Lectionary Calendar
Sunday, November 24th, 2024
the Week of Christ the King / Proper 29 / Ordinary 34
the Week of Christ the King / Proper 29 / Ordinary 34
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
Attention!
StudyLight.org has pledged to help build churches in Uganda. Help us with that pledge and support pastors in the heart of Africa.
Click here to join the effort!
Click here to join the effort!
Interlinear Study Bible
Greek Language
Hebrews 7:11
1487
Ei
Εἰ
If
Conj
3303
men
μὲν
indeed
Conj
3767
oun
οὖν
then
Conj
5050
teleiōsis
τελείωσις
perfection
N-NFS
1223
dia
διὰ
by
Prep
3588
tēs
τῆς
the
Art-GFS
3020
Leuitikēs
Λευιτικῆς*
Levitical
Adj-GFS
2420
hierōsynēs
ἱερωσύνης
priesthood
N-GFS
1510
ēn
ἦν
were
V-IIA-3S
3588
ho
ὁ
the
Art-NMS
2992
laos
λαὸς
people
N-NMS
1063
gar
γὰρ
indeed
Conj
1909
ep’
ἐπ’
upon
Prep
846
autēs
αὐτῆς
it
PPro-GF3S
3549
nenomothetētai
νενομοθέτηται
had received [the] law
V-RIM/P-3S
5101
tis
τίς
what
IPro-NFS
2089
eti
ἔτι
still
Adv
5532
chreia
χρεία
need [was there]
N-NFS
2596
kata
κατὰ
according to
Prep
3588
tēn
τὴν
the
Art-AFS
5010
taxin
τάξιν
order
N-AFS
3198
Melchisedek
Μελχισέδεκ
of Melchizadek
N-GMS
2087
heteron
ἕτερον
[for] another
Adj-AMS
450
anistasthai
ἀνίστασθαι
to arise
V-PNM
2409
hierea
ἱερέα
priest
N-AMS
2532
kai
καὶ
and
Conj
3756
ou
οὐ
not
Adv
2596
kata
κατὰ
according to
Prep
3588
tēn
τὴν
the
Art-AFS
5010
taxin
τάξιν
order
N-AFS
2
Aarōn
Ἀαρὼν
of Aaron
N-GMS
3004
legesthai
λέγεσθαι
to be named
V-PNM/P
Antoniades Patriarchal Edition (1904/12)
ει μεν ουν τελειωσις δια της λευιτικης ιερωσυνης ην 5707 ο λαος γαρ επ αυτη νενομοθετητο 5718 τις ετι χρεια κατα την ταξιν μελχισεδεκ ετερον ανιστασθαι 5733 ιερεα και ου κατα την ταξιν ααρων λεγεσθαι 5745
Textus Receptus (Beza, 1598)
ει μεν ουν τελειωσις δια της λευιτικης ιερωσυνης ην ο λαος γαρ επ αυτη νενομοθετητο τις ετι χρεια κατα την ταξιν μελχισεδεκ ετερον ανιστασθαι ιερεα και ου κατα την ταξιν ααρων λεγεσθαι
Berean Greek Bible (2016)
οὖν Εἰ τελείωσις ἦν, μὲν διὰ τῆς Λευιτικῆς ἱερωσύνης γὰρ ἐπ’ αὐτῆς ὁ λαὸς νενομοθέτηται, τίς ἔτι χρεία ἕτερον ἱερέα ἀνίστασθαι λέγεσθαι; κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισέδεκ καὶ οὐ κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Ἀαρὼν
Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
ει μεν ουν τελειωσις δια της λευιτικης ιερωσυνης ην ο λαος γαρ επ αυτη νενομοθετητο τις ετι χρεια κατα την ταξιν μελχισεδεκ ετερον ανιστασθαι ιερεα και ου κατα την ταξιν ααρων λεγεσθαι
Byzantine/Majority Text
ει μεν ουν τελειωσις δια της λευιτικης ιερωσυνης ην 5707 ο λαος γαρ επ αυτη νενομοθετητο 5718 τις ετι χρεια κατα την ταξιν μελχισεδεκ ετερον ανιστασθαι 5733 ιερεα και ου κατα την ταξιν ααρων λεγεσθαι 5745
Textus Receptus (Elzevir, 1624)
ει 5707 μεν ουν τελειωσις δια της λευιτικης ιερωσυνης ην ο 5718 λαος γαρ επ αυτη νενομοθετητο τις 5733 ετι χρεια κατα την ταξιν μελχισεδεκ ετερον ανιστασθαι ιερεα και ου κατα την ταξιν ααρων λεγεσθαι
