On the Nature of Temptation

Not every thought or temptation we ever have necessarily gets encoded to long-term memory.
In order to report occasional same sex temptation or attraction, the mind/brain would have retain it. You have to give at least some amount of attention to something in order to remember it.

Depending on the wording of the question, anywhere from 10% to 45% of adult men report having fantasies involving same-sex activity. Those are just people have sat and entertained the thoughts for however long, possibly on more than one occasion. These things never originate with the person anyway, it all comes from satan, and not just same sex stuff but other things. We decide if we are going to hold the thought or not, and whatever else we might do with it.


Advertisers sometimes try to get people to associate products with unrelated things that they want or need. Sex being used to advertise credit cards, shoes, or etc is an example of that, as is Summer's Eve's unfortunate attempt to use women's career advancement goals to sell feminine deodorant. Likewise, the enemy tries to sell unnatural or even self-defeating things to people.

Like the advertisers attempts at sales, the enemy's ploys may or may not work, and may or may not even be remembered. He has probably tried stuff on me that I don't remember. I lived on the street a couple of times in my life, but do not recall ever being actually tempted by drugs. Ever. I'm sure he must tried it though. If you have any doubts about the rates of same-sex fantasizing, the links to sources are below. Keep in mind, even on anonymous studies, self report studies tend to be skewed by people giving answers closer to what their society would want to hear (See the section on "measurement bias" in section 2 of this UIC article).

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jsm.12734/full
http://www.businessinsider.com/which-sexual-fantasies-are-normal-2014-10

There is a very strong taboo about same-sex activity and temptation among American males in particular. If there is self-report bias here, it is more likely to be making the rates look smaller, not larger. Not recalling ever being tempted by SSAs, or anything else on the list of perverse thoughts and actions in this study, does not mean it has never been tried on you, or that it never will be. It does however, mean you are probably less likely to commit that particular sin, even in your thoughts. Many, many people who do not identify as LGBT and never acted out, and may never act these things out, with others have committed this type of sexual sin in their thoughts through lust.
Sexual fantasy is, in fact, a lustful sort of meditation that many people who are physically very chaste may battle with on the inside, and which the Holy Spirit can and will deliver people from.

Godspeed.

~Mother Star

Pushing Too Hard for Change?

Expressing the truth about our lives and sounding off about what we believe in is risky.
One of the risks is lost relationships.

Telling the story about the battle I had with "sexual orientation" has cost me at least one connection. Predictably, I was branded as a hater in spite of exposing the genuinely hateful behavior by some people on the right in the process of testifying to my deliverance and transformation. I say it is not out of your control, not really, and immediately that makes me the enemy (For the people who do not wish to believe that perverse "sexual orientation" is not inborn, fixed, and part of who someone is,).

It is one thing to not want to see yourself differently, or behave differently, than you do; it is another thing to get angry at people for saying or demonstrating that one has a choice in the matter.
If there is nothing wrong with your behavior, why is it threatening for someone to say that you have an option to do otherwise? The only thing that changes is it makes you responsible for how you are acting or who you believe you are. Why do you need to be powerless and without a choice in the matter? Does having a choice make you feel like you've chosen wrong? Why is offering examples that show that you have a choice a threat in any way unless you do not feel right about it?

Other people feel strongly about entertainment, and do not feel that the message or ideals expressed in any entertainment or art should count for anything. If anyone dislikes an artist for standing up, lets say for "white supremacy," some people will get upset because they think the person is being judgmental.
I personally will not support an artist who objectifies or demeans women, or who is openly racist or advocates violence (I mean they say in interviews and such that they are white supremacists or something). Some people feel strongly enough about artists not being accountable for their message and such, that they actively dislike people like me. If you confront social issues and the role the media plays in them by only supporting people who do not add to the problem, these individuals may take serious issue with you.

On the other hand, there are people I take issue with too. Agreeing with Satan's plan for someones life and telling them that God made them gay, allegedly in the name of "God's love," is so severe to me, I will delete you from facebook or Tsu over it.

I will not delete a person for self-identifying as gay. I WILL delete them if they use God as a support for the morality of acting that out, though. That is trying to use God to say the opposite of what God says. So-called "Gay theology" is every bit as unloving as throwing a "gay" person onto burning tires, tied up; it is just a more insidious form of working for the devil than violence is. I would delete a person for supporting the violent, and more blatantly unloving behavior too - and for the same reason. They are using Christ as a support for something He came and suffered to destroy, namely, sin. In the first case, the sin is homosexual behavior. in the second case it is violence and hatred. It does not matter why you hate a person, it could be because they beat up your mother and stole all her savings. You can't hate people. If people sin against you, you must forgive. If they sin in a way that does not directly affect you, you have to care about them in spite of it. Both Westboro Baptist Church and the"Gay Christian" crowd are  abusing the Gospel, and I will delete both kinds of people just as readily, and for the same basic reason.

