the Week of Proper 22 / Ordinary 27
Click here to learn more!
Read the Bible
King James Version
Hebrews 7:11
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- AmericanEncyclopedias:
- CondensedDevotionals:
- EveryParallel Translations
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?
So the Levites were the preachers of the Code of the Law, but obviously this code didn't make anyone perfect. That's why God came along and took us down the trail to perfection that Mel had started instead of continuing to follow the one that Levi and Aaron took.
Now if it was possible for things to be made complete through the priests of the house of Levi (for the law was given to the people in connection with them), what need was there for another priest who was of the order of Melchizedek and not of 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?
Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it have the people 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?
If then perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law) what farther need was there that another priest should rise, after the order of Melchisedek, 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?
If therefore perfection were by the Leuiticall Priesthood (for vnder it the people receiued the Law) what further neede was there, that another Priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not bee called after the order of Aaron?
Truly, then, if perfection was through the Levitical priestly office (for the people had been given Law under it), why yet was there need for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek and not to be called according to theorder of Aaron?
Yf now therfore perfeccion came by the presthode of the Leuites (for vnder the same (presthode) the people receaued the lawe) what neded it then furthurmore, that another prest shulde ryse after the order of Melchisedech, and not after the order of Aaron?
If therefore the Levitical priesthood, concerning which the people received a law, could have given perfection, what further need was there that another priest should rise, to be named after the order of Melchisedec, and not after the order of 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.
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 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 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?
Yf now therfore perfeccion came by the presthod of the levites (for vnder that presthod the people recaved the lawe) what neded it furthermore that an other prest shuld ryse after the order of Melchisedech and not after the order of Aaron?
Now if there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it has 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 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 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 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.
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 could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on this basis the people received the law), why was there still need for another priest to appear-one in the order of Melchizedek and not in the order of Aaron?
Even though the Law of Moses says that 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.
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?
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 therefore perfection had bene by the Priesthoode of the Leuites (for vnder it the Lawe was established to the people) what needed it furthermore, that another Priest should rise after the order of Melchi-sedec, and not to be called after the order of Aaron?
If therefore perfection had been reached by the Le-vit''ic-al priesthood, by which the law was enacted for the people, what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Mel-chis''e-dec? Otherwise, the scriptures would have said, that he would be after 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 there was perfection through the Levitical priesthood (for under it have the people received the law), what further need was there for another Kohen to arise after the order of Malki-Tzedek, and not be called after the order of Aharon?
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?Galatians 2:21; Hebrews 7:18-19; 8:7;">[xr]
If, therefore, Perfection [fn] were to be through the priesthood of the Levoyee, by which the law has been put upon the people, why was there another Priest required, who should arise in the resemblance of Malki-Zedek? For he had said, In the likeness of Aharun he shall be.
If, therefore, perfection had been by means of the priesthood of the Levites, in which the law was enjoined on the people; why was another priest required, who should stand up after the likeness of Melchisedec? For it should have said, He shall be after the likeness of Aaron.
Psalm 110:4">[xr] 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?
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?
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.
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 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 indeed, therefore, there had been, a perfecting through means of the Levitical priesthood, - for, the people, thereon, have had based a code of laws, what further need, according to the rank of Melchizedek, for a different priest to be raised up, and, not according to the rank of Aaron, to be designated?
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?
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 therefore perfection was by the priesthood of ye Leuites (For vnder that priesthood the people receaued the law) what neded it furthermore that another priest shoulde rise after the order of Melchisedech, and not to be called after 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.
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?
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.
Therfor if perfeccioun was bi the preesthood of Leuy, for vndur hym the puple took the lawe, what yit was it nedeful, another preest to rise, bi the ordre of Melchisedech, and not to be seid bi the ordre of Aaron?
Contextual Overview
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
perfection: וכוישףיע [Strong's G5050], completion, or fulfilment of the plan and purpose of God. Hebrews 7:18, Hebrews 7:19, Hebrews 8:7, Hebrews 8:10-13, Hebrews 10:1-4, Galatians 2:21, Galatians 4:3, Galatians 4:9, Colossians 2:10-17
what: Hebrews 7:26-28
another: Hebrews 7:15, Hebrews 7:17, Hebrews 7:21, Hebrews 5:6, Hebrews 5:10, Hebrews 6:20
Reciprocal: Exodus 29:9 - the priest's Numbers 20:26 - General Numbers 25:13 - an everlasting 1 Chronicles 6:49 - Aaron 1 Chronicles 24:19 - under Aaron Psalms 110:4 - Thou Acts 6:14 - change Galatians 3:25 - we Hebrews 6:1 - let Hebrews 8:4 - he should Hebrews 8:13 - he hath Hebrews 9:9 - the time Hebrews 9:11 - an high priest
Cross-References
And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
And Noah did according unto all that the Lord commanded him.
And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.
Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth,
In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.
Then a lord on whose hand the king leaned answered the man of God, and said, Behold, if the Lord would make windows in heaven, might this thing be? And he said, Behold, thou shalt see it with thine eyes, but shalt not eat thereof.
And that lord answered the man of God, and said, Now, behold, if the Lord should make windows in heaven, might such a thing be? And he said, Behold, thou shalt see it with thine eyes, but shalt not eat thereof.
