Heb Židům, kapitola List Židům, kapitola 7
Габрэям 7:11 у розных перакладах
Чэшская
BKR
A protož byla-liť dokonalost spasení skrze Levítské kněžství, (nebo za toho kněžství vydán jest lidu Zákon,) jakáž toho byla potřeba, aby jiný kněz podle řádu Melchisedechova povstal, a nebyl již více podle řádu Aronova jmenován?
SNC [7:11–13]
Lévijská služba nebyla s to přivést Boží lid k dokonalosti. Proto bylo třeba jiné služby a jiného kněze – a to podle řádu Malkísedekova. Je zřejmé, že přenesením kněžství zaniká zákonité oprávnění pro trvání lévijské služby.
Беларуская
Сёмуха
І вось, калі б дасканаласьць дасягалася празь лявіцкае сьвятарства, - бо зь ім спалучаны закон народу, - дык якая яшчэ была б патрэба зьяўляцца іншаму сьвятару па чыне Мелхісэдэка, а не па чыне Абрагамавым звацца?
Бокун
Дык, калі б усё зьдзейсьнілася праз сьвятарства лявітаў, бо народ разам з ім атрымаў Закон, якая яшчэ [была б] патрэба паўставаць іншаму сьвятарству паводле парадку Мэльхісэдэка, і не паводле парадку Аарона называцца?
Руская
РСП (66 кн.)
Итак, если бы совершенство достигалось посредством левитского священства, — ибо с ним сопряжен закон народа, — то какая бы еще нужда была восставать иному священнику по чину Мелхиседека, а не по чину Аарона именоваться?
НРП
Если бы совершенство достигалось через священство левитов (а оно было неотъемлемой частью Закона, который был дан народу), то разве была бы нужда в другом священнике — по чину Мелхиседека, а не по чину Аарона?
Заокская (Кулаков)
А если бы только через левитское священство (при котором получил народ Закон) возможно было прийти к совершенству, то какая была бы нужда в появлении иного священника, по чину Мелхиседека, а не по чину Аарона?
ВП
Если бы цель Всевышнего достигалась через священство левитов (а оно было неотъемлемой частью Закона, который был дан народу), то разве была бы нужда в другом священнослужителе — подобном Малик-Цедеку, а не подобном Харуну?
ВП-А
Если бы цель Аллаха достигалась через священство левитов (а оно было неотъемлемой частью Закона, который был дан народу), то разве была бы нужда в другом священнослужителе — подобном Малик-Цедеку, а не подобном Харуну?
ВП-Т
Если бы цель Всевышнего достигалась через священство левитов (а оно было неотъемлемой частью Закона, который был дан народу), то разве была бы нужда в другом священнослужителе — подобном Малик-Цедеку, а не подобном Хоруну?
СП (БЛ)
Народу был дан закон, основанный на священничестве племени Левия, но никто не мог достичь духовного совершенства через это священничество. Так почему же была необходимость в том, чтобы появился другой священник, подобный Мелхиседеку, а не Аарону?
Десницкий
Если бы к совершенству приводило левитское священство (ведь именно оно было определено Законом для народа), какая была бы нужда появляться другому священнику по чину Мелхиседека? Тогда он мог бы называться священником по чину Аарона.
Кассиан
Итак, если бы совершенство достигалось чрез левитское священство — ибо оно является основанием Закона для народа, — какая была бы еще нужда восставать иному священнику по чину Мелхиседека, а не по чину Аарона ему именоваться?
Англійская
KJV (66 books)
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?
AFINT (Exp US)
Now if perfection had been achievable through the Levitical priesthood, for based on it the people received the Law, what further necessity existed for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek rather than being designated according to the order of Aaron?
AFINT (Lit US)
Now if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood—for on the basis of it the people received the Law—what further need would there have been for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not said to be according to the order of Aaron?
ASV
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?
BSB
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?
DRA
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?
EMTV
Therefore, if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people have received the law), why is there yet a need for another priest to rise, after the order of Melchizedek, and not to be called after the order of Aaron?
FBV
Now if perfection could have been achieved through the priesthood of Levi (for that's how the law was received), what was the need for another priest to come following the order of Melchizedek, and not following the order of Aaron?
GNV
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?
LSV
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 Melchizedek, for another priest to arise, and not to be called according to the order of Aaron?
NASB
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? NASB 2020
NIV (US)
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?
NMV
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 Malki-Tzedek [king of righteousness], and not be called after the order of Aharon [Bright, Very High]?
OJB
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” rather than “al divrati Aharon”?
TCENT
Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under this priesthood the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek rather than the order of Aaron?
T4T
God gave his laws to his people at the same time he gave regulations about the priests. So, if what the priests who were descended from Levi did could have provided a way for God to completely forgive people for disobeying those laws, certainly no other priest like Melchizedek would have been necessary. [RHQ] Instead, priests who were descended from Aaron, Levi’s descendant, would have been adequate.
WEB (US)
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?