Sacrament talk: Women and the priesthood

[paper face]

Just for clarity, Mary being referred to as "Apostle to the Apostles" was an idea that came out of the Middle Ages if I recall correctly. I'd have to review the dating of the more general concept, but 3rd or 4th century sounds about right.

That's fine, but the middle ages is generally considered to be the 5th through the 15th centuries. If the concept developed in the middle ages as you said, it would have to hit puberty before it was even born.

[Amonhi]

It doesn't change the fact that on the all important principles and ordinances of the gospel: faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentence, Baptism, and the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands are not still 100% intact.

It certainly is, more or less, but it is there.

Moreover, the Lord's annointed still do have the keys of the Priesthood and they do speak with God.

Yes, God still leads the church from the top down but his voice, the Holy Ghost, just as he did anciently under the direction of Peter after he left. For an extensive discussion and many detailed examples of how the Lord directly leads the church See this thread - How the Lord Leads His Church Today....

Knowing who exactly was on the mountain or whether or womb is a veil or not will not gain us admission into the Kindgom of God or the Kindgom of Heaven (Celestial). You know what will? The first four principles and ordinances of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

:ymapplause: :ymapplause: I agree.

Peace,
Amonhi

[lemuel]

Just for clarity, Mary being referred to as "Apostle to the Apostles" was an idea that came out of the Middle Ages if I recall correctly. I'd have to review the dating of the more general concept, but 3rd or 4th century sounds about right.

That's fine, but the middle ages is generally considered to be the 5th through the 15th centuries. If the concept developed in the middle ages as you said, it would have to hit puberty before it was even born.

Mary Magdalene was the first witness of the Resurrection, making her a special witness, an Apostle. She bore that witness to the 12 Apostles. In this way she was "Apostle to the Apostles".

[Amonhi]

The way Christ treated and respected women and the position he gave them, seemed to upset even the Apostles when you read other writings from that day, for it appears Christ made Mary an Apostle, even the Apostle to the Apostles. So it doesn't appear that Christ believed in Paul's submission of women either.

That is what I have learned as well from scriptures like the Gospel according Mary or the Gospel according to Philip or the gospel according to Thomas. It is a shame that didn't make the cut into the bible, but it is also clear to see why.

Even today there are still some men who want to demean women and require their submission to men, in marriage or the Church or even society, for they do not want to honor and respect women's true equality like Christ did.

This is due to a book called "The witches hammer" which was considered equal to the bible for hundreds of years and was used to prove people witches. It used the bible references like those from Paul to subject and kill many thousands to hundreds of thousands of women. Many t=of the teachings of this book are well and alive today and taught over the pulpit without knowing where they came from.

Peace Lilli, (That never gets old),
Amonhi

[Dannyk]

A very long but fascinating read regarding some of Joseph's comments regarding women and the priesthood, and historical examples of female apostles: http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org ... rdination/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Even if Mary being Apostle to the Apostles can be questioned (as in some believe it simply means witness to the Apostles), you cannot discount some of the other historical examples of female leadership - as in Junia the Apostle (KJV has her name as Junius and therefore male...but scholarship shows this is incorrect and a convenient change made later to deemphasize the role of women in the early church. There are a few others as well.

The article also covers some interesting material on apocryphal Enoch books - showing the place that Wisdom/Ashera (as a female counterpart to Jehovah) had at times. This female counterpart, later removed by the deutoronomists is well documented here http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/prophe ... ogy/...and" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; seems to be related to some of the things Lehi learns in his visions which come at a time shortly after their removal.

Good stuff. And very insightful comments overall. Thanks to all who've taken time to post.

[Amonhi]

Just for clarity, Mary being referred to as "Apostle to the Apostles" was an idea that came out of the Middle Ages if I recall correctly. I'd have to review the dating of the more general concept, but 3rd or 4th century sounds about right.

That's fine, but the middle ages is generally considered to be the 5th through the 15th centuries. If the concept developed in the middle ages as you said, it would have to hit puberty before it was even born.

That was cute. I enjoy a good humorous comment.

Peace,
Amonhi

[Hyrcanus]

Just for clarity, Mary being referred to as "Apostle to the Apostles" was an idea that came out of the Middle Ages if I recall correctly. I'd have to review the dating of the more general concept, but 3rd or 4th century sounds about right.

That's fine, but the middle ages is generally considered to be the 5th through the 15th centuries. If the concept developed in the middle ages as you said, it would have to hit puberty before it was even born.

Mary being an Apostle in the sense of Priesthood office is dintinct from the concept of her being an Apostle to the Apostles, which is a reference to her role in telling the ordained Apostles that Christ was risen.

In any case, I don't intend it as an argument against any of the broader discussion, I just thought it was a useful historical clarification to offer.

[Lilli]

A very long but fascinating read regarding some of Joseph's comments regarding women and the priesthood, and historical examples of female apostles: http://www.feministmormonhousewives.org ... rdination/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Even if Mary being Apostle to the Apostles can be questioned (as in some believe it simply means witness to the Apostles), you cannot discount some of the other historical examples of female leadership - as in Junia the Apostle (KJV has her name as Junius and therefore male...but scholarship shows this is incorrect and a convenient change made later to deemphasize the role of women in the early church. There are a few others as well.

The article also covers some interesting material on apocryphal Enoch books - showing the place that Wisdom/Ashera (as a female counterpart to Jehovah) had at times. This female counterpart, later removed by the deutoronomists is well documented here http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/prophe ... ogy/...and" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; seems to be related to some of the things Lehi learns in his visions which come at a time shortly after their removal.

Good stuff. And very insightful comments overall. Thanks to all who've taken time to post.

Thank you very much for those links Danny. They have so much info that clearly supports women's rights and role and history in all church leadership roles.

[Rick Grimes]

My point is that I do not believe anyone is going to side with Paul, because he was wrong. Even Rick Grimes is not willing to side with Paul when push comes to shove.

I will "side" with Paul, and all other established scripture. Not because it is convenient for me or to my agenda, but because it is the inspired word of God. I will write more on this tommorow, but it's late and I have to work in the morning. Paul wrote many things that have often been misunderstood. Unfortunatly, we do not have all the writings of the apostles. Alot of the writings in the Bible are from Paul. He had a unique writing style and often expressed himself in unique ways. This, in no way, diminished his authority to speak in the name of the Lord. A careful of study of his writings, countered with the writings of other apostles and prophets gives us a more full picture or meaning of what Paul was conveying. I will write more later though.

