<< 希伯來書 7:11 >>

本节经文

  • 吳經熊文理聖詠與新經全集
    夫斯民之受律法也、乃在利未子孫為司祭之時。假使陳制而能躋人於純全之域、則何須復有異軍突起之司祭；而且此司祭何不與亞倫同一支派、而獨與麥基德同一班次耶？
  • 新标点和合本
    从前百姓在利未人祭司职任以下受律法，倘若藉这职任能得完全，又何用另外兴起一位祭司，照麦基洗德的等次，不照亚伦的等次呢？
  • 和合本2010（上帝版-简体）
    那么，如果百姓藉着利未人的祭司职任能达到完全—因为百姓是在这职分下领受律法的—为什么还需要按照麦基洗德的体系另外兴起一位祭司，而不按照亚伦的体系呢？
  • 和合本2010（神版-简体）
    那么，如果百姓藉着利未人的祭司职任能达到完全—因为百姓是在这职分下领受律法的—为什么还需要按照麦基洗德的体系另外兴起一位祭司，而不按照亚伦的体系呢？
  • 当代译本
    犹太人在利未祭司制度的基础上承受了律法，如果通过这个祭司制度可以达到纯全，又何必照麦基洗德的模式而不是亚伦的模式，另外兴起一位祭司呢？
  • 圣经新译本
    这样看来，如果藉着利未人的祭司制度能达到完全的地步（人民是在这制度下领受律法的），为什么还需要照着麦基洗德的体系，另外兴起一位祭司，而不照着亚伦的体系呢？
  • 中文标准译本
    既然如此，如果藉着利未人的祭司职份能达到完全——子民本来在这职份下领受了律法——那么，为什么还需要照着麦基洗德的等级，而不照着所谓“亚伦的等级”兴起另一位祭司呢？
  • 新標點和合本
    從前百姓在利未人祭司職任以下受律法，倘若藉這職任能得完全，又何用另外興起一位祭司，照麥基洗德的等次，不照亞倫的等次呢？
  • 和合本2010（上帝版-繁體）
    那麼，如果百姓藉着利未人的祭司職任能達到完全－因為百姓是在這職分下領受律法的－為甚麼還需要按照麥基洗德的體系另外興起一位祭司，而不按照亞倫的體系呢？
  • 和合本2010（神版-繁體）
    那麼，如果百姓藉着利未人的祭司職任能達到完全－因為百姓是在這職分下領受律法的－為甚麼還需要按照麥基洗德的體系另外興起一位祭司，而不按照亞倫的體系呢？
  • 當代譯本
    猶太人在利未祭司制度的基礎上承受了律法，如果通過這個祭司制度可以達到純全，又何必照麥基洗德的模式而不是亞倫的模式，另外興起一位祭司呢？
  • 聖經新譯本
    這樣看來，如果藉著利未人的祭司制度能達到完全的地步（人民是在這制度下領受律法的），為甚麼還需要照著麥基洗德的體系，另外興起一位祭司，而不照著亞倫的體系呢？
  • 呂振中譯本
    這樣看來，倘若藉着利未人的祭司職分能有完全勝任的資格（而人民之領受了律法倒是以這職分為基本），哪裏還需要另一種的一位祭司興起來、是照麥基洗德的等次、而不稱為照亞倫的等次呢？
  • 中文標準譯本
    既然如此，如果藉著利未人的祭司職份能達到完全——子民本來在這職份下領受了律法——那麼，為什麼還需要照著麥基洗德的等級，而不照著所謂「亞倫的等級」興起另一位祭司呢？
  • 文理和合譯本
    昔民在利未人祭司職下受律、若由之而得完全、則何須別興一祭司依麥基洗德之班、而不謂之依亞倫班乎、
  • 文理委辦譯本
    昔民受律例時、利未子孫任祭司職、若人賴此、罔有缺乏、則毋庸別設一祭司、依麥基洗德班聯、不依亞倫班聯、
  • 施約瑟淺文理新舊約聖經
    昔民受律法、即在利未子孫得祭司職之時、若賴此祭司之職、能得成全、何用別設一祭司、循麥基洗德之等次、而不循亞倫之等次乎、又作人若賴利未子孫所得祭司之職能得成全何須別設一祭司循麥基洗德之等次而非循亞倫之等次乎民所受之律法與此祭司之職實有關係
  • New International Version
    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?
  • New International Reader's Version
    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?
  • English Standard Version
    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?
  • New Living Translation
    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?
  • Christian Standard Bible
    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?
  • New American Standard Bible
    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?
  • New King James Version
    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?
  • American Standard Version
    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?
  • Holman Christian Standard Bible
    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?
  • King James Version
    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?
  • New English Translation
    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?
  • World English Bible
    Now if perfection was 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?

