Jesus is in this line

I like Hebrew 7:1-3 because it says, "his Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High. He met Abraham returning from the defeat of the kings and blessed him, and Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. First, the name Melchizedek means “king of righteousness”; then also, “king of Salem” means “king of peace.” Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever."
Many Jews will not believe in Jesus because he wasn't in the line of Levi and so many Jews will reject Jesus.
This position is based on an bad line of thinking. 
 Melchizedek was the first priest in the Old Testament and he was before Moses received the Commandants. 

Melchizedek is mentioned in Genesis 14:18-20 says, "Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High,  and he blessed Abram, saying, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Creator of heaven and earth. And praise be to God Most High, who delivered your enemies into your hand.” Then Abram gave him a tenth of everything."

You will not see Melchizedek mentioned until Psalm 110:4 says, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”

Abraham gave a tenth of his money to Melchizedek before the law was given. 

Hebrews 7:4-10 says, "Just think how great he was: Even the patriarch Abraham gave him a tenth of the plunder!  Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people—that is, from their fellow Israelites—even though they also are descended from Abraham. This man, however, did not trace his descent from Levi, yet he collected a tenth from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. And without doubt the lesser is blessed by the greater.  In the one case, the tenth is collected by people who die; but in the other case, by him who is declared to be living.  One might even say that Levi, who collects the tenth, paid the tenth through Abraham,  because when Melchizedek met Abraham, Levi was still in the body of his ancestor."

I will leave you with Hebrews 7:11-28:

" 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?  For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also. He of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe, and no one from that tribe has ever served at the altar. For it is clear that our Lord descended from Judah, and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests.  And what we have said is even more clear if another priest like Melchizedek appears, one who has become a priest not on the basis of a regulation as to his ancestry but on the basis of the power of an indestructible life.  For it is declared: “You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.”

The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God.

 And it was not without an oath! Others became priests without any oath, ²¹ but he became a priest with an oath when God said to him: “The Lord has sworn  and will not change his mind: ‘You are a priest forever.’” Because of this oath, Jesus has become the guarantor of a better covenant. Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. For the law appoints as high priests men in all their weakness; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever."

 

The Principle Of Existence

I will talk about the First Principle idea of the principle of existence.
Something exists. For example, I exist. This is undeniable, for I would have to exist in order to deny my existence. In the very attempt to explicitly deny my existence I implicitly affirm it.

Phylogeny, evolution and other facts

Phylogeny is the study of the evolutionary relationships between all living  organisms. Taxonomists, scientists who classify living things, use different types of diagrams to display the supposed relationships. These diagrams show how organisms are supposed to have descended from a single ancestor. The diagram come in several forms. The fan diagram show the organisms with respect to their common ancestors and the relative size of the groups. Phylogenetic trees and cladograms are very similar in that they show evolutionary relationships based on various characteristics. There is much debate in taxonomy about what traits to include when doing the analyis. Different relationships come to light depending on which characteristics are given the most weight in the system of classification. Evolutionists assume that they can construct the complete "tree of life" by including as many traits as possible. Evidence from DNA, anatomy, development and fossils are commonly used in the construction of these systems.
A major problem with phylogenetic trees and other related models is the lack of evidence that supports the links between organisms and their supposed fossils relatives. The lines that connect an ancestor to the living organism are mostly imaginary. Very little fossils evidence supports the lines on the diagrams that connect the different kinds of organisms over millions of years, but the lines are often presented as fact. Darwin expected the fossils to show a progression of form, from fish to amphibian, for example, but that progression is missing. The term "missing link"  is often used to refer to these gaps and the missing fossils that supposedly fill them. Whenever you see one of these trees, ask, "What direct evidence supports the lines on the tree?" In some cases there are examples of fossils that fit in the sequence, but the vast majority are missing the evidence. The reliability of such a model is called into question when it is based on so many assumptions.
Creationist disagree with the idea of a "tree of life" as evolutionists sees it- all life originating from a single, unknown, common ancestor. If we consider the created kinds from Genesis, the picture of life would look more like an orchard- distinct groups of animals showing variety within a kind.
Imagine an tree orchard. The trees do not overlap one another or cross one another, representing the limits of variety within the DNA of the created kinds.
While new species have been observed to arise, it is always within the limits of the created kinds. The study of this variability and the relationship of animals within the original created kinds is called baraminology.  This does not mean that creationists reject the majority of classifications by evolutionary biologists but that the evolutionary history associated with the classifications is rejected. More research is needed in the field of baraminology to understand the relationship within the created kinds. This field of research can make specific predictions about the relationships of organisms based on breeding experiments and improve the current understanding of God's divine order.    

