Are you naturally or inherently good?

What's your starting point?

Are you born good or bad or neither?

A blank sheet or a conscious being with inherent flaws?


Now we've discussed many times the moral argument and the following premises are necessary for it to coherently exist:

1. An ultimate purpose of life and author
2. A moral author to describe how we ought and ought not to live
3. A moral code from that author
4. A judicial system to judge if the moral code has been breached
5. A penal system to bring justice.

And how the God of the Bible provides all that and then introduces forgiveness of that breach of the moral code by justice being fulfilled by another, Jesus Christ, motivated by His love for us - to restore mankind to each other and God Himself.

You may not agree with these, but where is the contradiction ?

Moving on:

Are you perfect?

Is anyone?

When you say "no, I am not", what definition or benchmark or moral reference point are you using to judge that you are not?  It can't be relative. Perfection doesn't exist in relativism.  (if you say "I am perfect when measured, say against another flawed image or idea, then you're misusing the term - "without fault")

Immediately you recognise that (moral) perfection exists, then you are immediately accepting and recognising the possibility of its existence.  Who then could possibly be perfect?

God.

Have you ever read Genesis Chpts 1-3? Especially chpt 3?

God gives mankind 1 rule: don't eat from the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil - the consequence if you do: death.  (separation from God).

Before that event, mankind was perfect.

Mankind can't even keep one law vs 1,000 laws.

If God gave you 100 ways to be reconciled with Him, do you think we'd have wanted 101 ways?  i.e my own way, on my terms ?
Do relationships grounded in love work like that?

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+5&version=NIV

Have you ever read Matthew Chapters 5-7? The Sermon on the Mount.

It's Jesus moralising. And there is a lot of it.

Would you disagree with any of his teaching?  Is Jesus evil or immoral for the content of his moralising?

The West for the most part has been grounded in Matthew Chapter 5-7.

It's not the enlightenment which was grounded in an imaginary "social contract" of "don't hurt me and I won't hurt you". A poor man's Golden Rule offspring.

Genesis 1-3 and Matthew 5-7 provide a pretty decent explanation of my current predicament.

I recognise the possibility of perfection by knowing I am an imperfect moral accountable being.

I recognise the depravity of my own autonomy to do it "my way, my terms, in my time". But in relationships that doesn't work.

And I admire true moral teaching when it comes up - because it speaks to my heart, mind and soul, but also make sense.