Εἰ μὲν οὖν τελείωσις διὰ τῆς Λευιτικῆς ἱερωσύνης ἦν, ὁ λαὸς γὰρ ἐπʼ ⸀αὐτῆς ⸀νενομοθέτηται, τίς ἔτι χρεία κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισέδεκ ἕτερον ἀνίστασθαι ἱερέα καὶ οὐ κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Ἀαρὼν λέγεσθαι;

Ei men oun teleiosis dia tes Leuitikes ierosunes en, o laos gar ep' rautes rnenomothetetai, tis eti khreia kata ten taxin Melkhisedek eteron anistasthai ierea kai ou kata ten taxin Aaron legesthai;

si ergo consummatio per sacerdotium leviticum erat populus enim sub ipso legem accepit quid adhuc necessarium secundum ordinem Melchisedech alium surgere sacerdotem et non secundum ordinem Aaron dici

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?

If therefore perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?

Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it hath the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be reckoned after the order of Aaron?

Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it hath the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be reckoned after the order of Aaron?

If perfection therefore is by Priesthood of Levi, ( for by it The Written Law was established to the people ), why was another Priest needed to arise in the image of Melchizedek? But does it say that he would be in the image of Aaron?

If perfection therefore is by Priesthood of Levi, ( for by it The Written Law was established to the people ), why was another Priest needed to arise in the image of Melchizedek? But does it say that he would be in the image of Aaron?

If indeed then perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, for the people had their law given to them in connexion with it, what need was there still that a different priest should arise according to the order of Melchisedec, and not be named after the order of Aaron?

If indeed then perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, for the people had their law given to them in connexion with it, what need was there still that a different priest should arise according to the order of Melchisedec, and not be named after the order of Aaron?

If then perfection was by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchisedech, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?

If then perfection was by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchisedech, and not be called according to the order of Aaron?

Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it hath the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be reckoned after the order of Aaron?

Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it hath the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be reckoned after the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron?

The people established the Levitical priesthood based on instructions they received. If the work of the Levitical priests had been perfect, we wouldn't need to speak about another kind of priest. However, we speak about another kind of priest, a priest like Melchizedek, not a Levitical priest like Aaron.

The people established the Levitical priesthood based on instructions they received. If the work of the Levitical priests had been perfect, we wouldn't need to speak about another kind of priest. However, we speak about another kind of priest, a priest like Melchizedek, not a Levitical priest like Aaron.

If then, perfection came through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there for another priest to appear, said to be in the order of Melchizedek and not in the order of Aaron?

If then, perfection came through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there for another priest to appear, said to be in the order of Melchizedek and not in the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—for on this basis the people received the Law—what further need would there be to speak of appointing another kind of priest according to the order of Melchizedek, not one according to the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood—for on this basis the people received the Law—what further need would there be to speak of appointing another kind of priest according to the order of Melchizedek, not one according to the order of Aaron?

So if perfection had in fact been possible through the Levitical priesthood--for on that basis the people received the law--what further need would there have been for another priest to arise, said to be in the order of Melchizedek and not in Aaron's order?

So if perfection had in fact been possible through the Levitical priesthood--for on that basis the people received the law--what further need would there have been for another priest to arise, said to be in the order of Melchizedek and not in Aaron's order?

Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron?

If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood--and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood--why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?

If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood--and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood--why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?

So if the priesthood of Levi, on which the law was based, could have achieved the perfection God intended, why did God need to establish a different priesthood, with a priest in the order of Melchizedek instead of the order of Levi and Aaron?

So if the priesthood of Levi, on which the law was based, could have achieved the perfection God intended, why did God need to establish a different priesthood, with a priest in the order of Melchizedek instead of the order of Levi and Aaron?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

Now if the crowning blessing was attainable by means of the Levitical priesthood--for as resting on this foundation the people received the Law, to which they are still subject-- what further need was there for a Priest of a different kind to be raised up belonging to the order of Melchizedek instead of being said to belong to the order of Aaron?

Now if the crowning blessing was attainable by means of the Levitical priesthood--for as resting on this foundation the people received the Law, to which they are still subject-- what further need was there for a Priest of a different kind to be raised up belonging to the order of Melchizedek instead of being said to belong to the order of Aaron?

Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people have received the law), what further need was there for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people have received the law), what further need was there for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

The Levite priests were a necessary part of God's Law for Israel's people. But those priests could not make the people completely right with God. If that had been possible, the Levite priests could have continued their work. But we see that God has chosen a different kind of priest to serve him. That priest is not someone from Aaron's family, as the Levites were. Instead, he is a priest in the same way that Melchizedek was God's priest.

If indeed, then, perfection were through the Levitical priesthood -- for the people under it had received law -- what further need, according to the order of Melchisedek, for another priest to arise, and not to be called according to the order of Aaron?

The Law was given during the time when Levi and his sons were the religious leaders. If the work of those religious leaders had been perfect in taking away the sins of the people, there would have been no need for another religious leader. But one like Melchizedek was needed and not one from the family group of Aaron.

Therefore, if perfection had been by the priesthood of the Levites (for under it the people received the Law) what further need was there for another priest to rise after the order of Melchizedek, and not to be called after the order of Aaron?

If a perfect method of reconciling with God—a perfect priesthood—had been found in the sons of Levi (a priesthood that communicated God’s law to the people), then why would the Scriptures speak of another priest, a priest according to the order of Melchizedek, instead of, say, from the order of Aaron? What would be the need for it? It would reflect a new way of relating to God

(e) If the Jewish priests and their laws had been able to save us, why then did God need to send Christ as a priest with the rank of Melchizedek, instead of sending someone with the rank of Aaron—the same rank all other priests had?

If perfection was therefore achieved through the Levitical priesthood, on the basis of which the Law was given to the people, what need would there have been for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek rather than one according to the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec and not be called after the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection came through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the law), what further need was there for another priest to appear, said to be according to the order of Melchizedek and not according to the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection (a perfect fellowship between God and the worshiper) had been attainable by the Levitical priesthood—for under it the people were given the Law—why was it further necessary that there should arise another and different kind of Priest, one after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one appointed after the order and rank of Aaron?

The people were given the law concerning the system of priests from the tribe of Levi, but they could not be made perfect through that system. So there was a need for another priest to come, a priest like Melchizedek, not Aaron.

If the priesthood of Levi and Aaron, which provided the framework for the giving of the law, could really make people perfect, there wouldn’t have been need for a new priesthood like that of Melchizedek. But since it didn’t get the job done, there was a change of priesthood, which brought with it a radical new kind of law. There is no way of understanding this in terms of the old Levitical priesthood, which is why there is nothing in Jesus’ family tree connecting him with that priestly line.

So if everything could have been brought to its goal through the Levitical priesthood (for the people received the law on the basis of that priesthood), what further need was there for another priest to arise who was like Melchizedek, yet not said to be like Aaron?

If, then, perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people had received the law), what further need would there have been for another kind of priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, · rather than one designated after the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection had been attainable through the levitical priesthood—for the people received the law under this priesthood—what further need would there have been to speak of another priest arising according to the order of Melchizedek, rather than one according to the order of Aaron?

If now therefore perfection came by the priesthood of the Levites (for under that priesthood the people received the law), what further need was there for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, and not after the order of Aaron?

It was on the basis of the levitical priesthood that the Law was given to the people of Israel. Now, if the work of the levitical priests had been perfect, there would have been no need for a different kind of priest to appear, one who is in the priestly order of Melchizedek, not of Aaron.

Therefore if perfection was by the priesthood of Levi, for under him the people took the law, what yet was it needful, another priest to rise, by the order of Melchisedec, and not to be said by the order of Aaron [what yet was it needful, another priest to rise, after the order of Melchisedec, and not to be said after the order of Aaron]?

So, you see, if it had been possible to arrive at complete perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for the people received the law by that means), what further need would there have been to speak of another priesthood being established “according to the order of Melchizedek,” rather than “according to the order of Aaron”?

Even though the Law of Moses says the priests must be descendants of Levi, those priests cannot make anyone perfect. So there needs to be a priest like Melchizedek, rather than one from the priestly family of Aaron.

Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levit′ical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchiz′edek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron?