Neste-Aland 26
Εἰ μὲν οὖν τελείωσις διὰ τῆς Λευιτικῆς ἱερωσύνης ἦν 5713 ὁ λαὸς γὰρ ἐπ αὐτῆς νενομοθέτηται 5769 τίς ἔτι χρεία κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισέδεκ ἕτερον ἀνίστασθαι 5733 ἱερέα καὶ οὐ κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Ἀαρὼν λέγεσθαι 5745
SBL Greek New Testament (2010)
Εἰ μὲν οὖν τελείωσις διὰ τῆς Λευιτικῆς ἱερωσύνης ἦν ὁ λαὸς γὰρ ἐπ αὐτῆς νενομοθέτηται τίς ἔτι χρεία κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισέδεκ ἕτερον ἀνίστασθαι ἱερέα καὶ οὐ κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Ἀαρὼν λέγεσθαι
Textus Receptus (Schrivener, 1894)
ει μεν ουν τελειωσις δια της λευιτικης ιερωσυνης ην ο λαος γαρ επ αυτη νενομοθετητο τις ετι χρεια κατα την ταξιν μελχισεδεκ ετερον ανιστασθαι ιερεα και ου κατα την ταξιν ααρων λεγεσθαι
Textus Receptus (Stephanus, 1550)
ει μεν ουν τελειωσις δια της λευιτικης ιερωσυνης ην ο λαος γαρ επ αυτη νενομοθετητο τις ετι χρεια κατα την ταξιν μελχισεδεκ ετερον ανιστασθαι ιερεα και ου κατα την ταξιν ααρων λεγεσθαι
Tischendorf 8th Edition (1869/72)
Εἰ μὲν οὖν τελείωσις διὰ τῆς Λευειτικῆς ἱερωσύνης ἦν ὁ λαὸς γὰρ ἐπ’ αὐτῆς νενομοθέτηται τίς ἔτι χρεία κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισεδὲκ ἕτερον ἀνίστασθαι ἱερέα καὶ οὐ κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Ἀαρὼν λέγεσθαι
Textus Receptus (1550/1894)
εἰ μὲν οὖν τελείωσις διὰ τῆς λευιτικῆς ἱερωσύνης ἦν 5707 ὁ λαὸς γὰρ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῇ νενομοθέτητο 5718 τίς ἔτι χρεία κατὰ τὴν τάξιν μελχισέδεκ ἕτερον ἀνίστασθαι 5733 ἱερέα καὶ οὐ κατὰ τὴν τάξιν ἀαρὼν λέγεσθαι 5745
Westcott / Hort, UBS4
ει μεν ουν τελειωσις δια της λευιτικης ιερωσυνης ην 5707 ο λαος γαρ επ αυτης νενομοθετηται 5769 τις ετι χρεια κατα την ταξιν μελχισεδεκ ετερον ανιστασθαι 5733 ιερεα και ου κατα την ταξιν ααρων λεγεσθαι 5745
Berean Study Bible
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 appearone 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), why was there still need for another priest to appearone in the order of Melchizedek and not in the order of Aaron?
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
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
Holman Christian Standard Version
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?
King James Version
If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law (5718),) 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 (5718),) 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 American Standard Version
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?
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
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
World English Bible
Now if there were 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 were 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?
