Which lie did the priests add to the Law of God—something that altered, according to His own Voice, His Law?
Let us keep in mind, as we try to answer these questions, that the only one who can lie is man, and that, according to Jesus, the Father of Lies is his source. We should also remember that it was the lie—the deception—that trapped Eve and Adam in the beginning, diverting them from God’s purpose for their lives and for ours. What we are living on this planet was not the will and plan of the Creator for us. It is the consequence of the wrong choice made by our father Adam and Eve. Choices have consequences.
The Creator warned us through the prophets that His Word had been falsified—laws were attributed to His Name that He had never commanded, and they were distorted by deceit, that is, by words contrary to the agreement, or by unnecessary commitments that had never been part of what was agreed upon with the children of Israel in the wilderness as part of the Covenant.
The Book of Jeremiah contains enough information for us to understand this, but it is not the only one. It says in chapter 9:13:
“And the LORD said: Because they have forsaken My law, which I set before them, and have not obeyed My voice, nor walked in it.”
Yet there was a whole image of religiosity and obedience to God’s law—and God responded:
“Not even the priests said, ‘Where is the LORD?’ And those who handle the law did not know Me; the rulers transgressed against Me; the prophets prophesied by Baal and went after things that do not profit.” (Jeremiah 2:8)
This passage is very illuminating. First, when God says their priests did not care about Him, He is saying they cared about their own tastes and interests. And what were the interests and tastes of the priests of that generation? The religious traditions of their fathers—polytheism—and its religious expression, which was the ritual of sacrifices. God had called them to be a nation different from their neighbors, but those traditions were their comfort zone, their cultural attachment, and they did not want to leave it.
In Jeremiah 9:13:
“The LORD says: ‘They have abandoned the law I gave them; they did not obey Me or live according to it.’”
In chapter 11:2 God says to them—and He clarifies it for us as well:
“Remind the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem of the terms of My covenant with them.”
In chapter 7:21–34 the Lord forcefully excludes the ritual practice of sacrifices and burnt offerings from the Covenant, saying:
“The LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says to His people: ‘Go ahead, add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices and eat the meat yourselves! For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. What I commanded them was this: Obey Me, and I will be your God and you will be My people… But they did not obey Me or pay attention. They stubbornly followed the evil inclinations of their hearts. Instead of turning toward Me, they turned their backs on Me. From the time their ancestors left Egypt until now, I have sent to you all My servants the prophets, again and again. But you did not listen to Me or pay attention; you were more stubborn than your ancestors.’”
The Lord was explicitly telling them that He had not commanded the ritual. In other words, He demanded nothing about the meat of sacrificed animals—which is what they were doing—yet at the same time, by doing it, they were disobeying His Voice and turning their backs on Him. What they followed were their own terms.
One thing to keep in mind is that, at least in the book of Jeremiah, the chapters do not follow a timeline the way the order of the chapters might suggest.
First God clarifies, in chapter 11, the terms of the Covenant. Then He excludes the priestly law of sacrifices and burnt offerings in chapter 7. When you read Scripture, you should do so without being bound to its divisions. Even more important is to read without any preconceived idea—even if it is a doctrine you have been taught all your life. Even if it might be correct, doctrines are not facts. Those theories will look for whatever they can throughout the reading in order to remain clinging to the mind—especially if the belief is wrong—and they will not even allow you to see what you need to see.
Once, speaking with a believer who did not believe in the baptism of the Holy Spirit, I asked her what she thought of the passage in Acts that speaks of it. She told me she read it, but did not think anything about it. The reason she could not see what it said and understand it was because she had a fixed doctrine in her mind telling her that baptism was only for the apostles, not applicable to her. So, it was like reading ancient history.
So, in the passage I just read from the prophet, God says they did not obey Him, but instead followed the evil inclinations of their heart. These were moral behaviors that did not fit the Covenant, along with the continuation of their fathers’ polytheistic religion and the rituals of sacrifices and burnt offerings.
In chapter 6:13 God speaks of fraud:
“From the least to the greatest, all are greedy for gain; prophets and priests alike, all practice deceit.”
Here a key question arises: what fraud is the Lord talking about?
From the context, we realize that the fraud was committed with His Law or Word—by adding requirements God never demanded as part of the Covenant in the wilderness. Fraud can be material, but in this case the fraud was spiritual. The definition of fraud tells us it is not only an action contrary to truth and integrity, but also something that harms the one against whom it is committed.
In this case, the fraud affected both God and the believer. It affected God because it distorted His character and His will, making Him appear like man—demanding worship and obedience through ritual forms that did nothing for the soul, but satisfied the ego and human arrogance. For example, the solemn festivals in the temple that God Himself dismissed.
It affected the believer because it diverted them from the true path of transformation and spiritual growth—something only reconciliation with God through His forgiveness could accomplish—and it trapped them in a cycle of useless demands.