We may go further. If it be possible to bring men to spiritual maturity through the Levitical priestly system (for that is the system under which the people were given the Law), why does the necessity arise for another priest to make his appearance after the order of Melchizedek, instead of following the normal priestly calling of Aaron? For if there is a transference of priestly powers, there will necessarily follow an alteration of the Law regarding priesthood. He who is described as our High Priest belongs to another tribe, no member of which had ever attended the altar! For it is a matter of history that our Lord was a descendant of Judah, and Moses made no mention of priesthood in connection with that tribe.

Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood—for the people received the law under this priesthood—what further need would there have been to speak of another priest arising according to the order of Melchizedek rather than one according to the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection had been attainable through the levitical priesthood—for the people received the law under this priesthood—what further need would there have been to speak of another priest arising according to the order of Melchizedek, rather than one according to the order of Aaron?

So if perfection came through the levitical office of priest (for the people received the Law under the priests), why was there still a need to speak about raising up another priest according to the order of Melchizedek rather than one according to the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection [a perfect fellowship between God and the worshiper] had been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people were given the Law) what further need was there for another and different kind of priest to arise, one in the manner of Melchizedek, rather than one appointed to the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron?

If, then, perfection came through the levitical priesthood, on the basis of which the people received the law, what need would there still have been for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not reckoned according to the order of Aaron?

So if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron?

·The people were given the law concerning the system of priests from the tribe of Levi, but they could not be made perfect through that system [L If perfection could be attained through the Levitical priesthood, established for the people in the law…]. ·So there was [L …why was there…?] a need for another priest to come, a priest ·like [L in the priestly order/line of] Melchizedek, not [L in the priestly order/line of] Aaron [C Moses’ brother and Israel’s first high priest (5:4; Ex. 28:1); the existence of Melchizedek’s priestly line implies that the priesthood through Levi and Aaron was inadequate].

Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for based on it the people had been given the Torah), what further need was there for a different kohen to arise—designated according to the order of Melchizedek, not according to the order of Aaron?

Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levit′ical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchiz′edek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron?

The law that was given to the people called for the priestly system. That system began with Levi. Suppose the priestly system could have made people perfect. Then why was there still a need for another priest to come? And why did he need to be like Melchizedek? Why wasn’t he from Aaron’s family line?

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

Therefore, if it had been possible to reach the goal through the system of cohanim derived from Levi (since in connection with it, the people were given the Torah), what need would there have been for another, different kind of cohen, the one spoken of as to be compared with Malki-Tzedek and not to be compared with Aharon?

It was while the sons of Levi were priests that the law was made for the people. If those priests were good enough, why would another priest need to come who was like Melchizedek? Why would he not be like Aaron?

Now if perfection had been attainable through the levitical priesthood—for the people received the law under this priesthood—what further need would there have been to speak of another priest arising according to the order of Melchizedek, rather than one according to the order of Aaron?

Now if shleimut (completeness) had been attainable through the Kehunah of Levi‖for under it came the Mattan Torah (giving of the Torah) to the Am Brit‖what further need would there have been to speak of another KOHEN arising "according to the order of Malki-Tzedek" TEHILLIM 110:4) rather than "al divrati Aharon"?

The people established the Levitical priesthood based on instructions they received. If the work of the Levitical priests had been perfect, we wouldn’t need to speak about another kind of priest. However, we speak about another kind of priest, a priest like Melchizedek, not a Levitical priest like Aaron.

If perfection were attained through the Levitical priesthood (for through it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise in the order of Melchizedek, rather than established in the order of Aaron?

The people were given the law under the system of priests from the tribe of Levi. But no one could be made spiritually perfect through that system of priests. So there was a need for another priest to come. I mean a priest like Melchizedek, not Aaron.

The people were given the law concerning the system of priests from the tribe of Levi. But they could not be made spiritually perfect through that system of priests. So there was a need for another priest to come. I mean a priest like Melchizedek, not Aaron.

Thus if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood, for on the basis of it the people received the law, what further need is there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek and not said to be according to the order of Aaron?

If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood – and indeed the law given to the people established that priesthood – why was there still need for another priest to come, one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?

Now indeed, if perfection had been through the Levitical priesthood (for the [Jewish] people have received-the-Law on the basis of it) what further need would there have been that another priest should arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be named according to the order of Aaron?