Until then, I will leave you with this, "....Even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him, hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." 2 Peter 3:15-16

[Seek the Truth]

It's very interesting, when I was younger women having Priesthood in the temple and the Mary Madelene stuff was construed as a positive for the LDS Church past and present, now people seem to be using it against the LDS Church.

[Seek the Truth]

Until then, I will leave you with this, "....Even as our beloved brother Paul aslo according to the wisom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these htings; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." 2 Peter 3:15-16

Pretty heavy scripture. There is another that complements this that will rock people's worlds.

[Rick Grimes]

To my point, I am saying that we are on the same standing and using the same foundation. I am saying that I disregard those sayings of Paul which are obviously incorrect and that you do too. If you can prove me wrong simply by declaring boldly that you believe what Paul taught and that you honestly feel that we should follow his "Thus sayeth the Lord" commandments and:
•Let your women keep silence in the churches
•it is not permitted unto them to speak
•they are commanded to be under obedience
•if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home
•it is a shame for women to speak in the church
•Why Paul followed this up with "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord."
You completely ignored this entirely[/b]. Either you believe it, or you do not or perhaps you have an alternate translation which we might both agree on? But any sincere seeker will acknowledge that Paul had a view of women and their role and that view influenced everything he said on the matter. That view and everything he said based on it was true or not.

I have not ignored this. And, yes, I do believe that this is Heaven inspired scripture that is true and worthy of study. However, like in all things, context is important.

My point is that I do not believe anyone is going to side with Paul, because he was wrong. Even Rick Grimes is not willing to side with Paul when push comes to shove.

Just to be clear, I will repeat myself:

I will "side" with Paul, and all other established scripture.

But any sincere seeker will acknowledge that Paul had a view of women and their role and that view influenced everything he said on the matter.

I take your meaning by this and several of your previous posts that Paul was "sexist". You claim that by him stating the following, that he was somehow demeaning towards women.

•Let your women keep silence in the churches
•it is not permitted unto them to speak
•they are commanded to be under obedience
•if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home
•it is a shame for women to speak in the church

Again, context matters.... So here goes. Paul was a pharisee. (Acts 23:6) They were zealous observers of the Law of Moses and all its tenents, as laid out by the Torah. (This is important to remember) After Christ's resurrection, the early Jewish-Christians were still observing the Law of Moses. This even caused some dissension in the early church after Gentiles started converting into the faith, and the question of whether or not they needed to observe the rest of the Law of Moses as well was addressed by Peter and the other apostles. (Acts 15)

Although Paul did not push the issue of Gentiles living by the Law of Moses, he certainly was a strict observer of it himself.(Acts 22:3)

It is important to know that his audience that he addressed this epistle too, was to a community of Jewish Christians in the Roman Colony of Corinth. Debauchery and other boisterous bahaviour was making its way into the church there and Paul, having heard these reports, wrote to correct or call back these Saints from their errors. Among these errors, were the constant disruptions that were common place in the churches. (talking gibberish ie. tongues, arguing on points of doctrine, contentions about the doctrines during meetings, etc....)

You quote Acts 14:34-36 as evidence that Paul was antagnostic towards women.

]•Let your women keep silence in the churches
•it is not permitted unto them to speak
•they are commanded to be under obedience
•if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home
•it is a shame for women to speak in the church

Yet, you seem to overlook that he makes a similiar statement towards men just a few verses before.

If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

Paul must be sexist against both genders, huh?

Admittedly, Paul is a little more pointed in his address towards the women of the congregation but that was because these Jewish Christians were not following the Law or Torah by allowing women to speak in the meeting. Which is why he states....

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

Here is one such example of the role of women in the synogues that many of the early Jewish Christians attended. You are free to find more examples as there are plenty.

The second thing that must be understood is the separation of men and women during prayer. According to Jewish Law, men and women must be separated during prayer, usually by a wall or curtain called a mechitzah or by placing women in a second floor balcony. There are two reasons for this: first, your mind is supposed to be on prayer, not on the pretty girl praying near you. Second, many pagan religious ceremonies at the time Judaism was founded involved sexual activity and orgies, and the separation prevents or at least discourages this. Interestingly, although men should not be able to see women during prayer, women are permitted to see men during prayer. This seems to reflect the opinion that women are better able to concentrate on prayer with an attractive member of the opposite sex visible.

The combination of this exemption from certain mitzvot and this separation often has the result that women have an inferior place in the synagogue. Women are not obligated by Jewish law to attend formal religious services, and cannot participate in many aspects of the services

http://www.jewfaq.org/women.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have highlighted the parts that specifiy that this was Jewish Law. This was NOT authored by Paul. Paul was merely calling out what the Torah/Law dictated about a woman's place in the church/synagogue. This does not mean that Paul or that the Lord wanted to treat women as second class citizens. Indeed, a further reading of the scriptures clarifies what the Lord's position is on women and them being able to speak to share the gospel with those around them.

“And it shall come to pass afterward
That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh;
Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,Your old men shall dream dreams,
Your young men shall see visions.

Joel 2:28

Do you really believe that Paul, a strict and ardent upholder of the Law/Torah, with a firm upbringing in the Old Testament wouldn't have been familiar with this prophesy? Obviously, it was important enough that it was quoted again the New Testament Acts 2:16-17.

Kinda takes the sting out of the charge that Paul was "Sexist" when we are able to look at the bigger picture and understand that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is indeed in order. No matter what the seeming contradiction might be, if you seek the answer, you will be able to find it. That's one of the blessings of having true revelation by the Lord's servants to help guide us. The spirit will lead us to these truths, if we will be humble enough to not have an agenda before hand that needs to be satisfied.

I again, leave you with these words from Peter, not only endorsing the words of Paul, but warning that those who reject them, risk their own destruction.

