women as priests

BibleLinguist

Active Member
Mar 18, 2024
103
59
51
Sukhothai
✟2,073.00
Country
Thailand
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Did Ellen G. White ever preach in her churches? Or did she just write books?
How does this question pertain to what we are presently discussing? If I preach to you, it does not mean I have authority over you. I don't think you have seen me say anywhere that I oppose women preaching or even teaching. I think you may be an unwitting victim of profiling, and you haven't quite nailed my profile yet! ;)
 
Upvote 0

2PhiloVoid

Critical Thinking ***contra*** Conformity!
Site Supporter
Oct 28, 2006
21,345
10,038
The Void!
✟1,143,929.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
How does this question pertain to what we are presently discussing? If I preach to you, it does not mean I have authority over you. I don't think you have seen me say anywhere that I oppose women preaching or even teaching. I think you may be an unwitting victim of profiling, and you haven't quite nailed my profile yet! ;)

And I'm sure you haven't nailed my profile yet either, Mr. SDA. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: BibleLinguist
Upvote 0

BibleLinguist

Active Member
Mar 18, 2024
103
59
51
Sukhothai
✟2,073.00
Country
Thailand
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
That IS in Scripture. God called a woman to be a judge,
Where is your text for this?
called both men and women to prophesy.
Yes, and even a donkey prophesied. But the prophets and prophetesses were always subject to the civil authorities. When a command came from God through a prophet's instrumentality, it did not make the prophet superior in authority to the one for whom the message was given. Nathan, for example, still deferred to David as king, despite bringing decisive messages to him from God. Prophets are spokespersons--the real authority behind their messages is not the prophet, but God. Balaam was not his donkey's servant, nor was David Nathan's servant, etc. All were servants of God.
He appointed Solomon, who was wealthy, Moses and Amos, who were shepherds, Jonah, who ran away and Jeremiah who protested that he was too young.
Very true.
He appointed a Jewish girl to become queen - and she saved the Jews from being massacred.
Yes, God prepared Esther for that trial, though we do not find Esther ruling from a throne. She did not take a leadership role. She most certainly influenced the king by her earnest request (not command), but it was her cousin Mordecai who prepared the legal stratagem and laws to counter Haman's wicked edict.
Later, he chose another young girl to bear the Messiah.
Bearing children is the natural role of a woman, and one which honors God.
 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
6,211
1,730
✟204,683.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
To some extent. But to the best of my knowledge of the history of marriage, under Roman law it was only legal to marry one person at a time. There were also other restrictions, for example, on slaves marrying.
Jew's also had rules for slaves as well. But I did read that jew's did not stop polygamy until after the diaspora, from Jewish (rabbininic) sources. Jew's were also given exemption from the Roman's, at least from Idol's . It would be difficult to continue a practice, in a culture that had no law to regulate polygamy at all, let alone frown on it. But Rome did allow religious practice and enforcement within certain provinces by religious leaders..
 
