Is a 100% sinless life possible?

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by notofworks

But I can't help but think that Timmy is using this to make a point and I would HATE to be part of the point he's trying to make!!!

That was exactly my thought.

[pelathais]

LOL. I voted "yes." Then I looked at the others who voted "yes" as well. I bet we all did it for about the same reason.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by pelathais

LOL. I voted "yes." Then I looked at the others who voted "yes" as well. I bet we all did it for about the same reason.

Why? What do you mean? Why did you vote "yes?"

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Why? What do you mean? Why did you vote "yes?"

1 John 1:7

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by pelathais

LOL. I voted "yes." Then I looked at the others who voted "yes" as well. I bet we all did it for about the same reason.

Cause we like being disagreeable? jk.

Actually the other yes voter wants his vote changed to no. So it seems it's just me and you pel

Originally Posted by Timmy

You also missed "Besides Jesus".

So, do we need to (mentally) move your vote to "No"? (Maybe an admin can do that for real.)

Originally Posted by mfblume

Yes, move me.

Sorry for the delete also, i realized I didn't post the quotes in it how i wanted and thought it would be easier to delete than edit. I didn't realize ya had done quoted me

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by pelathais

1 John 1:7

Not so much the reason I voted yes. I dislike the concept of original sin and without original sin there is no good reason why another sinless person couldn't come to existence sometime

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Not so much the reason I voted yes. I dislike the concept of original sin and without original sin there is no good reason why another sinless person couldn't come to existence sometime

hmm... we're talking long odds then and not so much human nature. I'm rather generous in my definitions, and "original sin" gets a pretty wide latitude. We may not even be in disagreement, but I think there's only one possible "Jesus."

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I don't think he intended anyone to

That provokes a question. Could there be such a thing as english tongues? A bunch of english words strung together that has no meaning in english but might have meaning to God?

Most would say my posts are like this.

[Aquila]

I was thinking about the question presented on this thread and I think it depends on how we define "sin".

For example, some would say that due to the internets vile contents and some banner adds on just news websites a Christian is in sin by merely having access to it in the home. I was on CNN website and saw a very nice Victoria's secret add... and forgive me, I'm a healthy man, and it appealed to me. Some would say I sinned by looking at it.

So I think "sin" needs to be defined. Once sin is defined we can determine if we can live a sinless life.

By the way, personally, I think we can.

[Pro31:28]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I was thinking about the question presented on this thread and I think it depends on how we define "sin".

For example, some would say that due to the internets vile contents and some banner adds on just news websites a Christian is in sin by merely having access to it in the home. I was on CNN website and saw a very nice Victoria's secret add... and forgive me, I'm a healthy man, and it appealed to me. Some would say I sinned by looking at it.

So I think "sin" needs to be defined. Once sin is defined we can determine if we can live a sinless life.

By the way, personally, I think we can.

I believe that sin is defined as anything outside of the realm of God's perfection.