The unbeliever was also affected because what they heard seemed logically ridiculous, thereby reinforcing their skepticism. Hosea also expressed God’s will clearly, in harmony with Jeremiah:
“I desire mercy, not sacrifice; and knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.”
The deception was sustained for centuries, becoming the pillar of a religious structure that demanded blood as the price for the expiation of sins. Yet, as the author of the epistle to the Hebrews would point out centuries later, that law was ineffective and useless. What is notable is that, instead of recognizing that the practice of sacrifices came from man and not from God, this author replaced it with another form of sacrifice: the blood of a righteous man to satisfy God’s justice regarding the unrighteous man.
Or was it that he never read the prophets’ words saying on God’s behalf that He had never demanded sacrifices?
Here a crucial reflection arises: Why was the system of sacrifices never questioned in its entirety? Why, instead of recognizing it as a human creation, did they decide to replace it with an even greater sacrifice? How did they ignore the messages of the prophets warning that the ritual was not commanded or required by God?
Shame or pride in the writer of Hebrews could have acted as an obstacle to admitting the error. Or perhaps, if the writer was part of the Levitical priesthood, there may have been an interest in protecting the image of the religious system, even at the cost of distorting God’s character. In that process, an unjust image of God was created—making Him seem like someone who demanded blood in order to forgive, when in reality His forgiveness was always based on mercy and reconciliation, not on bloodshed.
And how did we not see this?
In the same prophetic book, God makes clear that there was a conscious collusion:
“It has been found that the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem are preparing a conspiracy.”
Now, what is a conspiracy? It is an agreement between two or more people to act against someone or something, especially against authority. So what was this conspiracy? It was intentional disobedience—abandoning the agreement made with their ancestors in the wilderness in order to return to the idolatrous beliefs and religious rituals of their fathers. Concerning their practices, God says to them:
“Do you really think that sacrifices and the consecrated flesh of the animals offered can deliver you from punishment?”
What would truly have delivered them was sincere conversion—leaving behind the evil they were doing. The way of reconciliation God accepts was recorded in 2 Chronicles:
“If My people, who are called by My name, will humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, forgive their fall, and restore their land.”
And in Jeremiah 8:4 He asks:
“When someone falls, do they not get up again? When they realize they are on the wrong road, do they not turn back?”
God was showing them that true repentance was not in sacrifices, but in correcting their course.
In Jeremiah 8:8 He speaks clearly about the falsification of His Word:
“How can you say, ‘We are wise and possess the Law of Yahweh,’ when in fact the lying pen of the scribes has turned it into a lie?”
Zephaniah also confirms the lie interwoven with the Word of God:
“Her prophets are reckless, lawless men; her priests have profaned the sanctuary and have done violence to the law.”
The question must be asked again here: Where did they falsify the Law of God?
God’s Law was altered when the Levitical priesthood added commandments in His name that God never ordered. These are the same “human commandments” Isaiah speaks of:
“This people draws near to Me with their mouth and honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. Their fear of Me is nothing but a commandment of men learned by rote.”
Another question arises here:
How did we reach this point in our spiritual belief?
The early Christian church, in its religious zeal, decided to separate the texts it considered “divinely inspired” from those it did not, according to its own criteria. But in doing so, it enclosed the selected texts within a framework that made them unquestionable, as if all of them were directly inspired by God.
One of the greatest examples of this interference is the epistle to the Hebrews. The author of that letter built his entire doctrine on the idea that the sacrificial ritual was ordered by God through the Levitical priesthood. Yet God Himself contradicts this claim through the prophets. Despite this fundamental error, Hebrews was accepted as divinely inspired—despite having been built upon an understanding of a sacrificial ritual that was never ordered by God.
On that letter and on Paul’s teachings, much of Christianity was built, even though Jesus never came to found a new religion.
Analyzing Hebrews, let us look at one of its claims:
“If perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it 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 one named according to the order of Aaron?”
Here the author of Hebrews is saying that the Levitical priesthood could not bring perfection and therefore had to be replaced. But to begin with, there is an error in his argument. When he says, “under it the people received the law,” he is speaking about the law of sacrifices and burnt offerings, not the Law of God. The Law of God was given at Mount Sinai before Aaron and his sons were established as priests.
As Jeremiah and Zephaniah affirm, God gave them no law about sacrifices in the wilderness. The Levitical priesthood was instituted after the events at Sinai, as the prophetic message implies. Therefore, the law given “under the Levitical priesthood” was not God’s Law, but the law of sacrifices.
The concept of “perfection” used in Hebrews is not something God declared, but a construction of the author to justify his argument. In other words, the Levitical system was not “imperfect” because God said so, but because the author of Hebrews needed to justify a change in religious structure. When the writer criticizes the Levitical system, he is actually speaking of the sacrificial ritual, not of the original purpose of priesthood in Israel.
