Priesthood

My perception of the priestly duties of the anointed did not arise suddenly or recently. I can trace its formation back to 1996. I know this not because I remember every detail precisely, but because I have studied The Watchtower diligently for more than 31 years, and certain frameworks, once formed, continue to shape perception even when their origin fades from memory.

​

Looking back now, the July 1, 1996 Watchtower article on Jehovah’s great spiritual temple appears to have played a decisive role in shaping that early understanding. From that time on, I consistently viewed Jehovah’s organization through temple imagery. The sheep were not merely visitors; they were pictured in my mind as acceptable sacrifices entering Jehovah’s temple. The organization itself appeared to me as the inner courtyard of the great spiritual temple—a place of cleansing, dedication, and service.

​

What I did not yet have at that time was a clear, experiential perception of the anointed serving within the Holy. That understanding came later—not through theory, but through lived experience. Only after personally passing through what I can describe as a death of the old personality and a spiritual resurrection as a new creation did the imagery of the Holy place become meaningful from the inside rather than from observation.

​

In recent years, I have cautiously shared this perception only with those who seemed to have “ears to hear.” What I noticed—without surprise—was that only anointed Christians were able to process this framework meaningfully. Others listened respectfully but could not internalize it in the same way. This was not a matter of intelligence or spirituality, but of calling and perception.

​

When I eventually had the opportunity to discuss this with an anointed brother—whom I will call Mario to protect his identity—I encountered disagreement. For him, priestly service belongs entirely to the future, after death and resurrection in heaven. In his view, present responsibility is defined almost exclusively by preaching.

​

I see it differently.

​

I do not deny the future aspect. I agree that kingship and full glorification are future realities. Where we differ is in timing and definition. For me, priestly service is not postponed entirely to the afterlife. It is already active now, though in a provisional and preparatory form. The decisive transition is not physical death, but the death of the old personality and the spiritual rebirth that Scripture describes as becoming a “new creation.”

​

From that point on, responsibility changes in nature. Preaching remains essential, but it is no longer the only expression of service. Shepherding, intercession, spiritual care, bearing others’ burdens, guiding consciences patiently, and preserving spiritual health become central. These are not administrative roles, nor positions of authority, but priestly functions—quiet, inward, often unseen.​

​

Just to keep the timing clear, I want to note that this recent discussion came out of a cluster of messages we exchanged periodically beginning January 4, 2026. Mario and I have known each other for about three years, and during that time we have genuinely enjoyed exchanging spiritual thoughts.

​

The subject of priesthood itself is not new in our conversations. We have discussed it before, and I clearly remember how open Mario was to considering it from a different angle. What made this recent exchange different was not the topic, but the timing.

​

This time, our conversation exposed a radically different perception of when priestly services are performed by anointed Christians. For Mario, priestly service is something reserved entirely for the future—after death and resurrection in heaven. For me, priestly responsibility is already being exercised now, while still in the flesh, though not yet in its final kingly expression.

​

That difference in timing—not loyalty, not respect for Jehovah’s arrangement—is what brought the tension into focus.

​​

​

​

​

​

The Essence of My Message to Mario:
Why I Understand My Calling Through the Priestly Framework

​

​

"To be completely transparent, the priestly perception of the holy place in the spiritual temple, as well as the inner court services, resonated in my heart for many years before I would ever consider this as part of my personal anointing. I did see the anointed in this capacity, and even the entire congregation in an extended sense. We are all sheep in Jehovah’s courtyard for worship, and it is there that determinations are made regarding who is qualified to serve Jehovah.

​

The priests placed their hands on sheep, goats, and bulls—to slaughter them or to send them into the wilderness. Some were rejected as not acceptable for sacrifice. Who determined whether they were qualified? The priest did. For me, this was full of symbolism. It was one of those puzzle pieces that, over time, helped me identify myself as someone who had worked in the inner court for many years.