It can be a hard line to walk on occasion, trying to stand for what you know to be right and also try to be tolerant and love people regardless of what they do. I disassociate from those who use God to justify moral wrongs, and from people who dehumanize, demean,  or objectify groups, like women or racial groups. Sometimes I cut people slack if I think they are just truly ignorant and may get better as their knowledge grows, or if they are definitely on the mend in an area and are acting out of where they are in their pain but are progressing, like aware they have issues and are doing what they can to work through it. Those exceptions are very rare though, not because few people have issues but because so few are willing to recognize it or work to change it.

I often battle with whether I am too hard on people, especially when someone becomes offended with me the same way. What I have decided to do is accept it as "just what it is". Somebody felt as strongly about what I did as I do about people abusing the gospel. As far as I know, it means they are very strongly deceived about something. Do I get angry? Not anymore. It hurts less than it used to as well, mostly because I know my own boundaries and am increasingly comfortable with them. I still pray for the people, sometimes more than I did before, due to the "very strongly deceived" part.

With a lot of consideration, I feel more comfortable with the boundaries I set in these areas. I feel I am on a positive path because it is also making more able to accept the same treatment from others, even if I don't agree with them. Perhaps this rant is helpful to someone else, as it has helped me so much to write it.
I hope so.




Godspeed.

~Mother Star

Regarding "Gay Christains" and "Gay Theology"

Forgive me, some of its gross, but needs to be said.
I want to make it very clear I do not ascribe to any of the ideas I am typing out here. I am just explaining a point. We are called to love sinners, but not sins,and there is a difference. I have things I've been delivered from that are disgusting, disturbing, and that freak people out, especially church people (not the things I am talking about here though). I have also previously self-identified as bi-sexual. I have no same sex desires now, at all. I do not hate anybody, but I really felt I had to make this point.
If the "gay Christian" theology is to be believed, then beastiality and rape and incest are all ok too. The O.T. Scriptures that say homosexuality is a sin are in the same section, Leviticus 18 (the laws concerning sexual conduct), that condemns all of those other things. None of those other things are mentioned in the NT at all.
Look at the other sexual laws that would have to be dismissed along the same grounds, otherwise it becomes "what is and isn't a sin is based on my and select others' feelings about it". Can you accept this new theological position and be consistent?

If animals of the same sex jumping on each other and humping means that it is in fact natural (I've at least seen that argument), then the dog jumping on your leg when you come in the house means that beastiality is natural too, and the fact that animals have no reservations about inbreeding means that incest also is. Furthermore, research shows that offspring of two first-cousins has about the same odds of genetic defects as a child born to a mother in her 30s.
You think people who do those things don't feel the need to hide for fear of being ostracized? You think the church wouldn't lose its mind over people like that going shamelessly public and insisting on being married and ordained and so on, and act very un-christlike and unproductive in its response (I'm not saying an un-christ-like response is justifiable. It's not)? Do you suppose that people, be they professing Christian or not, might be tempted to commit violence over it? Naturally, that un-christlike and unproductive behavior would result in severe emotional wounds for those doing those sins. Does that mean that the church should not call such behavior a sin? Anybody ready to sanction those sins, or make it just a matter of individual conviction?
My dad met someone at work who eventually told him he liked dogs in that way. The guy had been raised Baptist and believed that he was right with God. He had no desire to repent,and did not feel any conviction for his behavior. I met him several times when I was young (my dad did not know yet at that point), and he seemed like a really nice guy. Maybe those kinds of guys aren't out of the closet yet, but pornography of that sort does exist and does sell, so there's people buying it. When and if such people "come out" in droves, and make the same demands that LGBT people do, what are going to do? Get mad at the church for going off-normal and then fall off the horse on the other side, saying that its ok to do that?



Just something to think about.

Jesus' cross was enough to make all of us new, if we'll have it. It was enough to forgive us all, and it does not matter what we have done. If we sincerely repent and call what the wrong we have pursued or done "wrong" and receive his gift of salvation, then we shall have His Salvation. That makes us all equal, and in this we are all alike.