Are believers ‘a royal priesthood’ or ‘kings and priests’, as some say?

How should one understand 1 Peter 2:4–9?

For the latest version of this document, click here:

1 Peter 2:4–9 records how the apostle Peter cited certain Old Testament passages. Many English bible-translations have in those passages such wordings as “royal priesthood”, “holy nation” and “peculiar people above all nations”. Did Peter, by his poetical references to passages in the Old Testament, mean that the saints [a] whom he wrote to, were “priests” and “kings” in the literal sense? Also: Do his words apply in some way even to people of our day – are believers “a royal priesthood” or “kings and priests”, as some say? How should one understand 1 Peter 2:4–9? This article takes a closer look at that matter. Even other scriptures, among them Revelation 1:6, are considered here.

a In this article, the word “saints” refers to people who received the Holy Spirit in biblical times, first century CE or earlier.

1 Peter 2:4–9.

Below, the words which the NASB77 highlights in caps, are cited from the Old Testament.

1 Peter 2:1 Therefore, putting aside all malice and all guile and hypocrisy and envy and all slander, 2 like newborn babes, long for the pure milk of the word, that by it you may grow in respect to salvation, 3 if you have tasted the kindness of the Lord. 4 And coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected by men, but choice and precious in the sight of God, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For this is contained in Scripture: “Behold I lay in Zion a choice stone, a precious corner stone, and he who believes in Him shall not be disappointed.” 7 This precious value, then, is for you who believe. But for those who disbelieve, “the stone which the builders rejected, this became the very corner stone,” 8 and, “a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense”; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this doom they were also appointed. 9 But you are a chosen race, A royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light (NASB77, original caps)

(In verse 9, where the above-quoted NASB77 has “royal priesthood”, some other translations have “kingly priesthood” or “priests and kings”.)

So, in that passage, the apostle Peter cited certain OT passages which record how it was said to the ancient Israelites that they were to be, as some bible-translations have it, “a peculiar people” and “a royal priesthood” for the Lord. That was concerning the ancient Israelites, in connection with the Old Covenant. Here, in the case of 1 Peter 2:4–9, the apostle was in a poetic manner quoting those passages, in connection with the saints and the New Covenant. – Please note that Peter wrote to and regarding certain saints, people of his own day, in the first century. When one reads the New Testament, for instance 1 Peter 2, and sees such words as “we”, “us”, “our”, “you” and “your”, one must keep in mind that those words refer to those who were being addressed, people of New Testament times, and not us who almost 2000 years later read a copy of what was said to and regarding those people. It is important to study the Bible, but one must not think that all the “nice” things that one sees there, would somehow apply to the reader. That simply is not so. For more on this, see point 2 in the article rga022.htm.

A note: Some writers have used 1 Peter 2:4–9, and perhaps even certain passages in Hebrews and Revelation, for producing a concept which talks about “a common priesthood of all believers”. The details of that concept will not be discussed in this article, but it will be shown that believers are not “priests”, and that not even the saints whom Peter wrote to were that. Also: It is Jesus who is the King, and not anyone else. [c]

c Here, someone might think of for instance Luke 22:29–30, because many translators have put into that passage wordings that might cause a casual reader to think that the apostles were to become kings. But, the meaning of the Greek text appears to something like this:

Luke 22:29 And I appoint unto you royal power, [d] as my father has appointed to me, 30 so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on seats, [e] and judge the twelve tribes of Israel.

d Verse 29, “royal power” – the Greek text has basileia which can refer to “kingdom” but also to royal power. (Point 1 in the definition of that word in Thayer’s lexicon is “royal power, kingship, dominion, rule”.)

e Verse 30, “seats” – the Greek text has thronos which can refer to a king’s seat but also to a seat of the kind that judges have. Strong defined thronos as “from θραω thrao (to sit); a stately seat (‘throne’); by implication, power or (concretely) a potentate”. Please note that the Kingdom is God’s, and that he has placed his son Jesus as its ruler (king). As for the apostles whom Luke 22:29–30 refers to – they were to act as judges, on behalf of that kingdom. In that way, they certainly were to have royal power. But, they were not to become “kings”.

Two of the relevant Old Testament passages.

The Greek text of 1 Peter 2 indicates that the apostle was citing an OT text with wordings similar to those in the Greek text of the Septuagint (LXX). Here are two of the relevant passages, in an English translation.

Exodus 19:5 And now if ye will indeed hear my voice, and keep my covenant, ye shall be to me a peculiar people above all nations; for the whole earth is mine. 6 And ye shall be to me a royal priesthood and a holy nation: these words shalt thou speak to the children of Israel. (LXXE)

Exodus 23:22 If ye will indeed hear my voice, and if thou wilt do all the things I shall charge thee with, and keep my covenant, ye shall be to me a peculiar people above all nations, for the whole earth is mine; and ye shall be to me a royal priesthood, and a holy nation: these words shall ye speak to the children of Israel, If ye shall indeed hear my voice, and do all the things I shall tell thee, I will be an enemy to thine enemies, and an adversary to thine adversaries. (LXXE)

A note: That wording in Exodus 23:22 is slightly different from what many people are used to. The above-quoted LXXE is based on the Greek text of the ancient Septuagint version (LXX).