​

Later, my senses began to perceive my presence inside the holy place —eating from the showbread in a way not permitted for other sheep, a liberty allowed only to sons. Even my imperfection was no longer a hindrance; I felt redeemed. I felt the love Jehovah poured into my heart. When I began hearing the calling, it confirmed the meaning of what I had already sensed.

​

You know how our publications compare the inner court and the holy place with the condition of the anointed. For me, however, the most meaningful element was sonship. I experienced a transformation not only in my feelings toward Jehovah as Father, but—more importantly—in His expression of fatherly love toward me as His son. This is where “Abba, Father” became central to my relationship with Jehovah.

​

My prayers then became more than personal petitions. They expanded to include prayers on behalf of all people, for our brothers, and for the sanctification of Jehovah’s name. This felt connected to something even more specific—what the high priest alone was allowed to do when stepping behind the curtain to redeem the people from their sins. “Forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us.” This became very personal to me.

​

Like Joseph and Jesus, I experienced betrayal from those I loved, cared for, and sacrificed myself for. The entire spectrum of the model prayer became my own. It became a fully prepared holy incense —something permitted only behind the curtain—to redeem not only those who betrayed me, but others as well.

​

Jesus, after his baptism, was not only a Lamb—he became the High Priest. I already shared with you how he was baptized on the Day of Atonement, the day when the high priest was allowed to step behind the curtain. As we know, the heavens were opened for Jesus. I sense them opened for me as well. It is hard to express fully, but just as Jesus heard the voice of approval, I hear Jehovah’s voice expressed through his Son, the Word, in a new way—not merely as instruction, but as calling, or rather, communion.

​

Through this, I began sensing Jehovah’s love for all people in a new way. His purpose to redeem mankind for everlasting life on earth became sharper through this heavenly communion.

“My heart is stirred by something good. I say: ‘My song is about a king.’ May my tongue be the stylus of a skilled copyist.”
This was an undeniable confirmation of my personal anointing, and priestly perception became more meaningful to me than anything else.

​

As you know, calling is more than perception. It is communion with Jehovah and Jesus, something described quite precisely in the inspired expressions of the Scriptures. In this conversation, we are touching on matters that have not yet been expressed clearly by the faithful slave. That does not trouble me. The spirit searches into the deep things of God—and searching does not mean immediate revealing.

​

The faithful slave encourages us to search for deep spiritual things, and we see that even reflected in the theme text for 2026. I am personally grateful that we live in a time when fear of being judged no longer blocks the road for a sincere spiritual journey into the deep things of God. Where Jehovah’s spirit is, there is freedom.

​

At the same time, we know that many have gone through this journey before us, and their searching has been consolidated in the Bible and in the publications of the faithful and discreet slave. These are solid anchors that protect us from drifting away. Still, we know which authority dominates. Our publications themselves show that understanding can change over time as God’s Word is given priority in shaping perception. The faithful slave does not claim to be prophetic or infallible, and therefore there is room for personal searching.

​

As I mentioned, I tend to circle around themes and terminology, allowing inner connections to form. This helps me perceive Jehovah’s mind more clearly. These are the most enjoyable discoveries for me, because His thinking goes deep. The Scriptures say that the spiritual person discerns all things, yet such a person is not easily judged by others.

​

You, I, and the anointed brothers who have received the assignment to feed and shepherd those entrusted to us—we all at times uncover insights that are not immediately obvious to others. Often, only the spirit confirms that something is true, even if only conditionally at first. I also appreciate that brothers on the Governing Body themselves experience moments of discussion and refinement, as Brother Jeffrey Winder mentioned in the annual meeting talk “How Does the Light Get Brighter?”

​

So, returning to the priestly perception of the services: I acknowledge your point. At the same time, I have an undeniable inner conviction that I personally experience communion with Jehovah and Jesus comparable to what was represented by the priests—those who were allowed to hear what the spirit teaches and reveals. This is something very personal, just as you once told me when we spoke at Michael's house. 