Questions for evolutionists #5, How did new biochemical pathways, which involve mulitiple enzymes?

How did new biochemical pathways which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, originate?

Every pathway and nano-machine requires multiple protein/enzyme components to work How did lucky accidents create even one of the components, let alone 10 or 20 or 30+ at the same time, often in a necessary programmed sequence? Evolutionary biochemist Franklin Harold wrote, "we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations."
Here is an link for you if you want more information. creation.com/motor  (includes animation)     

Always faithful

I will talk about Hebrews 6:16-20. This was written to the Jewish believers in Jesus but non-Jewish believers in Jesus can receive hope in these verses.
God made an pact with Abraham and the line went to Issac then Jacob. God gave the Old Testament laws to the Jews. The Old Testament laws were a foreshadow of the New Testament and Jesus was the fulfillment of the Old Testament.
Many non-Messianic Jews says that Jesus came to abolish the Old Testament law but they need to read Matthew 5:17-18. Matthew 5:17-18 says, "  Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸ For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."
The order of  Melchizedek is an higher order than the tribe of Levi. Psalm 110:4 says, "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind: 'You are a priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.” This passage is talking about Jesus and he fulfilled this prophecy.
God the Father so loved the world he give his one and only Son to redeem mankind.
John 3:16-17 says, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. ¹⁷ For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him."

Hebrews 6:16-20

 ¹⁶ People swear by someone greater than themselves, and the oath confirms what is said and puts an end to all argument. ¹⁷ Because God wanted to make the unchanging nature of his purpose very clear to the heirs of what was promised, he confirmed it with an oath. ¹⁸ God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us may be greatly encouraged. ¹⁹ We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, firm and secure. It enters the inner sanctuary behind the curtain, ²⁰ where our forerunner, Jesus, has entered on our behalf. He has become a high priest forever, in the order of Melchizedek.

The First Principles are undeniable or reducible to the undeniable

The First Principles are undeniable or reducible to the undeniable. They are either self-evident or reducible to the self-evident. And self-evident principles are either true by their nature or undeniable because the predicate is reducible to the subject. That the predicate is reducible to the subject means that one cannot deny the principle without using it. For example, the principle of non-contradiction cannot be denied without using it in the very denial. The statement: "Opposites cannot be true" assumes that the opposite of that statements cannot be true.
Not all skeptics or agnostics are willing to grant that the principle of causality, which is crucial in all cosmological arguments for God, is an undeniable first principle. Indeed, not every skeptic is willing to admit that something exists (the principle of existence). Thus,it is necessary to comment on their undeniability.

Would all scientific thought and advancement end if supernatural creation was accepted?

Many people will say that if a person accepts that there is God then all scientific thought and advancement would end. Does this argument have any merit? Would it be true that people would stop researching because people would be saying, "God wanted to do it that way."This is false and I will explain my thoughts.
The ability to study the world around us us is only reasonable because there is a Lawgiver who established the laws of nature. Modern Science founders believed in the Lawgiver and so believed that nature can be studied because it follows the laws given to it by the Lawgiver.
Johannes Kepler, one of the founders of astronomy said that science was "thinking God's thoughts after Him."
Many founders of scientific disciples, such as Bacon, Newton, Kepler, Galileo, Pascal, Dalton, Linnaeus, Mendel, Maxwell and Kelvin were Bible-believing Christians.
The science think-tanks have hijacked science and have accepted that everything was made only by Materialism that teaches the denying that an event or object has a supernatural significance; the doctrine that scientific laws are adequate to account for all phenomena.
We need to look at the possibilities of Materialism that made everything without God.

discovery.org/a/98#

Questions for Evolutionists, #4 Taught as "Evolution", as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life?

By definition it is a selective process (selecting from already existing information), so is not a creative process. It might explain the survival of the fittest (why certain genes benefits creatures more in certain environments), but not the arrival of the fittest (where the genes and creatures came from in the first place). The death of individuals not adapted to an environment and the survival of those adapted to an environment and the survival of those that are suited does not explain the origin of the traits that make an organism adapted to the environment. E.g., how do minor back-and-forth variations in finch beaks explain the origin of beaks or finches? How does natural selection explain goo-to-you evolution? Click on this link. creation.com/defining-terms

The faithful Being

I love the book of Hebrews. The author that wrote this book by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
The book was written to the Jewish believers in Jesus but non-Jews can learn from this book.
Hebrews 6:13-15 talked about the faithfulness of the Lord and his promise to Abraham.
God promised that Abraham that he would have many children and this came true.
The Jews look to Abraham as their father and Jesus was an Jew. Jesus came to redeemed mankind from their sins so he lived a perfect life, died on the cross and arose from the dead.
If an Jew or non-Jew repents from their sins and follow Jesus then they are God's children.
God promise are true. He promised Abraham that he would have many children and it came true.
Abraham had many by nature births and spiritual births.