Even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

2 Peter 3:15-16

[Rick Grimes]

Mary was treated as a chief disciple in the Pistis Sophia, which scholars think was written between the 2nd and 4th centuries. It was discovered in and Egyptian crypt in 1773. If the idea of Mary as an Apostle developed in the middle ages, then a quick read of the first four chapters of the Pistis Sophia should still raise an eyebrow. Mary is the primary questioner of Christ and, at the very least, placed on equal footing with the Apostles.

When did the apostasy take place?? Oh yeah, by the end of the first century. So and idea as absurd as Mary of Magdeline being on "equal footing" (ie. an apostle) would fit in with the fact that the interpolations of man were being added into the gospel of Jesus Christ on an ongoing and steady basis. Feminism and it's followers is not a new thing. Many early cults worshipped the "sacred feminen" and no doubt, some early Christians (apostatized by this time) would have been influenced into believing this falsehood.
It needs to be remembered that the apostleship is an actual priesthood office that one is ordained to, by the laying of hands. Those who throw about terms and inferences that Mary was somehow an "apostle" do not understand the nature of priesthood and how it is passed on.

Here's an interesting meme to think upon:
Jesus Christ had many disciples that followed him. It is obvious that some of His most devoted disciples were women. They stayed true and believed in Him, even when His own apostles doubted His resurrection. Yet, for some reason, Christ never chose a woman to be numbered among them. Even after the death of Judas, when the apostles again met up to fill the vacancy, they chose Mathias (another man) to take the place of Judas. Why is it that this is totally disregarded? This is not a slam against women. Christ loved the women that followed Him, yet, not even He would break the "rules/laws of heaven" and ordained a woman to the priesthood. Why are we still arguing this tired point????? I am so done with this topic! X(

[TZONE]

Mary was treated as a chief disciple in the Pistis Sophia, which scholars think was written between the 2nd and 4th centuries. It was discovered in and Egyptian crypt in 1773. If the idea of Mary as an Apostle developed in the middle ages, then a quick read of the first four chapters of the Pistis Sophia should still raise an eyebrow. Mary is the primary questioner of Christ and, at the very least, placed on equal footing with the Apostles.

It needs to be remembered that the apostleship is an actual priesthood office that one is ordained to, by the laying of hands. Those who throw about terms and inferences that Mary was somehow an "apostle" do not understand the nature of priesthood and how it is passed on.
X(

I disagree but that is ok ;).

Church offices are not part of the priesthood, they are part of a new testament church added due to wicked men and women. this is what sidney rigdon pressured the early leaders to bring back, I don't believe joseph wanted it but since the members did the lord always gives us what we want. D&C 107 uses the word appendage.

ap·pend·age
əˈpendij/Submit
noun
plural noun: appendages
1.
(often with negative or pejorative connotations) a thing that is added or attached to something larger or more important.

meaning its not the original form.

many of the offices in Christs NT church did not exist in the beginning. And it won't exist at the end. For from the beginning you can tell the end...

moses 6: 7 Now this same Priesthood, which was in the beginning, shall be in the end of the world also.

OT priesthood -> NT tesetament (great apostasy) LDS -> OT (zion)... The world is one giant chiamus, history repeats literally. That is why isaiah was able to prophecy the end from the beginning, what he went through we are experiencing.

Isaiah 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

EDITED to add, doesn't mean I am completely right about all offices... Still waiting for further light and knowledge on this one.

[Amonhi]

I take your meaning by this and several of your previous posts that Paul was "sexist".

By our current standards, yes, absolutely. But he was inline with his own society.

You claim that by him stating the following, that he was somehow demeaning towards women.

Like I said, he was right inline with his own society but not with ours and not with truth, (not that ours is in line with truth either).

You quote Acts 14:34-36 as evidence that Paul was antagonistic towards women.

]•Let your women keep silence in the churches
•it is not permitted unto them to speak
•they are commanded to be under obedience
•if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home
•it is a shame for women to speak in the church

Yet, you seem to overlook that he makes a similiar statement towards men just a few verses before.

If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

Paul must be sexist against both genders, huh?

LOL, that WOULD be funny... Reminds me of the guy who said, "I'm not racist, I hate them all the same!" LOL. So, it seems your point is that Paul is treating them both almost equal and telling them both to be silent in the church ?in regard to speaking in tongues? hehehe. If Paul is sexist to both genders equally, then we can simply switch the roles and come to the same conclusions that Paul came to... Looks like this:

•Let your MEN keep silence in the churches
•it is not permitted unto them to speak
•they are commanded to be under obedience
•if they will learn any thing, let them ask their WIVES at home
•it is a shame for MEN to speak in the church

and

If any woman speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28 But if there be no interpreter, let her keep silence in the church; and let her speak to herself, and to God.

Yeah, I am not seeing a similar relationship between Paul's instruction toward women and his instruction toward men...

Admittedly, Paul is a little more pointed in his address towards the women of the congregation but that was because these Jewish Christians were not following the Law or Torah by allowing women to speak in the meeting.

So, you are saying that Paul was for the Law or Torah and that he was teaching its precepts as commandments because he was so into it before he joined the church. i got it. That is what I was saying too. But I added that in doing this he errored and in declaring it the commandment of God and the teachings of Jesus, he also errored. And more importantly that we are not bound to do as he instructed.

Which is why he states....

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

Your right. They had a VERY hard time letting the dead law die and moving on to the living law hence the great disputations on the subject recorded in Acts 15.

Here is one such example of the role of women in the synogues that many of the early Jewish Christians attended. You are free to find more examples as there are plenty.

The second thing that must be understood is the separation of men and women during prayer. According to Jewish Law, men and women must be separated during prayer, usually by a wall or curtain called a mechitzah or by placing women in a second floor balcony. There are two reasons for this: first, your mind is supposed to be on prayer, not on the pretty girl praying near you. Second, many pagan religious ceremonies at the time Judaism was founded involved sexual activity and orgies, and the separation prevents or at least discourages this. Interestingly, although men should not be able to see women during prayer, women are permitted to see men during prayer. This seems to reflect the opinion that women are better able to concentrate on prayer with an attractive member of the opposite sex visible.

