

Why do you believe that Paul is not intending to be taken at his word when he says that there will indeed be those who are ultimately given eternal life based on good deeds?

 

GE:
Yes, and obedience to the Great Commandment of Love is supposed; and who can say he perfectly obeyed it? None among men but Jesus Christ. Are you found in Christ by faith, it is Christ God sees when looking for that perfect obedience, an so you are justified being found in Christ by faith.

 

All true, but not an argument that Paul does not mean exactly what he says in 2:6-7. The fact that some Jews are hypocrites does not mean that ultimate justification is not based on good deeds.

All true, but again not an argument that Paul does not mean exactly what he says in 2:6-7.

You are stating your position, but providing no argument. You need to make an actual case that "good deeds" are not relevent to the awarding of eternal life.

And that is a challenge, in light of what Paul says here, a statement you claim is "hypothetical" yet whose hypothetical status you have not satisfactorily explained:

6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

 

GE:
O no! It does not say, "based on good deeds"! If a man "does good" it's because God gave eternal life before he does good and graciously added glory, honour and peace, also before his doing good; not vice versa. "Before you ask, the Father knows" and his knowing is as good as his doing. God answered our prayers even before we prayed them. God recompensed our good works even before we did them. HE GAVE US CHRIST who is our glory and honour and peace.

 

Romans 2:6-10 is inseparable from Romans 2:11-29 as the same judgement continues to be the subject in Romans 2:11-16. Furthermore, the law mentioned in regard to the Jews in Romans 2:11-16 is the Mosaic law as Romans 2:17-29 prove. Three of the ten commandments are listed and circumcision is listed in Romans 2:17-29.

Your problem is that the Mosaic law is explicitly stated to be the means to justify the Jew in the day of judgment as that is the law given to the Jew. Yet, Paul states the only way a Jew can be justified under the law is to continue in all things written or else they come under the "curse" not the justification of that law. James says that violation in "one point" makes you a transgressor of the same law (James 2:10) as it is the ten commandments James is speaking about (James 2:11).

The Jew cannot at one and the same time be under the "curse" and yet justified by the same law.

Hence, Romans 2:6-29 can only be hypothetical as the jew cannot be justified under the law spoken of in Romans 2:11-29. Hence, Paul is speaking hypothetically because those he addressing believe they can be when he will go on to categorically deny that is a possibility (Rom. 3:9-20; Gal. 3:10) as they are all under it "curse" and one cannot be justified by the same law that has already condemned them and placed them under its "curse."

Hence, the law that the Jew must be a doer instead of a hearer is the same law that requires obedience in EVERY POINT to be justified under and contrary to Jewish opinion (and yours) that is impossible as violation of one point brings them under its "curse" not its justification.

You cannot separate Romans 2:8 from Romans 2:11-16 as the means for justification by "the law" in regard to the Jew is what is being considered to justify them in that day of judgement. Since that is IMPOSSIBLE Paul is speaking hypothetical in Romans 2:8.

The only way you can deny this is to prove that the Jew can be justified by the Mosaic law in Romans 2:11-16 in the day of judgement as that is the law under consideration as Romans 2:17-29 proves.

You cannot do it! Hence, here is abolute solid evidence that Paul is speaking hypothetically in Romans 2:6-15 in regard to those Jews who THINK they can be justified under the law of Moses in that Day as well as those Gentiles who think they can be justified by their works in that day. It is hypothetical as the reality is spelled out in Romans 3:9-20.

And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

 

I have gone through the entire chapter with you. Again and again, inspite of what every other verse in the chapter says, you go back to these two verses as if they teach something different. You would hang your own salvation on two verses taken out of context. That is amazing, but amazingly sad.

Start from the beginning and look at the overall context. I really didn't want to do a verse by verse commentary from chapter one to chapter five, though this is what you seem to want. Chapter one describes the sinful condition of the pagan world.

Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
--There is the key verse. God's wrath is revealed against all unrighteousness in the world. And then Paul proceeds to describe the horrible wickedness of the world.

Chapter two he devotes to the wickedness of the Jew. Though they think they are above the nations of the world they are not. They are just as wicked. Look at the last verse of chapter one:

Romans 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
--A terrible indictment on the nations of the world--they have pleasure not only in their own wicked sin, but pleasure in the fact that others sin as well.
Paul picks up right there in chapter two:

Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
--YOU, JEWS, do the same things. They are just as wicked as the Gentiles and Paul devotes this entire chapter demonstrating this fact. Trying to wrench two verses out of its context will not disprove this premise.

In Chapter three Paul's theme becomes more pointed. Yes the Gentiles, yes the Jews, but just to make sure that you have any idea that you might be omitted--chapter three is directed against the world--both Jews and Gentiles. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God (3:23). No man can escape that condemnation of being a sinner, No one!

Paul's description of the unsaved man is very vivid and precludes any idea of good works entering into one's salvation:

Romans 3:9-18 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
17 And the way of peace have they not known:
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

It is quite evident that it is impossible for them to have good works without Christ. There is none righteous. There is none that does good; no not one. Nobody in their unsaved state is able to do good or good works. It is quite evident that it is impossible to work toward eternal life. The unsaved man can't even do good works.

The Bible doesn't contradict itself. Either this passage means what it says, or you have a wrong interpretation of Romans 2:6,7. I believe the latter.

The only possible interpretation of:
Romans 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
--Is that the saved (or those like Abraham) are those ones that will seek after immortality and will gain eternal life. It is impossible for an unsaved man to do so. In context, Paul, after demonstrating that all are sinners, picks up with this in chapter four and uses Abraham as a man declared just as one who has believed in God. His works did not save him. He was justified by faith. Chapter four speaks of justification by faith; how Christ died for our sins. It actually concludes with chapter five and verse one.

Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

 

No, GE. It says what it says - eternal life is indeed awarded according to what the person has done:

God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

 

You have provided no valid case as to why we should read these verses as hypothetical.

It is a remarkable claim - that Paul is saying something that he believes is only hypothetically true. You have an obligation to show why Paul would do the odd thing of saying that people will be awarded eternal life based on good deeds, when, according to you, he believes that there will be zero such people who are granted eternal life in this way.

A remarkably odd thing for Paul to say. Do you have an actual explanation as to why he would say such a thing?

I can almost guarantee that I have studied Romans as least as much as you have.

No. I simply want an actual case as to why Paul would make the extraordinary move of saying that people will be awarded eternal life based on good deeds, yet all the while believing that zero persons will, in fact, be awarded eternal life in that way.

Agree

If you are implying this precludes ultimate salvation by good deeds, you are making a big error. Romans 8 makes it clear that the Christian is rescued from the state where he is enslaved to sin and can do no good.

This is not all that Paul talks about. He also clearly speaks of a coming "good deeds" judgement for both Jew and Gentile with eternal life in the balance. You tell us that Paul is speaking hypothetically, at least in respect to the awarding of eternal life based on good works. A remarkable claim that you have not substantiated with any argument.

As should be clear, and as has already been pointed out, the fact that some Jews are hypocrites is not any kind of basis for not taking 2:6-7 seriously.

Please explain to us precisely how this lecture, aimed at the Jewish hypocrite means that Paul is speaking hypothetically when he says eternal life is granted according to good deeds?

If my boss accuses me of being a hypocrite because I am lazy and come in late and leave early, is this any kind of argument against taking this statement seriously?:

I, the boss, "will give to each employee according to what he has done." 7To those who by persistence in working hard, I will give a big raise.

Of course it isn't! The fact that I am a hypocrite does not mean that my boss is "speaking hypothetically" in respect to giving raises according to good deeds.

 

This poses no challenge to my view. I have been consistent in agreeing that the Jew cannot be justified by doing the works of the Law of Moses.

We are back to a point that has been left hanging from previous discussion of this passage. And I still need to work the details of the argument. But my assertions is this: the "law" in verse 13 is not, repeat not the Law of Moses. What it is will need to wait.

But, if I can make the case that the "law" of verse 13 is not the Law of Moses, I am not placed in the contradictory position that I agree I would probably otherwise be in.

Actually I do not agree and suggest that Paul is talking about two different "laws" in the text above. You will need to wait to get the detailed argument for this.

No. You have no grounds to make that detemination. You need to wait for more explanation from me.

 

In the last two posts that I have directed to you I have not said that they are hypothetical. Whether I believe that or not is immaterial at this point. That is not my argument. I have not made that claim in the last two posts to you. So why are you bringing this red herring up. It is a moot point.

You don't read my posts very carefully do you. Take time to read. I said that you are the one ignoring the context of the chapter. Every verse in the chapter except one points to the condemnation of the Jews. What does this one verse teach in the light of chapters one, three, four and five? It teaches that the saved will persevere and obtain eternal life. It teaches very clearly in Romans 3:9-18 that it is impossible for the unsaved to do good works. There is none that doeth good, no not one. What do you do with that? You just ignore it. You can't explain it.

Yes, and I gave it to you. A Jew who is not hypocritical, but righteous as Abraham was (see chapter four), would be justified and desire to do good works. He would already have eternal life because justification would already be imputed unto him from the time that he believed. Study the first few verses of Romans 4.

Your interests lie in philosophy and artificial intelligence. You are a software engineer. I am in the ministry full time. Over the years I have written my own commentary on the book of Romans.
Plus I see that you go to one of the most apostate churches in Canada, the United Church--a church where most of its ministers deny the very existence of Hell. In fact if you look in the statement of faith Hell is not even mentioned. Some of its ministers deny the deity of Christ. The statement of faith gives no clear salvation message, or definition of "new birth." "Commitment to Christ" is as close as it comes, and that could mean anything. Like the RCC it also believes that saving faith comes through baptism. It is an apostate church.

That is where he continues in chapter four.

Romans 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
--Abraham's works could not justify him. They were not acceptable before God.

Romans 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
--When did Abraham believe God. It was back in the Ur of Chaldees, before he did any of these works. Thus it was his faith that counted him for righteousness. It was faith and faith alone.

Romans 4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
--If one works, he receives a reward but that is because it is owed to him, just as an employer must pay his employee his wage. It his debt to do so. The wage given is not grace; it is a debt given because of the work rendered.

Romans 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
--There are no works involved here--To him that works not, but simply believes on him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. That is justification by faith alone. There is no clearer statement of justification by faith alone than this statement right here.

The next few verses give both Abraham and David as examples of this justification by faith.

You just made a huge leap from chapter one to chapter 8. Chapter one is speaking of the unsaved Gentiles of the world. Chapter 8 is directed to believers. Look at the first verse:

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,
--Keep things in their context.

What shall I say to get this repetitive monkey off my back--that you falsely accuse me? Where in the last three posts (including this one) have I said that Paul is speaking hypothetically. You go on and on about this as this is your only argument. It is the only thing you have to hang on to, thus I must conclude that you have failed in all arguments.
Verse 6 simply says that God treats both Jews and Gentiles alike or equally.

Romans 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
Whether it be at the Judgment Seat of Christ, or at the Great White Throne Judgment, this statement will hold true. God will not favor one man over another. He will judge all men equally.

1 Corinthians 3:14-15 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Revelation 20:12-13 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

Here you go on your hypothetical "trip" again. It is the only argument that you have and one I have not put forth.
I connected the two chapters for you, showing you how Paul is definitely addressing the Jews here and not the Gentiles. You cannot ignore context. And you have yet to explain Romans 3:9-18.