The article to which you respond, which is penned by my good self (by grace of Jesus Christ) states, and I quote:
“If the Christian God really is a God of love, love demands He would not give to Jews commands no one has capacity for obeying. In the giving of enumerated six laws to Jews thousands of years before advent of Christ, the Christian God declares that in absence of Jesus’ Sacrifice and Resurrection, man possesses capacity for morality. In presence of the public declaration, clearly it is erroneous for those who believe in same God — Christians — to declare incapacity of all non-Christians at living up to moral codes of behavior.”
It would have been nice if you had read the article prior to embarking on an already determined attack on the author.
But then again you miss the point of the post, which is,
“Is morality equivalent to goodness?”, a question that I answer in same post.
Again, I quote,
“If society is to benefit from Jesus’ teachings, secular interpretations of Jesus’ teachings must become important cornerstones of relations between leaders and followers, must become integral components of how leaders of both governments and corporations are evaluated. In presence of such rubrics, it will become ever more clear that capacity for ‘goodness’, ‘uprightness’, or ‘right living’ cannot be construed to be preserve of ‘goody two shoes’ Christians.”
Goodness demands actions derive from pure motives. You should check motives for your response and determine whether your response derives from pure motives.