The combination of this exemption from certain mitzvot and this separation often has the result that women have an inferior place in the synagogue. Women are not obligated by Jewish law to attend formal religious services, and cannot participate in many aspects of the services

http://www.jewfaq.org/women.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes, I agree and have been saying that Paul was heavily influenced by his social climate and upbringing and was speaking from his background more than from inspiration. That has been my point from the beginning and why I said that Ephesians 5 as quoted is also influenced by Paul's background, upbringing and social climate and so is not useful as direction for us today just as his comments in the various quotes I provided by Paul regarding women are not useful or relevant to us today. You are making my point very well... Please continue...

I have highlighted the parts that specifiy that this was Jewish Law. This was NOT authored by Paul. (I believe you mean the quote above?) Paul was merely calling out what the Torah/Law dictated about a woman's place in the church/synagogue. This does not mean that Paul or that the Lord wanted to treat women as second class citizens.

You have driven the conversation to the point that you are saying that Paul was not speaking his own opinions and convictions but was quoting the law or Torah. And yet it seems that using your first point in your response in this post, Paul was a "zealous observers of the Law of Moses and all its tenents, as laid out by the Torah." In other words he was speaking his own opinion as learned from the Law and tenants of the torah. I get this from your pointing out the following:

"Paul was a pharisee. (Acts 23:6) They were zealous observers of the Law of Moses and all its tenents, as laid out by the Torah. (This is important to remember)... Although Paul did not push the issue of Gentiles living by the Law of Moses, he certainly was a strict observer of it himself.(Acts 22:3)

Now, I am not questioning whether it was Jewish law or not or the customs of the time. That is clear!

And it appears clear to me that this was according to Paul's upbringing and convictions as you pointed out, he being such a major follower of the Law of Moses. (It must have been really hard for him to let go of the law of Moses and accept that it was not needed for salvation just like we have a hard time letting go of the "Preparatory Gospel" and accepting that it is not needed for salvation.)

Indeed, a further reading of the scriptures clarifies what the Lord's position is on women and them being able to speak to share the gospel with those around them.

“And it shall come to pass afterward
That I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh;
Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,Your old men shall dream dreams,
Your young men shall see visions.

Joel 2:28

I am very well aware of the Lord's thoughts in relation to the strengths, abilities, faith and powers of women. The Lord's words regarding women does not save or undo Paul from Paul's words regarding women. Just because some other prophet gave a view of women does not mean that Paul's view of women was the same by default.

Do you really believe that Paul, a strict and ardent upholder of the Law/Torah, with a firm upbringing in the Old Testament wouldn't have been familiar with this prophesy? Obviously, it was important enough that it was quoted again the New Testament Acts 2:16-17.

And Acts 2:16-17 was spoken by Peter as indicated in verse 14, not Paul. So again Peter's words cannot fix for Paul what Paul said in multiple places as if Peter's understand was the same as Paul's and they were really trying to say the same thing.

Kinda takes the sting out of the charge that Paul was "Sexist" when we are able to look at the bigger picture and understand that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is indeed in order.

Not really. Paul was a sexist according to our current standards. Jesus was not, Peter was not. But Paul got his views of women from his heritage and society:

" 6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question." Acts 23:6

No matter what the seeming contradiction might be, if you seek the answer, you will be able to find it.

You are right. When scriptures contradict, you can still find the truth. In this particular exercise, we are not trying to point out the truth, we are pointing out Paul's teachings and views towards women which are not aligned with truth or Christ or Peter. We cannot understand Paul's views on women by reading Peter's views on Women or the Lord's views on Women. And as we have multiple statements by Paul and his history and social environment well documented, it has become clear with all these witnesses and references what Paul's views were as they relate to women. And those views according to today's standards and even eternal truth were sexist.

That's one of the blessings of having true revelation by the Lord's servants to help guide us. The spirit will lead us to these truths, if we will be humble enough to not have an agenda before hand that needs to be satisfied.

I agree that the Lords servants can help guide us. But I also agree that we cannot take the words of one like Paul who says he speaks the commandments of the Lord as truth without the bigger picture as you showed us. If it were not for the bigger picture of the teachings of other prophets, and if we were only given Paul's views on women then women would be treated like they were 2000 years ago by the catholic church and the Jews and today like the Muslims.

So far you have completely discredited paul's words by quoting Joel and Peter who speak to the contrary and say that this somehow puts everything into context. But it doesn't put Paul's words into the context of his own life and views. Your quotes about Paul being a Pharisee by birth and belief as well as the quote to the Jews Law do a very good job of putting Paul's words into the context of his life, history and views. And that context supports the plain and straightforward view and instructions he gave regarding women.

It seems that you are saying that contrary to Paul's words you have no issue with women speaking in church or with men learning from women or women being placed in teaching roles to men or in leadership roles over men since you used the words of Joel and of Peter to discredit Paul's words and clarify what you feel is a more accurate view of the true nature and divine nature, right and power of women. If this is not the case, and you still agree with Paul in regard to the roles and divine nature of women, then I challenge you to use the many references given by Paul regarding women to show their true standing in the church and in relation to men and God. And while you are at it, show how and why you agree with Paul on his statements that you still have neglected to address as true or false according to your own convictions:

By this, I mean, do you Rick Grimes believe that women should keep silent in church, not being permitted to speak, give talks, or serve as Gospel Doctrine or other teaching roles over men, that they are commanded to be obedient and subservient to men, and that if they are to learn anything they should ask their husbands at home because it is a shame for them to speak in church?

A simple yes or no will suffice, but feel free to explain why you agree or disagree with Paul's teachings on the subject.

I would not be so direct and insistent if you had not criticized me for doing openly what you do in secret. You cannot make paul's words true without changing them. You can change them or discredit them with the words of some other prophet, but that does not make Paul of the scriptures he wrote about women's place in our church and society true or worthy of applying.

I again, leave you with these words from Peter, not only endorsing the words of Paul, but warning that those who reject them, risk their own destruction.

Even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

2 Peter 3:15-16

Remember that context that you keep talking about? Well, You will notice that Peter is not talking about Paul's words regarding women. Is is talking about, "all his epistles, speaking in them of these things. And the things which Peter is speaking of are the events of the Second Coming which are hard to understand. Paul's words regarding women are not hard to understand at all. Hard to believe yes, and implement, sure, understand? not at all, he was very clear. Even you yourself said so. Here are these verses in context:

But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. - 2 Peter 3:10-16

Do not construe this reference as Peter agreeing to everything Paul ever taught or wrote in an Epistle regarding women or other topics except for those about the second coming of the Lord as given in context.

