The constant quotations of scripture which do not address the question directly aren't an engagement of my central concern (which you seem to dismiss as illegitimate, if so tell me why it is illegitimate by justifying your position).
Nevertheless i will bite. Is it reasonable to assume Paul is speaking about everyone when he speaks of "those who did not obey the gospel," including those who have not heard it? They are rightly condemned for not believing in a Gospel they never had a chance to hear? At least the other position, that people are condemned for sins alone, is more reasonable, but here you are demanding the impossible of people.
The Galatians metaphor doesn't actually address this either since Paul identifies the Children of Hagar with the Jews of Jerusalem who have heard of Christ and the Gospel but reject it. Paul here isn't concerned with the salvation of those with no saving knowledge of Christ but with the Church's relationship to those Jews who reject Christ or who insist on following Judaism.
As to the charge of being humanist, I don't mind that label if it puts me in the realm of More or Erasmus, though I don't compare to either. Still, you need to actually answer the problem, which you have refused to do, just quoting whatever scripture you think is vaguely related to the topic. Not a good argument theologically. Why, should it be considered good, righteous or just that those who never had a chance to repent (upon hearing the Gospel) are damned completely or irrevocably for something outside of their control?
'At least the other position, that people are condemned for sins alone, is more reasonable, but here you are demanding the impossible of people. '
All have sinned, God says, all souls are mine, the soul that sins shall die.
All who are condemned are condemned for sin, and in Acts 17, God makes a command,
30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, 31 because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.”
So God does no longer overlook times of ignorance. He commands all men everywhere to repent and believe in His Son. Not repenting , not believing in the Son is sin, it is disobedience to the command of God. It is not unreasonable. In Romans 2, the law of God is written on the hearts of all gentiles, and they know right from wrong behavior. None can escape their sins except by Christ. In His name is preached the forgiveness of sin.
And for unbelievers, God makes their sin utterly sinful, God gives them over to an unregenerate mind which makes them add sin to sin. And their whole situation goes from bad to worse to horrendous. And people who approve of other peoples sins, are also adding sin to sin. Such as supporting people who continue in their sins, not warning them of the judgement of God on them for their sin. I don't mean you have to tell everyone you meet, but everyone has some situation that arises where they had opportunity to warn and they did not. I have family that supports homosexual behavior of others, they say God loves them and they will not be judged by God for it. Those people go to church too, and they do not hear that they have to repent of their sin, what they hear is God loves them and do not be concerned.
This same idea of yours, that good people can go to heaven without Christ, they also believe. And they get angry if I say otherwise. My sister in Law's son rejected Christ many years ago, She also says there is no condemnation for sexual immorality. When you tell her what Christ says, she says it is only words attributed to Christ, so she nullifies the Word in her mind, and really gets angry. She is Episcopalian, a regular church goer.
Paul said you only have to warn anyone once or twice, then your done.