Hebrews 6:13-15

 ¹³ When God made his promise to Abraham, since there was no one greater for him to swear by, he swore by himself, ¹⁴ saying, “I will surely bless you and give you many descendants.” ¹⁵ And so after waiting patiently, Abraham received what was promised.

The First Principles are undeniable or reducible to the undeniable

The First Principles are undeniable or reducible to the undeniable. They are either self-evident or reducible to the self-evident. And self-evident principles are either true by their nature or undeniable because the predicate is reducible to the subject. That the predicate is reducible to the subject means that one cannot deny the principle without using it. For example, the principle of non-contradiction cannot be denied without using it in the very denial. The statement: "Opposites cannot be true" assumes that the opposite of that statements cannot be true.
Not all skeptics or agnostics are willing to grant that the principle of causality, which is crucial in all cosmological arguments for God, is an undeniable first principle. Indeed, not every skeptic is willing to admit that something exists (the principle of existence). Thus,it is necessary to comment on their undeniability.

Should there be a distinction between operational science and historical science?

Operational science is the type of science that allows us to understand how DNA codes for proteins in cells. It is the type of science that has allowed us to cure and treat diseases, put a man on the moon, build satellites and telescopes and make products that are useful to humans.
Historical Science interpreting evidence from past events based on a presupposed philosophical point of view. The past is not directly observable, testable, repeatable or falsifiable; so interpretations of past events presents greater challenges than interpretations involving operational science.
Evolutionists often claim that people misuse the word "theory" when discussing science and don't make a distinction between a scientific and the common use of the word "theory." You may say, "I have a theory about why Mr. Jones' hair looks funny" but that theory has never been compared to a broad set of observations. This is not the sense of a theory in science.
In light of this, few would argue that there are different types of theories. So it would be good to refine this term further to avoid any baiting and switching of the word "theory." Just as it was valuable to distinguish between operational and historical, it would be good to do the same with operational and historical theories. A scientific operational thoery is:
Operational Theory: an explanation of a set of facts based on a broad of repeatable and testable observations that is generally accepted within a group of scienists.
That evolution has been elevated to the status of an operational theory (and "fact" in the opinion of some) is not due to the strength of the evidence, but in spite of it. Because evolutionary ideas are interpretations of past events, they are not as well-founded as testable scientific theories like Einstein's Theory of Relativity or Newton's Theory of Gravity. These theories offer predictable models and the ability to conduct experiments to determine their validity in different circumstances. Molecules-to-man evolution does not offer this opportunity because these events happened in the past. Therefore, evolution is not an operational theory. Evolution is considered an historical theory, along with creation models and other origins theories.
Historical Theory: An explanation of past events based on the interpretation of past events based on the interpretation of evidence that is available in the present.
Evolution fits this definition of theory, but it relies on the assumption of naturalism. In the naturalistic scientific community, evolution has become a theory that is assumed to be an established fact and not an explanation. Evolution is the prevailing paradigm, and most scientists have stopped questioning the underlying assumptions that the theory is based upon. Creationists develop theories in the light of biblical truth, but they are not as widely accepted by scientists. All theories of the past are based on assumptions and cannot be equated with facts that are observable in the present. This holds true for creationist or  evolutionist theories.
Good operational science can provide scientific answers by test but it can't answer the questions of where we came from and why we are here.
A person must like at the probability of evolution and the probability of an God and he is the Maker.
Life on earth was either created or it developed in some progressive manner; there are no other alternatives. While there are the ideas of creation and evolution, both cannot be true.

Questions for Evolutionist, #3 How could mutations?

How could mutations- accidental copying mistakes (DNA 'Letters' exchanged, delete or added, Genes  duplicated, chromosome inversions, (Etc.)- create the huge volumes of information in the DNA of living things?

How could such errors create 3 billion letters of the DNA information to change a microbe into a microbiologists? There is information for how to make proteins and also for controlling their use- much like a cookbook contains the ingredients as well as the instructions for how and when to use them. One without the other is useless. See creation.com/meta-information
Mutations are known for their destructive effects, including over 1,000 human diseases such as hemophilia. Rarely are they even helpful. But how can scrambling existing DNA information create a new biochemical pathway or nano-machines with many components, to make 'goo-to-you' evolution possible? E.g., How did a 32-componet rotary motor like ATP synthase (which produces the energy currency, ATP, for all life), or robots like kinesin (a 'postman' delivering parcels inside cells) originate?
If you want an answer then click here creation.com/train