Bold and Overbearing, ;)
Amonhi

EDIT: Corrected quotes
EDIT2: Changed signoff

[Rick Grimes]

Boldly,
Amonhi

Sorry..... I had this big long rebuttal against all of the points that you made, when the words of the Savior came to my mind. "the spirit of contention is of the devil". I literally deleted everything I wrote. I'm out.

I will not refute what you wrote. I have already testified of the veracity of the scriptures and have named numerous sources and quoted numerous scriptures that back up what I claim. If you want to interpret the scriptures your own way, than that's on you. I'm not arguing with you anymore. B-)

[Reggie]

I have learned so much on this thread. Sometimes I feel like the scriptures were written through men for men. It feels like women are just left out altogether. Unless you understand the customs and ways of a certain time period it is so easy to be misled. I don't even know where any scripture that even mentions our heavenly mother is. It is like she was surmised because of the other doctrines like "if this; then this". For all we know, maybe God's way is to keep women silent, hid, in the dark, powerless. Some of the scriptures in the D&C addressing women, I feel are frightening. Every other sentence is "or I will destroy her". @-) :-ss I can't think of one book of scripture that was written through a woman addressing women's issues. So, I don't know. What's a girl to think? :-\ I do know from my own experiences that God loves me and has a purpose for me. What exactly that is, I'm still working on.

[sarahmj]

So I gave my talk today. It went down very well, some people said it's the best talk they've heard in years. I was happy that everyone seemed to get a lot out of it. So here it is for anyone who cares to read it.

Brothers and Sisters, it is my privilege to speak to you today on a subject that I have been pondering and praying about for the last few months. My topic today is Women and the priesthood.

Before I begin I wish to warn you that some of the things I say today may be things that you have never heard before, and some of it is not necessarily commonly accepted doctrine. But I will leave it up to your own powers of discernment as to whether you feel the things I say come from God or are the philosophies of men.

With that caveat I wish to quote Elder Bruce R. McConkie who said:

"This doctrine of the priesthood- unknown in the world and but little known even in the church- cannot be learned out of the scriptures alone. It is not set forth in the sermons and teachings of the prophets and Apostles, except in small measure. The doctrine of the priesthood is known only by personal revelation. It comes line upon line, precept upon precept, by the power of the Holy Ghost to those who love and serve God with all their heart, might, mind and strength”

So only by personal revelation will we fully understand the Priesthood. Keep that in mind.

Now you may have heard recently of the “ordain women” movement in the church, where some women are seeking ordination to the priesthood and “equality”. They have a fancy website with hundreds of photos of women and men with blurbs like:

“Hi, I’m Julia. For my mother, sisters, nieces and friends, I imagine an LDS faith in which women are ordained and share priesthood responsibilities”

and

“ Hi, I’m Megan. I don’t believe inequality is divine. I believe in continuing revelation. I believe our leaders have divine power to receive revelation that will give women full membership in Christ’s church. I believe women should be ordained”

and even some men are in on it:

“Hi, I’m Al. I remember as a teenage priest looking over the congregation while seated at the sacrament table and realizing that the women I knew were just as pious as the men. It seemed odd that women weren’t ordained to the priesthood, especially since I had been taught ordination was based on worthiness.”

To be honest, when I read these statements, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. It saddens me that so many, both men and women do not understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the plan of salvation and the vital role of women in that plan.

So let me explain why I believe that the ordination of women in this life is completely redundant and why I believe women already possess divine power and authority.

First, let’s briefly talk about the nature of God. We know from modern day revelation that we have a Heavenly Father and a Heavenly Mother, who are sealed in the new and everlasting covenant of marriage, who are perfect and exalted beings. We know that our Heavenly Father could not be the exalted being that He is without His eternal companion. We know they are both true equals, that our Heavenly Mother rules and reigns equally with Him. They have equal power and dominion. He is a King, and She is His Queen. Equal in glory, and most importantly, equal in love for their spirit children.

We are told in the scriptures that we are created in the image of God. Perhaps the word “God” in this context means both our Heavenly Father and our Heavenly Mother. Men are made in the image of Heavenly Father, and women of Heavenly Mother.

Now let’s talk about our first earthly parents, Adam and Eve.
Do you think it’s interesting that God didn’t place them both in the garden at the same time? He placed Adam there first, perhaps in an attempt to teach Adam how helpless he was without his helpmeet. Then God took from Adam’s side, a rib and formed a woman. And this is also interesting and symbolic. God didn’t take one of Adam’s vertebrae, so that woman was symbolically behind him, and he didn’t take a tarsal bone so that she was under him. He took a rib, so that symbolically she was equal and next to him in importance, and under his arm to be protected and near his heart to be loved. It is also interesting that most other mammals have 13 pairs of ribs, while humans enjoy 12 pairs (there’s the taxonomy geek in me coming out).

So God placed before them two trees. The tree of knowledge of good and evil and the tree of life. He also gave them two commandments. To multiply and replenish the earth and not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Adam and Eve being in a terrestrial and innocent state, did not have the capacity to create mortal bodies, they needed to be mortal in order to do that. Eve understood this principle. Eve was not an airhead, neither was she tricked or deceived. The Hebrew word that was translated for Beguile is a rare verb which indicates an intense multilevel experience, evoking great emotional, psychological, and/or spiritual trauma.
Adam hearkened unto Eve and also partook of the fruit so together they could create mortal bodies for God’s spirit children.

Now think about this for a minute. There are two people, two trees, two veils, two stewardships. I believe that women preside over the first veil, the veil of birth as represented by the tree of knowledge of good and evil. And likewise that men preside over the second veil as represented by the tree of life. Who is behind the second veil? Our Heavenly Father, waiting with open arms to receive us. If we could glimpse through the first veil, the veil of birth, what do you think we might see? I think we would see our Heavenly Mother, guiding and ushering her spirit children into their mortal tabernacles.
All those spirits who chose God’s plan get to pass through the first veil and partake of the fruit of the first tree. But only those who keep their second estate will get to partake of the second tree.

In a sense Adam was born of Eve because he accepted the fruit of the first tree from her and entered into mortality. Likewise, in mortality it was up to Eve to hearken to Adam to partake of the fruit of the second tree to return back to God.