Those passages show that the Israelites of Moses’ day were told that if they were faithful to the Lord, then they would be, as the above-quoted translation has it, “a peculiar people above all nations”, “a royal priesthood” and “a holy nation”, for the Lord. See even Deuteronomy 14:2 and 26:18–19 and Psalms 135:4.

That was regarding the ancient Israelites. But, as we know, those people were not “priests”, except for some few of them. So, it is obvious that the words which are recorded in those passages, were poetic, symbolic. Likewise, it is obvious that when the apostle Peter cited parts of some those passages, he did that in a poetic manner and did not mean his words to be interpreted in the literal sense. Let us also keep in mind that Peter wrote that letter to and regarding the saints, people of the first century, and not to or regarding us who today read a copy of that letter.

The saints had only one priest: The resurrected Jesus.

(Again, in this article the word “saints” refers to people who received the Holy Spirit in biblical times, first century CE or earlier.)

Here is something the apostle Paul wrote to Timothy:

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony borne at the proper time. (NASB77, highlighting added)

There is no place for other mediators (priests). And also: No one can add to the sacrifice which Jesus made. Consider even this passage:

Hebrews 10:9 then He said, “Lo, I come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first in order that He may set up the second; 10 by which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And indeed every priest stands day by day ministering, and often offering the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But He, offering but one sacrifice for sins, “sat down” in perpetuity “at the right hand” of God, 13 from then on expecting “until His enemies are placed as a footstool” of His feet. 14 For by one offering He has perfected in perpetuity the ones being sanctified. (LIT, highlighting added)

Note the words “once for all”, verse 10, and “but one sacrifice for sins”, verse 12, and “one offering” and “in perpetuity”, verse 14. In short: Jesus did all there was to be done, in the way of sacrifice (offering). The saints could not add to that, nor can anyone in our day.

Today, many churches have priests, persons who in the old Catholic manner act as if they were some kind of “mediatory agents” between God and humans. Among the saints, things were different. They had neither churches (temples, church buildings) nor altars or “priests”. They had elders, but those elders did not act as priests. The only priest or “mediator” the saints had, was the resurrected Jesus.

The Catholic Church “ordains priests”. (“Holy orders” is one of the Catholic “sacraments”.) Many other churches have copied that Catholic practice, but the Greek text of the New Testament does not give any support to the concept of “ordaining”; the article rea022.htm has more on this. The article rsa072.htm has some notes on such concepts as “clergy” and “laity”. The article rsa062.htm considers the matter of “spiritual authority” – that is, the question, who can speak for God?

Anyone who thinks that he or she is ‘a priest of God’, should sit down and consider these things more carefully.

Were it so that believers are “priests of God”, then what should they be doing, in such a case? What kind of priestly duties would there be for them to perform? Are there sacrifices to offer on some altar?

When Jesus made his Sacrifice by giving his life in place of others, did not that cover all that was needed in the way of mediating and sacrificing?

Taking to oneself the title ‘priest’, is not the thing to do.

Priesthood is not something that one chooses for oneself. It is God who appoints the priests that he eventually wants to have. He appointed Jesus as a “priest” for the New Covenant. But, will even others be appointed in that function?

A note: Here, we are talking about the New Covenant. The Old Covenant had a mortal priesthood, but the New Covenant does not. There are many who present themselves as “priests of God under the New Covenant”, but that has nothing to do with the New Testament or with what the saints practised.

The Bible records a number of examples of what happened to people who set up themselves as priests, though they had not received any such appointment from God. The following considers some of them.


1 Samuel 13:1–9 records an occasion when king Saul did not wait for Samuel the priest to come but took it upon himself to perform certain duties that were reserved for priests only. The result of Saul’s stupidity and rebellion was that the kingship was taken away from him, see 1 Samuel 13:13–14.


Even king Uzziah performed priestly duties, though he had no appointment as a priest. 2 Chronicles 26:16–21 records how he was punished for that, right away.

Korah the Levite and his companions.

The man Korah was of the tribe of Levi, but he was not a priest. (Only Aaron and his descendants were priests. The other Levites assisted the priests in certain things in connection with the sanctuary.) Korah and a group of men with him set themselves against Moses and Aaron. Numbers 16:9–10 records how Moses spoke to those men. They were punished – the ground opened up and swallowed them, see Numbers 16:30–33.

Did king Solomon act as a priest?

Someone might claim that “even Solomon offered things to God”. This has to do with 2 Chronicles 7:1–6. Verse 5 in that chapter records that king Solomon “offered a sacrifice of twenty-two thousand bulls”, but it is obvious that that merely means that Solomon provided those animals, while the sacrificing was done by the priests. This was in connection with the dedication of the temple. King Solomon made a prayer. The priests, assisted by other Levites, had arranged an altar with an offering. God sent a fire which consumed the sacrifice (the first offering on the altar). There is no indication that Solomon would have meddled with priestly duties, the way Korah, Saul and Uzziah did. Again, it is obvious that his part in that sacrifice was that he provided those animals.