If you don’t see it the way I see it, that simply reflects personal communion. And unless the faithful slave publishes something on it, there is no need to worry about it—because we will always settle matters in unity.

​

As you can see, I perceive my calling largely within the framework of priestly service. I hope I answered your question."

​

​

​

My following message to Mario

​

"I’ve been thinking more about our conversation, especially the distinction between priestly service and kingship, and I wanted to share one simple observation that helped me personally.

​

When I look at the Scriptures, I notice that kingship is always spoken of as future, while priestly service is described as something exercised now. Even Paul corrected the Corinthians for acting as if they were already ruling, saying he wished they had begun ruling so that he could rule with them as well—clearly placing rulership ahead in time.

​

At the same time, the Christians Greek Scriptures repeatedly speaks of Christians as already functioning in a priestly way: offering spiritual sacrifices, interceding in prayer, presenting themselves as living sacrifices, and having boldness to enter the holy place. All of that is present-tense language. It describes access, communion, and service—not authority or rulership.

​

That distinction helped me understand why priestly imagery resonates so strongly in the present Christian life, while kingship remains something we wait for. It also fits the bride picture: the bride is chosen and prepared now, but she becomes queen only after the marriage.

​

I’m not presenting this as a conclusion, only as an observation that brought balance to my thinking. I’d be interested to hear how you see this distinction when you read the same passages."

​

​​

​

​

​

​

My friend Mario, cannot share my perception and felt that I have to drop it. Pray to Jehovah and leave in his hands. I went through the following analysis, but didn't feel compel to share with Mario

​​

​

From Mosaic priesthood to Christian congregation —

assistance, not domination

​

When Jehovah introduced the priestly arrangement through Moses, He established distinct roles within sacred service, not to elevate individuals, but to preserve order, access, and communion.

​

Under the Law:

• The high priest alone entered the Most Holy.

• The priests assisted, served daily, and carried the spiritual burden of the people.

• The Levites supported the priests, guarding, transporting, teaching, and maintaining sacred service.

• The nation as a whole was still called a kingdom of priests, even though not all served in the same capacity.

​

What is striking is that most priestly work was not leading, but assisting. The priesthood functioned as a support system around Jehovah’s presence, ensuring that communion could continue in an orderly and holy way.

​

This pattern becomes especially meaningful when viewed through the lens of the bride / wife imagery.

​

​

The priestly role as “helper” —

the bride principle already present

​

From the beginning, Jehovah established that sacred work often advances through complementary partnership, not domination. Eve was created as a helper, not as a rival or ruler. That same principle quietly shaped the priestly arrangement:

​

• Priests did not rule the nation.

• They served for the nation.

• Their authority was functional, not positional.

​

In that sense, the priestly role already carried a wife-like quality:

supportive, intercessory, faithful, and essential—yet not governing.

​

​

First-century fulfillment —

priestly assistance within the congregation

​

When the Christian congregation was formed, Jehovah did not discard this framework; He internalized it.

​

• Christ became the Head—the true King and High Priest.

• Congregational overseers (elders) handled visible leadership and shepherding.

• Anointed ones, as part of Christ’s bride, fulfilled a priestly role that was complementary rather than directive.

​

Just as under Moses:

​

• Not all priests entered the Most Holy,

• Not all anointed exercise the same depth of communion at the same time.

​

Yet those granted deeper access do not dominate others. Instead, they:

​

• support through prayer,

• carry others before Jehovah,

• help preserve spiritual sensitivity,

• assist the congregation’s sanctification.

​

This mirrors exactly how a wife assists her husband—not by taking headship, but by strengthening the entire household through faithfulness and devotion.

​

​

Bride imagery explains priestly function without hierarchy

​

The bride imagery helps clarify something important:

​

• Priestly access ≠ congregational authority

• Deeper communion ≠ leadership position

​

Just as the high priest entered behind the curtain for the people,
so the anointed who experience priestly communion do so on behalf of the congregation, not above it.