交叉引用

  • 希伯來書 8:7
    使舊約已屬完美無缺、應無另立新約之餘地；
  • 加拉太書 2:21
    吾寧能辜負天主之恩寵哉？苟尚緣律法而求義、則基督之死、為徒然矣。』
  • 希伯來書 5:6
    又曰『爾為司祭、永世靡替、與麥基德、同一班次。』
  • 希伯來書 7:17-19
    有經為證：『爾為司祭、永世靡替；與麥基德、同一班次。』是則舊制由於荏弱無能、而遭廢棄、蓋律法固未曾躋一事於完成也；而一新興美滿之希望、已見曙光、吾人之得進而趨近天主者、於是乎賴。
  • 加拉太書 4:9
    今爾已識天主、抑且為天主所識矣、何又返於支離瑣碎之蒙學、抱殘守缺、而甘為之奴乎？
  • 歌羅西書 2:10-17
    彼乃一切爵品權品天神之元首也。爾等惟體基督乃臻充實之美。即爾等之領受割禮、亦在基督之中：惟斯割禮非以人手為之、乃克己去欲之基督割禮也。蓋爾等受洗時、實已與之同葬、且因信賴復活基督者天主之神力、而與之同復活矣。夫爾等本已死於罪中、縱情恣慾、漫無克制、而天主竟賜爾等與基督同生、惠然赦免吾人宿罪、慨然將吾人之罪狀一筆鈎銷、取而釘之於十字聖架、於以解除群魔之武裝、揭其慘敗、而慶聖架之凱旋。是故若有人以飲食、節期、新月、安息等事、訾議爾等、弗恤可也。此等事僅係後事之虛影、而其真體則屬於基督。
  • 希伯來書 6:20
    耶穌已為吾人先入閟帷矣。彼即立為永世靡替之大司祭、與麥基德同一班次者也。
  • 希伯來書 7:15
    是則另一與麥基德相彷彿之司祭之設置、
  • 加拉太書 4:3
    吾人亦然、方吾人之尚屬幼稚、亦受制於世俗之蒙學；
  • 希伯來書 7:21
    經云：『主既立誓豈能悔、爾為司祭永無替。』此即天主向耶穌所立之誓也。
  • 希伯來書 8:10-13
    主曰：「時既至、當與義塞約如次欲將吾誡命、置彼腔子裏；真諦與妙道、深深銘腑肺；我為彼主宰、彼為我子民其時人人心中皆識主、無庸國人昆弟相提醒；人無大與小、悉與我相親；吾願寬宥其諸惡、不欲再念其罪行。」』夫既曰新約、則舊者之見廢明矣。蓋天下之事、陳舊而呈衰老之象者、其離死亡不遠矣。
  • 希伯來書 5:10
    是天主之所以呼之為大司祭、與麥基德同一班次者也。
  • 希伯來書 10:1-4
    總之、律法僅為真福之前影、而非真福之實象。故雖歲一獻祭、亦無從使與祭者臻於純全之域也。若與祭者果得一洗永潔、而達無愧無怍之境界、則贖罪之祭、將不早應息絕乎？然稽諸事實、則歲歲獻祭、年年懷罪。無他、牛羊之血、固不能洗滌罪孽也。