Regarding the word ‘altar’ in Hebrews 13:10.

Here is something the apostle Paul wrote to some Jewish saints.

Hebrews 13:10 We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. (RSV)

In that verse, the mention of an “altar” is a symbolic expression. As so often, Paul used poetic and symbol-filled language, but he was merely making the note that the New Covenant does not have priests with a right to “eat from the altar”, the way it had been with the Old Covenant (Deuteronomy 18:1, et cetera). For a clarification of Hebrews 13:10, including the poetic phrase “those who serve the tent” and its meaning, see the article rma013.htm (which is about the matter of “tithes and offerings”).

There did remain, for the saints, ‘sacrificing’ of a certain kind.

Again, the New Covenant does not have any mortal priesthood. But, the apostle noted that there remained “sacrificing” – that is, thanking and praising God, Hebrews 13:15. And, there was even giving: The saints were to do good works, helping the poor and needy. We read:

Hebrews 13:16 And don’t forget to do good and to share with those in need. These are the sacrifices that please God. (NLT04)

Well, there was more. Romans 12:1 mentions a sacrifice connected to the saints in Rome. It might be that that referred either to the sufferings they had to go through, or the fact that some of them had to give their lives, for Jesus’ sake.

Revelation 1:6.

Certain passages in the book of Revelation might cause a casual reader to think that the saints were “kings” and “priests”. Here is one of them.

Revelation 1:6 […] and did make us kings and priests to his God and Father, to him is the glory and the power to the ages of the ages! Amen. (YLT)

Now, if we were to interpret that passage literally, then that would lead to the question, what were the saints to be doing in such a case, as “priests” or “kings”? Again, had not Jesus done all that was needed in the way of sacrificing, and is it not Jesus who is the king and ruler?

So, what did the apostle John mean by what he wrote to those saints? Well, it appears that even he was in a poetic and symbolic manner citing the Old Testament (in this case Exodus 19:6), just as the apostle Peter did.

A note: Here, one must also keep in mind that John wrote that letter to and regarding the saints, people of his own day and age – “John to the seven assemblies that are in Asia” – and not regarding people of our day. (If you have been subjected to some form of the old Baptist, Millerite “church eras” dogma which claims that chapters 1–3 in the book of Revelation somehow refer to people of our day, make sure to read the article raa032.htm.)


The ancient Israelites were not “priests” or “kings”, even though it was poetically said that they, as some translations have it, were to be “a holy nation” and “a royal priesthood”. In fact, it would have been a serious sin for a normal Israelite to perform priestly duties.

And, when the apostles John and Peter in letters to certain saints in a poetic manner cited certain Old Testament passages which refer to the ancient Israelites, that did not mean that the saints were kings or priests in the literal sense. They had only one priest, the resurrected Jesus, and he is also the King.

See also the “recommended reading” section, below.

Please tell others about this site. Please also link to it. The address to the table of contents page is

Recommended reading here at the Bible Pages, on related as well as other matters.

An explanation of the short names for the bible-translations that are quoted or mentioned at this site. → rsa092.htm

On the King James version. The story behind king James’ bible, including the men who were involved in producing it. → rsa032.htm

Easy keys to deeper understanding of the Scriptures. → rga022.htm

What powers were given to the apostles? Also: Did Simon Peter receive some special authority? → raa092.htm

How did the saints of the New Testament choose their elders? Also, were those elders “ordained”, and did they function as “priests” of some kind? → rea022.htm

On the words and concepts “clergy” and “laity”. → rsa072.htm

What does the Bible say about authority? Who has biblical, spiritual or religious authority? Who can speak for God? → rsa062.htm

On the matter of “tithes and offerings”. → rma013.htm

“Church eras” – do they exist? Are there seven “eras of the church”, as some say – “Sardis era”, “Philadelphian era”, “Laodicean era” and so on? → raa032.htm

On pride and humility in connection with religion. → rga102.htm

Table of contentsKey-word indexSearch functionOn the goal and purpose of this site

Regarding quoting and sharing with others.

Quoting: You can quote shorter passages in the articles at this site, provided that you mention the source by stating the full internet address (URL) to the article in question. Include also a date.

Sharing with others: You may not re-publish any part of the contents of this site, as a booklet, brochure or on the internet or in other ways; the author retains the copyright ©. But, you can send copies of the documents at this site, for instance to a friend. Often, the best way to do this is to send that person the internet address to the relevant page or pages. You can even give paper-copies to others, provided that you print the document in question in full, in the form it appears on this site, including the address and date at its end. Always get the latest document version, directly from this site.

For more on quoting and sharing with others, see the page rpa032.htm.

This site is not connected to any church or religious organisation. It looks at things from a biblical perspective and not from a dogmatic one. Regarding its goal and purpose, see the page rpa032.htm.

For the latest version of this document, click here:

Download the latest copy of this whole site, for offline use:

Please tell others about this site. Please also link to it.

This document was created or modified 2019–07–17. ©