Upvote 0

BibleLinguist

Active Member
Mar 18, 2024
103
59
51
Sukhothai
✟2,073.00
Country
Thailand
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Jew's also had rules for slaves as well. But I did read that jew's did not stop polygamy until after the diaspora, from Jewish (rabbininic) sources. Jew's were also given exemption from the Roman's, at least from Idol's . It would be difficult to continue a practice, in a culture that had no law to regulate polygamy at all, let alone frown on it. But Rome did allow religious practice and enforcement within certain provinces by religious leaders..
It may be worth noting that God's ordinances sometimes required polygamy. Perhaps that changed for the Israelites once they were no longer autonomous under their theocracy, as God also expects us to obey those in authority. I suppose this could open a whole theological can of worms, though, if any felt those laws given by God should still apply today.
 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
6,211
1,730
✟204,683.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
It may be worth noting that God's ordinances sometimes required polygamy.
Yes, that is why I referenced Levirite marriage as one such instance this could occur.
Perhaps that changed for the Israelites once they were no longer autonomous under their theocracy, as God also expects us to obey those in authority.
Don't know. But I do know what Jewish rabbinics (at least those I have read) say.
I suppose this could open a whole theological can of worms, though, if any felt those laws given by God should still apply today.
Well, I know I read once, way back, A man appealed to scripture to a pope. They quietly allowed him two wives acknowledging The practice is not condemned in scripture, in fact is regulated by law. When you consider divorce was not in the beginning, a strict monogamy, could often led to what God hated divorce. Abraham and Sarah are often spoken of as attempting to do things by their own will, in giving Hagar to Abraham. I do not believe that for a moment, and believe it distorts our understanding to do so....God never told Sarah she would have a son from her own womb at that time, but Abraham. It was perfectly normal for a concubine to be given. Since men were to be able to provide for a wife and children when marrying, I wonder that some abandining one wife financially to take another???Why God hates divorce but allowed it as a kinder option?
As for today, God gives rulers, to make law. So, no need to think polygamy must be accepted. But does monogamy increase divorce which God hates?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
28,054
8,044
NW England
✟1,062,385.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
How does this question pertain to what we are presently discussing?
I would think that the point was; did Ellen White have only ONE role which she abandoned to do something else - or did she do a few things?
Seeing as you seem to think that a person has their own role and cannot abandon it to take someone else's.
 
Upvote 0

BibleLinguist

Active Member
Mar 18, 2024
103
59
51
Sukhothai
✟2,073.00
Country
Thailand
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Yes, that is why I referenced Levirite marriage as one such instance this could occur.

Don't know. But I do know what Jewish rabbinics (at least those I have read) say.

Well, I know I read once, way back, A man appealed to scripture to a pope. They quietly allowed him two wives acknowledging The practice is not condemned in scripture, in fact is regulated by law. When you consider divorce was not in the beginning, a strict monogamy, could often led to what God hated divorce. Abraham and Sarah are often spoken of as attempting to do things by their own will, in giving Hagar to Abraham. I do not believe that for a moment, and believe it distorts our understanding to do so....God never told Sarah she would have a son from her own womb at that time, but Abraham. It was perfectly normal for a concubine to be given. Since men were to be able to provide for a wife and children when marrying, I wonder that some abandining one wife financially to take another???Why God hates divorce but allowed it as a kinder option?
As for today, God gives rulers, to make law. So, no need to think polygamy must be accepted. But does monogamy increase divorce which God hates?
At the time of Abraham, it was a common practice for an infertile wife to give her husband children via one of her maids. It was a form of surrogacy, and the belief was that if the child were born on the knees of the wife, it belonged to her, and not to the maid. We see this same practice followed later by Jacob, whose wives gave him their handmaids. In the Hebrew language, the word for this "handmaid" is "shiphchah," which the lexicon may say can mean part of the family, but which actually has a nuance of meaning "family builder," and multiple records in the Old Testament see these "handmaidens" becoming surrogate mothers for their masters/mistresses.

However, I believe that even though Sarai and Abram were following local custom, they were not in line with God's will, and should have known better. Their actions, taking matters into their own hands, showed a lack of faith in God and in His promises. It was because of their faithlessness that Abraham was later brought to the severe test on Mount Moriah.
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
28,054
8,044
NW England
✟1,062,385.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Where is your text for this?
Judges 4:4.
Yes, and even a donkey prophesied. But the prophets and prophetesses were always subject to the civil authorities.
No, they were subject to God.
Moses confronted Pharaoh, Elijah told Ahab that there would be no rain in the land until HE said so. (Ahab and Jezebel worshipped Baal, a god of fertility who controlled the weather.)
When a command came from God through a prophet's instrumentality, it did not make the prophet superior in authority to the one for whom the message was given.
I never said it did.
Nathan, for example, still deferred to David as king, despite bringing decisive messages to him from God.
David was God's choice for the kingship.
Nathan didn't try to overthrow him - but he severely rebuked him for disobeying God.

Prophets are spokespersons--the real authority behind their messages is not the prophet, but God.
I know.
They were subject to him, not civil authorities.

