Historically (as in, pre-Protestant "historically"), it's been understood that theosis was always the telos of the human from creation. Even while being created as "good", man wasn't created "perfect" (as in, complete according to the original intention), as that was meant to be a product of communion with God. This would have culminated in the Incarnation, which is to say that the Incarnation was "inevitable".
Because of the fall of man, however, that process had to take a salvific context, because death became part of the human condition, meaning God also had to pass through that (and accordingly liberate the nature of man He assumed from the shackles of death, on account of it being impossible to contain the origin of life in the realm of death). It's been said that Jesus could have as well died a natural death as an old man, and brought forth the same salvation very strictly speaking, but He chose an ignominious, unjust and visceral death as a common criminal despite His deity in order to additionally make a point about His love for mankind.
In essence, we were never created perfect, though we were made "good". We definitely aren't in the context of this world, but even prior to the fall of man we were not.
This is the part where I say "the Protestant Reformation/the East-West schism and its consequences have been a disaster for western Christendom" but I'm pretty sure anyone who barely perks their ears up in church-- if they even go, and regardless of the religious culture of their community-- can come to the erroneous conclusion that man was made perfect at any time prior to the Incarnation. As a matter of fact, it may just be that the proper understanding is more obvious to the majority of converts and a minority of cradles since the understanding usually comes with being a nerd catechism. As you say, it likely happens more among "born again" groups because much of the faith of many of them is a running of their pleasure orientation through a Christian filter.