Now let’s dig a little deeper. President Hicnkley said that "God planted within women something divine”. Wouldn’t it stand to reason if God planted in woman divinity, that divine authority and power would go hand in hand with that divinity?
What is the temple? It is the gate of heaven. What is the purpose of temples? In short, it is Veil work. We are told in the scriptures that the body is a temple. What did God plant in women that was divine? They planted a womb inside her, this womb is a veil, a gateway for the spirits of God between heaven and earth. If the womb is a veil, then sex, pregnancy, birth and lactation are ordinances under the female priesthood.
In his talk of Souls, symbols and sacraments, Elder Jeffrey R. Holland compares physical intimacy to a sacrament.


If the womb is a veil and the physical union of a man and a woman is a sacrament or an ordinance, then is it no wonder why the Lord delights in the chastity of women? For letting one who is not authorised to enter your veil would be blasphemy to God.

There is some beautiful symbolism that motherhood shares with the atonement, but I don’t have time to elaborate today. Perhaps it could be a topic for another talk.

Back to the symbolism of the two trees, I would like to quote Valerie Hudson, a scholar on this subject, it’s kind of long so bear with me:

"One important thing we are taught by our doctrine is that the sons of God are apprentices to Heavenly Father, and that the final destiny of a son of God--the pinnacle of all he can hope to attain--is the Fatherhood. (Mosiah 14:10) What we call the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods are simply the path of apprenticeship to become a Heavenly Father. After all, God the Father does not call himself after one of the offices of the apprenticeship—of all the titles he could possibly claim, God the Father takes unto himself the title of Father. We need to understand this more fully than we have to date. Biological fatherhood here on earth is not the template for Fatherhood; rather, Fatherhood is the template for biological fatherhood here on earth. What we call priesthood, then, is Fatherhood-training, qualifying a son of God more fully to become a Heavenly Father than biological fatherhood alone, expanding and deepening our concept of what it means to be a father in mortality. Indeed, one can aspire to Fatherhood and progress in one’s apprenticeship to become a Father without ever having sired a child in this mortal life and, in turn, biological fatherhood can be profoundly magnified when a man has apprenticed himself to the Father in the glorious work of bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of mankind in the Great Plan of Happiness.


And so it is for the daughters of God. The daughters of God are apprentices to Heavenly Mother, and the final destiny of a daughter of God--the pinnacle of all she can hope to attain--is the Motherhood. Biological motherhood here on earth is not the template for Motherhood; rather, Motherhood is the template for biological motherhood here on earth. The apprenticeship to be a Mother has, at various times in the Church, been called priestesshood; at other times it has been referred to as being a Mother in Israel or a Mother in Zion. This apprenticeship is Motherhood-training, qualifying one more fully to become a Heavenly Mother than biological motherhood alone, expanding and deepening our concept of what it means to be a mother in mortality. Indeed, one can aspire to Motherhood and progress in one’s apprenticeship without ever having given birth to a child in this mortal life and, in turn, biological motherhood can be profoundly magnified when a woman has apprenticed herself to the Mother in the magnificent work of bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of mankind in the Great Plan of Happiness.


Given these interlocking stewardships in the Plan, it is evident that at some point men were asked to hearken unto the daughters of God in their apprenticeship to Heavenly Mother. It is my opinion that this covenant was undertaken by the sons of God before approaching the doorway of the First Tree, over which the daughters of God preside. Later, once past the First Tree, women are asked to hearken unto the sons of God in their apprenticeship to Heavenly Father. We know this covenant is undertaken by the daughters of God before approaching the doorway of the Second Tree over which the sons of God preside.


When we step back, what we see is a beautiful Plan in which men and women hold equal power and hearken unto each other in order to bring to pass the eternal life of mankind. From this vantage point stepping back, what would it mean for women to ask men to ordain them to divine power in the apprenticeship that prepares one to become a Father?”


It would be like men asking the church to bestow upon them the power women have to give birth.


It is plausible to see why some women can feel neglected in this life since there is so much focus on men and the priesthood and the second veil. We all have already passed through the first veil, so naturally our focus here on earth is on the ordinances of the priesthood that lead us to the second veil.

Have you ever wondered why it is a requirement for men to be ordained to the priesthood before they enter the temple, but for a woman, it is not? A 12 year old boy must be ordained to the Aaronic priesthood in order to be baptised for the dead, but a young woman has no such requirement.
For those of you who have only been to the temple to do baptisms, you might be tempted to think that all women do there is issue temple clothing and towels and try and look pretty. Women play a significant role in the higher ordinances of the temple. In fact, the role women play was something that touched me deeply when I received my own endowment for the first time.
I have been an ordinance worker for two and a half years now. I have officiated in hundreds of ordinances for both the living and the dead. I have been given authority from the Temple president, who holds the keys, to perform those ordinances, but he did not need to ordain me to the priesthood in order to officiate in the ordinances of the priesthood. Why?
Is it because we were ordained to the female priesthood pre-mortally? Is it because we possess a gateway to heaven in us already? Is it because of some other reason? I don’t quite know the answer to that one yet. But whatever the reason, it is clear women hold equal power to men, but we have been authorised to use that power differently.

Elder Matthew Cowley said of women:

“You belong to the great sorority of saviourhood….Men are different, men have to have something given to them in mortality to make them saviours of men, but not mothers, not women. You are born with an inherent right, and inherent authority, to be the saviours of human souls”.

In her new book, Sheri Dew said that:

Endowed, covenant keeping women have direct access to priesthood power for their own lives. What does that mean? It means that we can receive revelation, be blessed and aided by the ministering of angels, learn to part the veil that separates us from our Heavenly Father, be strengthened to resist temptation, be protected, and be enlightened and made smarter than we are- all without any mortal intermediary.
Eliza R. Snow said that Latter-Day saint women “Have greater and higher privileges than any other females upon the face of this earth”. This is because the temple gives LDS women spiritual privileges no other women on earth may claim.


Can you see why this ordain women business is completely unnecessary? Can you see why the statements of Julia, Megan and Al I quoted before are so misguided?

