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？

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？

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？

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？

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？

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？

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？

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？

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？

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？

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？

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？

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？

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、

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、

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

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？

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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 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 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?

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 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?

第一個約若沒有瑕疵，就無須尋求第二個約了。

我不廢掉神的恩；如果義是藉着律法而獲得，那麼基督就白白死了。

就如又有一處說：「你是照着麥基洗德的體系永遠為祭司。」

因為有給他作見證的說：「你是照着麥基洗德的體系永遠為祭司。」一方面，先前的誡命因軟弱無能而廢掉了，（律法本來就不能成就甚麼）；另一方面，一個更好的指望被引進來，靠這指望，我們就可以親近神。

現在你們既然認識神，更可說是被神所認識的，怎麼還要轉回那懦弱無用的粗淺學說，情願再給它們作奴隸呢？

你們在他裏面也已經成為豐盛。他是所有執政掌權者的元首。你們也在他裏面受了不是人手所行的割禮，而是使你們脫去肉體情慾的基督的割禮。你們既受洗與他一同埋葬，也就在此禮上，因信那使他從死人中復活的神的作為跟他一同復活。你們從前在過犯和未受割禮的肉體中死了，神卻赦免了你們一切的過犯，使你們與基督一同活過來，塗去了在律例上所寫、敵對我們、束縛我們的字據，把它撤去，釘在十字架上。基督既將一切執政者、掌權者的權勢解除了，就在凱旋的行列中，將他們公開示眾，仗着十字架誇勝。所以，不要讓任何人在飲食上，或節期、初一、安息日等事上評斷你們。這些原是未來的事的影子，真體卻是屬基督的。

為我們作先鋒的耶穌，既照着麥基洗德的體系成了永遠的大祭司，已經進入了。

倘若有另一位像麥基洗德的祭司興起來，我的話就更顯而易見了。

我們也是一樣，在未成年的時候，被世上粗淺的學說所奴役，也是如此。

只有耶穌是起誓立的，因為那位立他的對他說：「主起了誓，絕不改變。你是永遠為祭司。」

主又說：那些日子以後，我與以色列家所立的約是這樣：我要將我的律法放在他們的心思裏，寫在他們的心上；我要作他們的神，他們要作我的子民。他們各人不用教導自己的鄉親和自己的弟兄，說：你要認識主；因為從最小的到最大的，他們都要認識我。我要寬恕他們的不義，絕不再記得他們的罪惡。」既然神提到「新的約」，那麼第一個約就成為舊的了；而那漸舊漸衰的必然很快消逝了。

並蒙神照着麥基洗德的體系宣稱他為大祭司。

既然律法只不過是未來美好事物的影子，不是本體的真像，就不能藉着每年常獻一樣的祭物，使那些進前來的人完全。若不然，獻祭的事豈不早已停止了嗎？因為敬拜的人僅只一次潔淨，良心就不再覺得有罪了。但是這些祭物使人每年都想起罪來，因為公牛和山羊的血不能除罪。