Balaam was not his donkey's servant, nor was David Nathan's servant, etc. All were servants of God.
That was my point - rocks, donkeys, burning bushes etc; all things that GOD uses to get his message across/proclaim his word.
It's not different with women; some are called by GOD into this role. It is not about a woman seeking equal rights, attention, status or anything else - she preaches God's word to God's people in God's house and helps to further God's kingdom. There is only one Gospel, and we preach the same Good News that the men do.

Yes, God prepared Esther for that trial, though we do not find Esther ruling from a throne.
My point was that God used her as part of his plan. She, effectively, did tell both the King and Mordecai what they should so. Neither responded by saying "we're in charge here; you'll do as I say", they accepted her words and guidance.
Bearing children is the natural role of a woman, and one which honors God.
My point was that God called these women for specific tasks/roles. And women brought up, cared for and educated their children; at least in the early years.
 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
6,211
1,730
✟204,683.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
At the time of Abraham, it was a common practice for an infertile wife to give her husband children via one of her maids. It was a form of surrogacy, and the belief was that if the child were born on the knees of the wife, it belonged to her, and not to the maid. We see this same practice followed later by Jacob, whose wives gave him their handmaids. In the Hebrew language, the word for this "handmaid" is "shiphchah," which the lexicon may say can mean part of the family, but which actually has a nuance of meaning "family builder," and multiple records in the Old Testament see these "handmaidens" becoming surrogate mothers for their masters/mistresses.
Yes.
However, I believe that even though Sarai and Abram were following local custom, they were not in line with God's will, and should have known better.
You acknowledge that this continued with Isaac and Jacob, why do you assume they should have known better. Better than what?
Abraham thought the seed would be from his hosehold servant....Common practice as well, that a purchased slave a (bondman) given a wife (bondwoman), if he were to go free and children would not leave with him, they belonged to Abraham.....
God told Abraham, no his homeborn servant would not be heir...
Ge 15:4 And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

Their actions, taking matters into their own hands, showed a lack of faith in God and in His promises.
What promises?
He first understood this to be speaking of his steward of his house. Just like a barren woman with a servant woman... God corrected that From his own bowels....
God did not say anything about Sarahs womb, as a correction. Instead of heirs through his household servant, it is by his own loins...
There was no promise to Sarah, her womb until years later.
This was not a mistake, there is no such testimony Concerning Abraham and Sarah in that way at all...


It was because of their faithlessness that Abraham was later brought to the severe test on Mount Moriah.
No, no, no, The women are an allegory, for 2 covenants, 2 sons....No mistake...
Moriah was a test of Abrahams' faith because of this
Gen 15:12 ¶ And when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and, lo, an horror of great darkness fell upon him.
13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.

******What is specifically said to Abraham here........He dies in this covenant.........

15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.

*****Which seed is specific to this covenant? The 4th generation of his seed.


16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again: for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.
17 ¶ And it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark, behold a smoking furnace, and a burning lamp that passed between those pieces.
18 In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:

*****The land is to the 4th generation of his seed. Not only does Abraham die, So does Isaac, Jacob and all the patriarchs...... Dieing and death for them all in this covenant....
Right here sets the foundation of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacobs, and the 12 Patriarchs of Israel, to faith in the resurrection from the dead to inherit the land themselves....
And so it was...

Ex 1:6 And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.
Joseph understood it to be after he was dead, and to another generation (the fourth)

Ge 50:25 And Joseph took an oath of the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence.
Ex 13:19 And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him: for he had straitly sworn the children of Israel, saying, God will surely visit you; and ye shall carry up my bones away hence with you.

The book of Hebrews as well as the book of Acts testifies to this.

Heb 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.

Acts 7:2 And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran,
3 And said unto him, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew thee.

Clearly, it was no mistake.......Inheriance in the land to 4th generation....

4 Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in Charran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell.

Abraham given no inheritance in it Gen 15 they die

5 And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on: yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child.
6 And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and entreat them evil four hundred years.

Interestingly the Levites also had no inheritance in the land among their brethren, the Lord, was their inheritance, the tithe, their priesthood.
So as all of us have our faith tested so did Abraham. Abraham had to be alive After death to inherit, so too Isaac, , so too Jacob
Heb 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,
18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:
19 Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure.