​

In the first century, this meant:

​

• the spirit worked through congregations,

• Christ walked among the lampstands,

• elders were held as stars in his right hand,

• and priestly assistance quietly sustained the body.

​

The bride did not lead the household—but without her, the household would collapse.

​

Why this framework still matters

​

Seeing the congregation through this Mosaic → Christian → bridal continuity helps explain:

​

• why priestly perception often expresses itself as service rather than leadership,

• why anointing deepens communion before it ever produces visibility,

• why humility and assistance are signs of maturity, not absence of calling.

​

The priestly framework, fulfilled in the bride imagery, becomes a map of spiritual approach:

showing how communion deepens, how responsibility grows, and how access is granted—without confusing role with rank.

​

​

One-sentence synthesis

 

The priestly arrangement Jehovah introduced through Moses finds its Christian fulfillment not in domination or hierarchy, but in the bride-like, assisting role of the anointed—those who support Christ’s headship by carrying priestly communion on behalf of the congregation.

​​

​

​

​

​

Present Priesthood, Future Kingship:

How Scripture Distinguishes Function From Destiny

​

​

1. Kingship is future; priesthood is present — explicitly stated

​

Kingship: consistently future

​

• Luke 22:28–30 – Jesus speaks of future eating, drinking, and judging.

• 1 Corinthians 4:8 – Paul corrects premature rulership: “I wish you had begun ruling…”

• 2 Timothy 2:12 – “If we endure, we will also rule with him” (conditional, future).

• Revelation 20:4, 6 – Reigning begins after resurrection and vindication.

​

Kingship is always tied to future completion, not present activity.

​

​

2. Priesthood is described as active now

​

a. Christians are already called “priests”

• 1 Peter 2:5

  “You yourselves are being built up as a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices…”

This is present tense.

• being built,

• offering,

• functioning.

No future language here.

​

b. Sacrificial language applies to current Christian life

• Romans 12:1

  “Present your bodies as a living sacrifice…”

Sacrifice is a priestly act, and it is ongoing.

• Hebrews 13:15–16

  “Through him let us always offer a sacrifice of praise… sharing with others.”

Again: always, not later.

​

c. Intercession and prayer — core priestly duties — are current

• 1 Timothy 2:1–4 – Supplications, intercessions “for all people.”

• Revelation 8:3–4 – Incense = prayers of the holy ones now.

Intercession is not postponed until kingship; it is the current priestly labor.

 

​

3. Access language proves priesthood is active now

​

a. “Entering” God’s presence is present tense

• Hebrews 10:19–22

  “We have boldness to enter the holy place…”

Not “will have,” but have.

This is priestly access language, rooted in Christ’s sacrifice.

​

b. Being “seated in heavenly places” is already true

• Ephesians 2:6

  “He raised us up together and seated us together in the heavenly places…”

This does not mean reigning yet, but access and standing — priestly position, not royal authority.

​

​

4. Revelation itself separates priesthood (now) from kingship (later)

​

Revelation 1:5–6

“He made us to be a kingdom and priests…”

• “priests” → functional identity

• “kingdom” → collective destiny

No statement of reigning yet.

Revelation 5:9–10

“They will rule over the earth.”

Future tense again.

​

Revelation carefully keeps priesthood active and kingship pending.

​

​

5. High-priestly pattern confirms timing

​

Jesus:

• Became High Priest immediately after his anointing (Hebrews 5–7)

• Did not begin reigning until after exaltation (Psalm 110:1)

His followers follow the same pattern:

• priestly service now,

• royal authority later.

​

​

6. Paul’s own life reflects present priesthood, not kingship

​

Paul repeatedly describes himself as:

• offering people as sacrifices (Romans 15:16),

• ministering priestly service of the good news,

• suffering rather than ruling.

