Look at my reply to kalium. To reiterate, the problem is that people confuse objects with processes. The definition I gave explicitly refers to processes. This answers your final point.

All you did was add the qualification 'simple' to the existing 'external'. Presumably plant matter is a sufficiently "simple" source of energy, since otherwise you would exclude human digestion; plant matter also burns.

I already conceded that it's a fuzzy definition. As I said, you are correct that 'simple' is a subjective property. However, if you look at the incredibly complex reactions that occur inside human cells (gene expression, ribosomes, ATP production, etc), then yes, amino acids and sugars are indeed extremely simple in comparison. If you pour some sugars and phosphates and amino acids into a blender you will not get much DNA; not nearly in the quantities that it is found in cells. This is what is meant by 'far from equilibrium'. There is much more DNA in cells than you would find if you took the sugars and fatty acids and vitamins and just mixed them together randomly.

Again, which equilibrium? The star is nowhere near equilibrium with its surroundings.

I feel like we're talking past each other here. I explicitly (and not once, but twice in the definition) referred to chemical processes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_equilibrium