Gill's Notes on the Bible
If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood,.... The priesthood which was established in the tribe of Levi; so called, to distinguish it from that which was before this institution, from the times of Adam, as well as from the priesthood of Melchizedek, and from the priesthood of Christ, and from that of his people under the Gospel, who are all priests; as well as to restrain it to the subject of the apostle's discourse: the design of which is to show, that there is no perfection by it; as is clear from the priests themselves, who were but men, mortal men, sinful men, and so imperfect, and consequently their priesthood; and from their offerings, between which, and sin, there is no proportion; and at best were but typical of the sacrifice of Christ; and could neither make the priests nor the worshippers perfect, neither in their own consciences, nor in the sight of God: moral actions are preferred before them, and yet by these there is no perfection, justification, and salvation; to which may be added, that the sacrifices the priests offered did not extend to all kind of sins, only to sins of ignorance, not to presumptuous ones; and there were many under that dispensation punished with death; and at most they only delivered from temporal, not eternal punishment, and only entitled to a temporal life, not an eternal one.
For under it the people received the law: not the moral law, which was given to Adam in innocence, and as it came by Moses, it was before the Levitical priesthood took place; but the ceremonial law, and which was carnal, mutable, and made nothing perfect: the Syriac version renders it, "by which a law was imposed upon the people"; to regard the office of priesthood, and the priests in it, and bring their sacrifices to them; and the Arabic version reads, "the law of a the priest's office"; which office was after the law of a carnal commandment, and so imperfect, as is manifest from what follows: for had perfection been by it,
what further need was there that another priest should arise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? that there was another priest promised and expected, and that he should arise after the order of Melchizedek, and who was to make his soul an offering for sin, is certain, Ezra 2:63 and such an one is risen, even Jesus of Nazareth; and yet there would have been no need of him, and especially that he should be of a different order from Aaron's, had there been perfection by the Levitical priesthood.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood - As the Jews supposed. They were accustomed to regard the system as perfect. It was an appointment of God, and they were tenacious of the opinion that it was to be permanent, and that it needed no change. But Paul says that this could not be. Even from their own Scriptures it was apparent that a priest was to arise of another order, and of a more permanent character, and this he says was full proof: that there was defect of some kind in the previous order. What this defect was, he does not here specify, but the subsequent reasoning shows that it was in such points as these - that it was not permanent; that it could not make the worshippers perfect; that the blood which they offered in sacrifice could not take away sin, and could not render those who offered it holy; compare Hebrews 7:19, Hebrews 7:23-24; Hebrews 10:1-4.
For under it the people received the law - This assertion seems necessary in order to establish the point maintained in Hebrews 7:12, that if the priesthood is changed there must be also a change of the Law. In order to this, it was necessary to admit that the Law was received under that economy, and that “it was a part of it,” so that the change of one involved also the change of the other. It was not strictly true that the whole Law was given after the various orders of Levitical priest were established - for the Law on Sinai, and several other laws, were given before that distinct arrangement was made; but it was true:
(1)That a considerable part of the laws of Moses were given under that arrangement; and,
(2)That the whole of the ceremonial observances was connected with that. They were parts of one system, and mutually dependent on each other. This is all that the argument demands.
What further need was there ... - “If that system would lead to perfection; if it was sufficient to make the conscience pure, and to remove sin, then there was no necessity of any other. Yet the Scriptures have declared that there “would be” another of a different order, implying that there was some defect in the former.” This reasoning is founded on the fact that there was an express prediction of the coming of a priest of a different “order” Psalms 110:4, and that this fact implied that there was some deficiency in the former arrangement. To this reasoning it is impossible to conceive that there can be any objection.
Clarke's Notes on the Bible
Verse Hebrews 7:11. If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood] The word τελειωσις, as we have before seen, signifies the completing or finishing of any thing, so as to leave nothing imperfect, and nothing wanting. Applied here to the Levitical priesthood, it signifies the accomplishment of that for which a priesthood is established, viz.: giving the Deity an acceptable service, enlightening and instructing the people, pardoning all offences, purging the conscience from guilt, purifying the soul and preparing it for heaven, and regulating the conduct of the people according to the precepts of the moral law. This perfection never came, and never could come, by the Levitical law; it was the shadow of good things to come, but was not the substance. It represented a perfect system, but was imperfect in itself. It showed that there was guilt, and that there was an absolute need for a sacrificial offering to atone for sin, and it typified that sacrifice; but every sacrificial act under that law most forcibly proved that it was impossible for the blood of BULLS and GOATS to take away sin.
For under it the people received the law — That is, as most interpret this place, under the priesthood, ιερωσυνη being understood; because, on the priesthood the whole Mosaical law and the Jewish economy depended: but it is much better to understand επαυτη on account of it, instead of under it; for it is a positive fact that the law was given before any priesthood was established, for Aaron and his sons were not called nor separated to this office till Moses came down the second time from the mount with the tables renewed, after that he had broken them, Exodus 40:12-14. But it was in reference to the great sacrificial system that the law was given, and on that law the priesthood was established; for, why was a priesthood necessary, but because that law was broken and must be fulfilled?
That another priest should rise — The law was given that the offence might abound, and sin appear exceeding sinful; and to show the absolute necessity of the sacrifice and mediation of the great Messiah, but it was neither perfect in itself, nor could it confer perfection, nor did it contain the original priesthood. Melchisedec had a priesthood more than four hundred years (422) before the law was given; and David prophesied, Psalms 110:4, that another priest should arise after the order of Melchisedec, nearly five hundred years (476) after the law was given. The law, therefore, did not contain the original priesthood; this existed typically in Melchisedec, and really in Jesus Christ.