Remember that Satan’s mission here on earth is to destroy the church of God. He delights in division and contention. He is the father of lies, if he ever tries to tell you that you are of no worth, that God does not love you,that your temple is ugly and not good enough, that you do not enjoy full membership in Christ’s church, that you are inferior to men because you have not been ordained to the priesthood in this life, that you are a second class citizen in the Kingdom of God. Then sisters, you use your priesthood power to rebuke him, tell him where to go and how to get there!
He is a jealous old bachelor who will never have a physical body, never have a wife and never have God’s priesthood.

Brethren, what can you do to help women realise their worth and potential? Always stay worthy to exercise the priesthood that has been given to you. Do not view pornography. Do not objectify us in any way. Treat us like the Queens and Priestesses we are destined to become.

Sisters, let’s sustain and support the Brethren in their callings.
The brethren who hold the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods, these men who offer the fruit of the second tree to us, who do they represent? They represent Jesus Christ.
The next time you partake of the sacrament bread and water, imagine it is the Saviour himself offering you the symbols of his body and blood, imagine when you stretch forth your hand to partake that you can see the marks in his hand. The next time you are baptised for the dead, close your eyes and imagine it is the Saviour himself gently lowering you into the water and raising you up. The next time you are confirmed for the dead, close your eyes and imagine that it is the Saviour with his hands on your head, confirming you a member of His church. For those of you who are endowed, imagine the Saviour himself, washing, anointing, clothing you, presenting you before the veil. When you find your eternal companion and are sealed for time and eternity, imagine it is the Saviour himself binding you together.

I know Jesus Christ is the head of this church. I know that through the ordinances of the Holy priesthood we can again come back into the presence of our Heavenly parents. I trust Jesus Christ. I trust that He knows best how to run His church. I know that priesthood blessings are for all, and all righteous men and women have access to God’s power.

[Reggie]

Fantastic Sarahmj. I wish I could have heard it delivered. :ymapplause:

[paper face]

Great talk, Sarah.

[sarahmj]

Couldn't have done it without you paper face!

[paper face]

The credit goes to Valerie Hudson Cassler. A mother, feminist, and BYU professor who realized that Jesus claims concerning the body being a temple don't merely infer abstract sacredness.

[TZONE]

What a great talk.

[Amonhi]

Some people didn't know that many women in the church today hold the priesthood. I thought I would bump this thread so that they could lean a little more about how women are made officiators inn the Melchizedek and Aaronic Priesthoods.

Peace,
Amonhi

[Amonhi]

Here is an interesting letter I received from a friend regarding a talk by Elder Ballard given last year about women receiving the priesthood through the endowment.

Here is a letter I sent to some of my family...

There is a growing group called, "http://ordainwomen.org/". They succeeded in convincing the church leadership to invite women to pray in General Conference which happened for the first time in April of this year. They are now asking women to request tickets to the priesthood session of General Conference and planning to have at least 300 women show up for the Priesthood session of General Conference to stand in the standby line for tickets. I believe that this idea came about because President Monson's wife showed up to a Priesthood session to listen to her husband talk and was denied access by a security guard. They point out that all priesthood and Prospective Priesthood holders are allowed in regardless of their standing in the church. Even non-members may be allowed in as long as they are male. Not that it is a secret meeting that isn't published and read by women everywhere via the church website and church magazines...so really it is a harmless request. And men are allowed in all the relief society meetings of the church so I see why they say this is a gender inequality issue. But this is only a small stop on their carefully planned path. They are slowly pressing the church to give/acknowledged that women hold the priesthood and to incorporate priesthood advancement among the girls as they do with the boys. They want the choice to have the priesthood and priesthood keys and callings that have been denied. (Sounds like another blacks and the priesthood thing to me.)

This is a very heated topic with high emotions on both sides. Think for a moment and clarify your own opinion before reading further...you may be surprised...

Many women say that they don't want the priesthood because it just means they will have more responsibilities as if having the option to have the priesthood obligates you to additional service, work and time that they don't want to be obligated to. This thought come from a stance that believes that men don't not have a choice in the matter as if because they can hold the priesthood they are expected to take it and are considered wicked if they don't want it. This is a dangerous line of thinking as the priesthood represents greater opportunities to serve and to do good. The scriptures say that we should desire to do good, even when we cannot (concept taught in Mosiah 4:24-25). Assuming that the priesthood provides opportunities to do good and to receive blessings that are not available to those who do not have it, it seems reasonable that women would like Abraham, seek after the priesthood. Abraham actively sought for the priesthood and explained why he became a rightful heir of the priesthood, saying,

" 2 And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father/mother of many nations, a prince/princess of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers." - Abr. 1:2

Others have said that the priesthood is given to men because they are not naturally serving and need the priesthood to obligate them to service opportunities... I find it funny that when you compare this explanation for why men have the priesthood against the reason many women don't want the priesthood, (more obligations to serve), because these two thoughts together at the same time, indicate that women who don't want the additional responsibility or service opportunity may actually need it. LOL...

Really, it is not a wicked thing to desire the priesthood. The blacks did and they finally were given it and it has been a great blessing to them and to the world.

Now, I wouldn't have written this email if it had not been for a talk given by Elder Ballard on 8/20/2013 at BYU Education week which I watched last Sunday while I was caring for Calel at the hospital. Rebecca and I learn about this doctrine first hand when she was an ordinance worker in the temple and performed hundreds of priesthood ordinances including new names, washings, anointings, and endowments. With the washings and anointings she would state, (just like the men), "Having authority, I ...".

The funny thing is that although it is not taught commonly as doctrine yet, many women in the church already hold the priesthood and don't realize it. Women and men are required to have it prior to serving missions (A Priesthood Duty and a Calling in the Priesthood), performing ordinances in the temple and even being sealed in the temple. They receive the Priesthood when they are made "Officiators of the Priesthood" in the endowment. That is their ordination and they are then qualified to be ordained as Ordinance workers who perform priesthood ordinances saying, "Having authority, I..."

What amazed me is that in his talk, Elder Ballard publicly pointed out that Women ARE given the Priesthood and HAVE all the power that comes with it when they are endowed (with power) in the temple. He adds that they do not hold the authority which is tied to the keys which are only held by men currently. He does not mention that women perform ordinances with this power, but that is clear if you know who performs the Melchizedek priesthood ordinances of the temple for women, (hint: It isn't men).