The resurrection from the dead, the second covenant of life after death Gen 17
The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob, Not the God of the dead but of the living....
 
Last edited:
  • Useful
Reactions: Rose_bud
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
28,054
8,044
NW England
✟1,062,385.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Their actions, taking matters into their own hands, showed a lack of faith in God and in His promises. It was because of their faithlessness that Abraham was later brought to the severe test on Mount Moriah.
Sarah didn't receive any promises from God - and it was Abraham who was tested, not her.
The text does not say, or even hint, that he was tested because of his faithlessness.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ralliann
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,712
12,224
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,192,054.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
As has already been pointed out "Priestess/es" is incorrect; it implies Paganism and is a slur.
Pagans also had "priests". How is it a slur?
In Greek, the wife of a "presbyter" is known as "presbytera", which is the feminine form of the word. It did not then follow that she was also a priest.
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
28,054
8,044
NW England
✟1,062,385.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Pagans also had "priests". How is it a slur?
In Greek, the wife of a "presbyter" is known as "presbytera", which is the feminine form of the word. It did not then follow that she was also a priest.
"Priestess" refers to, or conjures up the idea of, a pagan woman carrying out pagan rites.
It is not a term used by the church.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,712
12,224
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,192,054.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
"Priestess" refers to, or conjures up the idea of, a pagan woman carrying out pagan rites.
It is not a term used by the church.
It has not been used by the Church because they haven't existed in the Church, but the Church has happily co-opted the term "priest" despite having pagan counterparts.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
6,211
1,730
✟204,683.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Sarah didn't receive any promises from God - and it was Abraham who was tested, not her.
The text does not say, or even hint, that he was tested because of his faithlessness.
Exactly. Sarah did not receive the promise personally until Genesis 17. Sarah gave Abraham her maid by faith, as Abrahams wife. We have no witness anywhere in scripture that they were anything ither than faithful?
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
28,054
8,044
NW England
✟1,062,385.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It has not been used by the Church because they haven't existed in the Church, but the Church has happily co-opted the term "priest" despite having pagan counterparts.
There were priests in the OT - I suspect that is why the church uses the word "priests."
Peter said that we are a royal priesthood; I doubt he was thinking of pagans.
 
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,712
12,224
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,192,054.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
There were priests in the OT - I suspect that is why the church uses the word "priests."
The word used in Greek is "ἱερεὺς" (iereus)
Peter said that we are a royal priesthood; I doubt he was thinking of pagans.
It is the same word as above. The word "priest" as used in the Church comes from "presbyteros" which means "elder", and as I stated earlier, the wife of the "presbyteros" is called "presbytera". She is honored after her husband's profession but it does not make her a priest. It was the same for the wife of a doctor or the wife of a mayor, they were called the feminine form of their husband's profession.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Ted-01
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ignatius the Kiwi

Dissident
Mar 2, 2013
7,196
3,817
✟293,966.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
As has already been pointed out "Priestess/es" is incorrect; it implies Paganism and is a slur.
The correct term is "Priests"
Actually all it implies is female priests. Which you support. Why were the Pagans better than Christians on this issue?
I doubt they had pulpits then.
In Scripture women proclaimed the Gospel, prophesied and taught about God.
And they weren't pastors or elders.
Apart from allowing women to learn, allowing women to be witnesses to the Gospel and resurrection, appointing deaconesses and a female deacon and generally affirming women as those who were created by God, alongside men.
Why didnt he then appoint women as leaders over men? Either in his time or the time of the Apostles?
The Apostles met, debated and argued against many false teachings/teachers; the place of women in church, their gifts and calling from God and their place in the Kingdom was never mentioned. Nor did Jesus teach "I will build my church ........ but women will play no part in this."
When did anyone say women are to have no part in the Church? Their part howrver is not in being clerics, which they can never legitimately be.
Was he too cowardly to appoint a Gentile?
No he was deliberate in first excluding gentiles.
 
Upvote 0