He never describes himself as reigning.

​

​

7. Why Scripture emphasizes priesthood now

​

Because priesthood is about:

• mediation,

• reconciliation,

• intercession,

• sacrifice,

• communion.

These are needed now, while sin, suffering, and imperfection remain.

​

Kingship addresses:

• judgment,

• restoration,

• authority,

• administration.

Those belong to the age to come.

​

​

8. Simple synthesis (very safe to state)

​

• Priestly service: present, active, ongoing

• Kingly authority: future, conditional, post-marriage

​

​

In one sentence:

 

Scripture consistently presents priestly service as a present reality exercised through sacrifice, intercession, and access to God, while kingship is always reserved for a future time following endurance, approval, and union with Christ.

​

​​

​

​

When Restraint Precedes Clarity

How Jehovah Clarified the Question Without Forcing the Conversation

​

​

After my conversation with Mario, I did not pause because I doubted my reasoning or felt uncertain about my conclusions. On the contrary, I had a clear inner conviction that my understanding was sound. What led me to stop was something different: I did not want to push him to the edge or apply pressure where none was needed. I sensed that continuing at that moment would not be helpful for either of us.

​

So I chose restraint—not retreat.

​

I decided to give the matter space and time, trusting that Jehovah would clarify things in His own way, without forcing the conversation forward.

​

The very next day, January 9, 2026, my mother and I went downtown for our scheduled SMPW cart witnessing shift. We were assigned to a larger group, and this time the brother coordinating the work separated us, assigning different partners. Normally, my mother prefers to stay with me because she speaks little English and feels less comfortable with others. When she realized we were not assigned together, she considered requesting a change.

​

I encouraged her to accept the assignment as given. She did so willingly, trusting the arrangement. Looking back, that moment already carried meaning.

​

I was assigned to stand with a young Cuban brother named Gabriel. At the time, we began with simple conversation, which gradually turned spiritual. Eventually, I asked him what he had been enjoying recently in his personal Bible reading.

Without hesitation, he answered: Daniel’s seventy weeks.

​

That immediately caught my attention.

​

As we spoke, I briefly mentioned something I had learned earlier—that at the beginning of the final week, not only was Jesus anointed, but the Most Holy itself was anointed, as described in Daniel 9:24. Wanting to be precise, I opened the Study Bible on my phone and tapped the study note for that verse.

​

There I saw a reference I had not revisited in a long time:
The Watchtower, July 1, 1996 — “Jehovah’s Great Spiritual Temple.”

​

The date struck me. In 1995, my mother and I had moved from Moscow to serve where the need was greater. By the time that article appeared in mid-1996, I had already spent a full year in that new place. During that year, I learned firsthand that Christian service does not end with preaching. As people responded, another responsibility emerged—teaching, guiding, correcting gently, and shepherding those who were coming into the truth.

​

That year shaped me deeply. Long before I had language for it, I was already experiencing responsibilities that were priestly in nature.

​

I remembered the article. I had read it before. But now, reading it again after decades of service and reflection, it spoke with a different clarity. What had once been information became confirmation.

​

The article showed plainly that Jehovah’s great spiritual temple began operating while priests were still on earth; that anointed ones perform priestly duties while still in the flesh; that service in the Holy—feeding, praying, offering spiritual sacrifices, shepherding—belongs to the present; while kingship and ruling are clearly future.

​

What impressed me most was how this clarification came. Not by continuing the discussion with Mario. Not by emotional reassurance. But through restraint, prayer, obedience to an assignment, an unchosen separation, a conversation I did not plan, and a Scripture raised by a brother I had just met that day.

​

Jehovah answered quietly, without tension, and without forcing anything. The experience reassured me that I was neither ahead of Scripture nor apart from the publications—and it reminded me that Jehovah often clarifies matters not by accelerating discussion, but by pausing it, and allowing understanding to settle in peace.

​