No worries- I didn’t think you were picking on me – I think we might have a better understanding of each other now. I also feel like our exchanges are much less heated 🙂

I believe that your words: “Since I labored to talk about a personal God…who directs, guides, empowers, convicts…your phrases seem to indicate that you missed that. ” – while these words are beautiful and true, I still think they can be summed up in the general description of IMMINENCE! I agree with all your adjectives used to describe God though – perhaps that is a better statement. They are the same words I would use to describe God – even though there are so many more.

I was never talking about trying to prove when God’s grace and support entered the picture – If instead of using the words suppression, repression or “true change” you want to use “misguided guilt” or “conviction of the Holy Spirit” I suppose that’s fine, but I think those terms muddy up the picture. I think it is you that has missed the simplicity of my argument and seems – I’m sure unwillingly and unconsciously – to make it more complicated than it really is. All I’m suggesting is that we use less subjective means in the near future to test the claims made by SOME ex-gay people. I think that’s a reasonable thing to expect if the ex-gay community wants to bring science into the picture – that’s all. However, I’m also all for leaving the option open to letting this process remain a divine mystery – but what I said above still stands – if you want science in the picture, then let’s have science there, if you don’t, well…….

When a study like the J&Y study makes a claim that “orientation” is being changed, I would equate such a change (a real change of orientation) with God’s grace and divine intervention, and not something like suppression and repression. If someone were merely repressing those feelings – as many Ex-Gays have claimed they’ve done – then, to me, that wouldn’t qualify as “real change”, or a “change of orientation”. If you agree with me on this, then, from your statements above (re: being able to prove the HOW or Why), it seems to me as if you’d agree that we can’t prove – in the J&Y study – that orientation has really changed – since you told me that we could never prove God’s involvement in the process. I DO think, though, that we can prove where God ISN’T involved (In my mind that would be when feelings are simply being suppressed or repressed) – does that make sense?

Now, if we all we want to do is to define orientation as feelings and behaviors, which can be suppressed, or repressed – then maybe we can say real change has occurred, even if someone is only suppressing those feelings – but, from the way I hear most people talk about orientation, I don’t think most would agree with this.

please believe me, I’m not picking on you…I keep coming back on this because your words do not reflect that you’ve gotten my point. I’d let it go except for your statement that you think ‘we’re on the same page’. You followed that with comments about ‘the imminent, transcendent and triune God. Since I labored to talk about a personal God…who directs, guides, empowers, convicts…your phrases seem to indicate that you missed that. Then, my final point would have been how do we know that conviction we feel is a misguided guilt or the conviction of the Holy Spirit. If it’s misguided guilt, we may succeed in resisting the behavior but it will be all done completely in our own strength. If it’s the conviction of the Holy

Spirit, we can count on Him for strength, support and grace to assist us. The former would be ‘repression’ or ‘suppression’; the latter would be the result of divine grace. The end results may be the same but no one could PROVE when or if God’s grace and empowering entered the picture.

What!? You agree with me!? I guess surely on the ideas about science and what it can or cannot determine. But not those ideas I have on segregating components of sexual attraction, or dare I hope you agree there also? I think I feel faint… must be my low potassium levels….