Listen to what Elder Ballard said in his talk... the talk is called "Let Us Think Straight" (He has given other talks with the same name and similar introduction, so if you looked it up be aware that you have to find the one on that date given for BYU Education Week.) The entire talk is addressing the concerns of the growing movement lead by ordainwomen.org who are pressing for women to be ordained...

With that background, Here is a quote from his talk:

"When men and women go to the temple, they are both endowed with the same power, which by definition is priesthood power. While the authority of the priesthood is directed through priesthood keys, and priesthood keys are held only by worthy men, access to the power and the blessings of the priesthood is available to all of God’s children.

As President Joseph Fielding Smith explained:
The blessings of the priesthood are not confined to men alone. These blessings are also poured out upon . . . all the faithful women of the Church. . . . The Lord offers to his daughters every spiritual gift and blessing that can be obtained by his sons. - [“Magnifying Our Callings in the Priesthood,” Improvement Era, June 1970, 66]

Those who have entered the waters of baptism and subsequently received their endowment in the house of the Lord are eligible for rich and wonderful blessings. The endowment is literally a gift of power. All who enter the house of the Lord officiate in the ordinances of the priesthood. This applies to men and women alike.

Our Father in Heaven is generous with His power. All men and all women have access to this power for help in our own lives. All who have made sacred covenants with the Lord and who honor those covenants are eligible to receive personal revelation, to be blessed by the ministering of angels, to commune with God, to receive the fulness of the gospel, and, ultimately, to become heirs alongside Jesus Christ of all our Father has."

This should not be a big surprise because we know that women can and are Goddesses and Priestesses throughout the eternities. It just brings that concept to the here and now. I attached the talk as a PDF so you can read the entire thing in context. This seems to be the goal of the ordainwomen.org group, but they will certainly not be pleased until girls are given the oppertunities to grow into and publicly use the priesthood in the same mannor the boys are. However, when Elder Ballard publicly announced that women have the priesthood and can officiate in it, they should have celebrated a HUGE victory in that the doctrine is being publicly taught.

This doctrine begs us to ask a number of questions regarding what you are able to do with that priesthood power. Righteous men hold the priesthood power all the time and yet they may not have calling which gives them authority in the church. This does not mean however that he must ask the bishop for permission to officiate in a priesthood blessings to their sick or afflicted children when needed. Or to give father's blessings before starting a new school year. Or even giving blessings to others who ask for them.

Does holding the power of the priesthood then entitle/enabled a woman to officiate or give blessings to their children or others who request it for example? Or does the Lord deny righteous women the blessing of serving others including their own children in this way?

It doesn't seem too much to ask seeing that many of the miracles we associate with the priesthood are actually based on faith regardless of priesthood. Joseph Smith taught the following:

“No matter who believeth, these signs, such as healing the sick, casting our devils, etc., should follow all that believe, whether male or female. He asked the Society if they could not see by this sweeping promise, that wherein they are ordained, if it is the privilege of those set apart to administer in that authority, which is conferred on them; and if the sisters should have faith to heal the sick, let all hold their tongues, and let everything roll on.” –TPJS, Section Four 1839-42, p.224

“Respecting females administering for the healing of the sick he further remarked, there could be no evil in it, if God gave His sanction by healing; that there could be no more sin in any female laying hands on and praying for the sick, than in wetting the face with water; it is no sin for anybody to administer that has faith, or if the sick have faith to be healed by their administration.” –TPJS, Section Four 1839-42, p.224

These gifts are actually available to members and non-members alike whether they followers of Mormonism or not. The early Apostles did not understand that and were corrected by Christ in that regard...

"And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part. For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward." - Mark 9:38-41

If such miracles are not based on the power of the priesthood but on faith, then surely we must have even greater power and rights to call on the powers of heaven as Officiators in the priesthood...

Things to consider in this brave new world...

The above post was made in 2013 about women holding the priesthood. I hope you listened to President Nelson's talk in the General Relief Society Metting. He is making clear strides to prepare the LDS church to function like the Church of the First Born where Women and men hold the priesthood equally and independently. For the first time I have real hope to see women performing the ordinances of baptism, laying on of hands and even holding priesthood callings, in my lifetime.

One MAJOR change made by the church is as follows in which Women are enabled to stand in ordinances to fulfill the priesthood function of witnesses to the ordinances.

President Nelson then announced a change in the Church’s policy related to witnesses who participate in baptisms in local congregations and in temple work.

• Any baptized member of the Church may serve as a witness of the baptism of a living person. This change pertains to all baptisms outside the temple.
• A proxy baptism for a deceased person may be witnessed by anyone holding a current temple recommend, including a limited-use temple recommend.
• An endowed member with a current temple recommend may serve as a witness to sealing ordinances, living and proxy.

“We are joyful about these changes. Imagine a beloved sister serving as a witness to the living baptism of her younger brother. Imagine a mature couple serving as witnesses in the temple baptistry as their grandson baptizes their granddaughter for and in behalf of a dear ancestor.” - President Nelson
https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.or ... IT_10_5_19

This is a major step toward the natural conclusion that women hold the priesthood and will be permitted to exercise it and the church no longer maintaining its long-standing sexist policies.

His talk to the Relief Society tonight was turning up the heat and encouraging the members to prepare for some big changes that are coming with regard to Women using their priesthood in the church. Some of us learned by the spirit the truths that he taught and will teach long ago. I encourage those who didn't to learn and prepare. He that is commanded in all things is an unwise and slothful servant. He/she that cannot accept truth until they are revealed by the prophet and leaders of the church don't know the voice of the Lord and are not fit for His kingdom. There will come a time when we will not be able to rely on the voice of our leaders and President Nelson is trying to prepare us for that time by instructing us to do home church, and study and learn by the spirit how women can use their priesthood as instructed tonight.

The time for women to begin blessing the sick, casting out devils, blessing the blind to see and the deaf to hear is now. Those who have heard the voice of the Lord have been doing this for years under His direction. Those who have heard the voice of the prophet will begin doing this and were just given permission. Those who are not prepared to use their priesthood under the direction of the spirit are not prepared for what is coming and should prepare quickly.

Peace,
Amonhi