[nicoburns]

You seem to assuming that all of ones teachings must be moral in order for one to be able to be a good moral teacher. But if people are able to pick and choose teachings then this may not be required. As an example, many people would consider the bible to be a good source of moral teaching, but most would admit that it contains some teachings which are outright reprehensible.

If someone needed to be entirely good to be a good moral teacher then almost nobody (if anybody) would qualify.

[I_Am_Nous]

In Matthew 5:48, Jesus tells us to "be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect". I'm just holding him to his own moral standard :)

Moral authority is only as powerful as the believers not finding out you don't ACTUALLY believe what you are telling them to. People easily write off the Catholic Church because of the disgusting abuses Catholic authority figures have perpetrated throughout the ages. Pick and choose works with bare philosophies but Jesus isn't asking us to believe right, he's asking us to live right. You can't pick and choose living right, either you are or you aren't. If you only sometimes rob the bus station you aren't living right.

[nicoburns]

> You can't pick and choose living right, either you are or you aren't. If you only sometimes rob the bus station you aren't living right.

I don't really believe that. I think it's more of a continuum. And that everybody does both good and evil deeds.

[I_Am_Nous]

Catholics go to confession for this exact reason - people still mess up both accidentally and on purpose, and when they do they need a path back to God. This is the concept of repenting, where you just turn around and walk away from your sin and back to God, like the Prodigal Son.

Living right is acknowledging the mistakes and trying to never do that same thing again. Repeatedly robbing a bus station is quite a far cry from trying not to do evil on purpose.