The Visions of Mrs. E.G. White

OBJECTION 3. — LIMITED EXTENT OF THE GIFTS

If these are genuine gifts of the Spirit, the question is asked, Why are they not more extensive? why are they confined to one person, and that one a woman? To which we answer that it cannot be that the prophecy given by Joel, and repeated by Peter, was intended to allot to each division of the human race, male and female, those gifts, and none others, which they were respectively to enjoy. And inasmuch as both males and females are mentioned in the prophecy, we understand that all the different operations of the Spirit there mentioned are to be exercised by them indiscriminately. Hence there is no prohibition against young women’s seeing visions, in the fact that the prophecy says that young men shall see them, nor against young men’s having dreams, because it says old men are to have them. These both are among the means by which God sometimes sees fit to communicate prophetic knowledge, and in which both sons and daughters are to participate; for your sons and your daughters, says the record, shall prophecy. VEGW 17.1

In regard to the limited extent of the visions, it is certainly nothing against their authenticity that they are as yet confined to one individual. It is certainly a great advance over years preceding the proclamation of the Advent doctrine, that we have them at all. And if, in addition to this, we find that the people of God have been in exactly the same circumstances before,then certainly we ought not to regard this state of things as involving any difficulty over which there is occasion to stumble. We refer the objector to the time of Deborah, the prophetess, Judges 4:4, the only one through whom God at that time communicated instruction to his people; for they inquired of her; and that one was a woman. See also a similar case in the time of Huldah the prophetess. 2 Kings 22:14. VEGW 17.2

But to these instances it is objected, l. That in the days of Deborah they had the Urim and Thummim, by which to inquire of the Lord; and 2. In the days of Huldah, there were other prophets in Israel. To which we reply: VEGW 18.1

1. The Urim and Thummim were connected with the breastplate of the high priest; and it is true that Israel in those days had a typical priesthood to convey instruction to the people, and mediate between them and God. But this has nothing whatever to do with the question at issue. The limited manifestation of the gift of prophecy, is the point under consideration; and the fact is, there was but one person at the time in Israel of which we have any record, upon whom the spirit of prophecy rested; and that one was a woman. It is so now. Hence, in this respect, the situation of the church now is exactly parallel to that of Israel of old. And if the fact that these manifestations are at present confined to one individual, is any evidence against their authenticity, it is equally so in the case of Deborah. But if the manifestations then, though given through only one out of all the hosts of Israel, and that one a woman, were genuine, those given under exactly the same circumstances, may be so now. VEGW 18.2

2. In the time of Huldah there were other prophets in Israel, Jeremiah, Zephaniah, and perhaps Habakkuk. Well, would Huldah’s testimony have been any the less reliable, had there been no others? This renders her case all the more remarkable. Why, when there were others who prophesied, and they men, did the king send the high priest, the scribe, and his servants, to inquire of a woman the meaning of the law of the Lord? Those who feel so averse to a woman’s occupying any public position in the work of the Lord, will do well to make this fact a special subject of study. On this circumstance Dr. Clarke makes the following excellent remarks: “[Went unto Huldah the prophetess.]” This is a most singular circumstance. At this time Jeremiah was certainly a prophet in Israel, but it is likely he now dwelt at Anathoth, and could not be readily consulted; Zephaniah also prophesied under this reign, but probably he had not yet begun; Hilkiah was high priest, and the priest’s lips should retain knowledge; Shaphan was scribe, and must have been conversant in sacred affairs to have been at all fit for his office; and yet Huldah, a prophetess, of whom we know nothing but by this circumstance, is consulted on the meaning of the book of the law; for the secret of the Lord was neither with Hilkiah the high priest, Shaphan the scribe, nor any other of the servants of the king, or ministers of the temple! We find from this, and we have many facts in all ages to corroborate it, that a pontiff, a pope, a bishop, or a priest, may, in some cases, not possess the true knowledge of God; and that a simple woman, possessing the life of God in her soul, may have more knowledge of the divine testimonies than many of those whose office it is to explain and enforce them.” VEGW 19.1