The irony is that, even though he recognizes that animal blood could not cleanse sin, instead of questioning the system as a whole, he replaced it with another sacrifice: the blood of a righteous man.
And here is the great question:
If God never asked for sacrifices, why was this system established and falsely attributed to His will?
The fraud of scribes and priests turned relationship with God into a system of transactions, pulling the human being away from their true purpose: spiritual transformation based on obedience and genuine repentance, not external rituals.
The author of Hebrews says:
“You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek. Therefore the former commandment is annulled because of its weakness and ineffectiveness (for the law perfected nothing), and a better hope is introduced, through which we draw near to God.”
The law the writer is speaking of—saying it perfected nothing—is the law of sacrifices, because the Law of God is perfect, eternal, and has the power to cleanse the human soul and restore it to its original purpose.
But his idea that another priesthood was needed, according to the order of Melchizedek, has no foundation in the Torah. It is a theological interpretation. And we also know that Melchizedek was a Canaanite priest-prince from a polytheistic tradition, not a priest of the God of Israel. It would not be strange if, in the pantheon of gods under Melchizedek’s care, there had been a figurine representing Yahweh—because polytheistic religion would allow it, one god among others.
In his exegesis, the author associates the Levitical priesthood with the laws of sacrificial ritual as if they were the same thing. In his reasoning, priesthood and sacrifices become one single reality, when in fact they were not. He also introduces a concept of “perfection” in the Levitical priesthood that does not exist in the Old Testament.
When he speaks of “weakness and ineffectiveness” and of the need for “perfection,” he is referring to what sacrifices produced in the human soul—which was nothing, because animal sacrifices were food that ended up in the stomachs of the priests. The parts that could not be eaten were burned as a “pleasing aroma” to Yahweh. But we know what Yahweh thought of the “pleasing aroma.” In Isaiah He says:
“What do I care about your many sacrifices? … Stop bringing meaningless offerings…”
The writer’s intention is to use the apparently mysterious figure of Melchizedek to justify a new priesthood, even though the Old Testament never suggested replacing the Levitical system. In fact, the Levitical system he refers to—which included the rituals of sacrifices and burnt offerings—had been declared perpetual. Here we see clearly how the author of Hebrews is reshaping Jewish Law and history to fit a new narrative, rather than following what was actually written. If he had, he would have realized that the system had been declared perpetual—according to the priestly tradition—by God, and he would not have been able to touch it.
The author of Hebrews appears to be repeating the narrative of the priestly tradition without realizing that his own statement contradicts history. By saying that “the Law was given under the Levitical priesthood,” he is indirectly confirming that the laws of sacrifices and burnt offerings were not part of the original Law of God, but a later addition made by priests.
God only gave the family of Levi the task of guarding the tabernacle and the Ark of the Law. The system of sacrifices and priestly expiations was not commanded by God. Jeremiah confirms it: God never commanded burnt offerings or sacrifices. Therefore, without realizing it, the author of Hebrews is arguing against a later falsification of Yahweh’s Law created by man—not against the true Law given by God to Moses.
God rejected the Levitical system of sacrifices and burnt offerings as His own. Therefore, the entire interpretation of the author of Hebrews collapses. When we believe a lie, that lie acts like an enchantment. It numbs us. It prevents us from reasoning clearly. It makes us unable to connect ideas logically in order to arrive at the truth—and it is the truth, when we know it, that makes us free from the lie.
And here the key question arises: If expiation through sacrifices was never ordered by God, how did we come to believe that He wanted the righteous to die for the unrighteous?
Who is that “god” who demands the death of an innocent person to save the guilty? Because who is capable of sacrificing a good man for a bad one?
Only man—not my God.
The numbing of conscience by a believed lie blocks our action and prevents us from advancing spiritually. That is why someone said religion is the opium of the people. Because when religion is not merely tradition, but takes ownership of spiritual matters that belong only to God, it becomes an organized mechanism of control. Yet Jesus’ words are still valid:
“In this way, by your traditions that you pass down, you nullify what God has ordained. And you do many other things like this.”
Here the Word of God—teaching reconciliation through sincere repentance—was nullified. It was replaced by a tradition inspired by ancient pagan practices where sacrifices were common, but now given a new interpretation: the belief that expiation of sins was achieved through the blood of sacrificed animals. With the author of Hebrews, and after the death of Jesus, the understanding of sacrifice was modified again, claiming that the change was the work of God’s love.
When we accept a lie without questioning it, it captures the mind. Everything we perceive is seen through the lens of that error. That is how we read Scripture for centuries, believing things that did not come from God, but from man.
There are convictions of Paul with which I disagree, but there is one principle of his I adopted in my spiritual life: “Examine everything carefully; hold fast to what is good.” Although Paul was speaking of prophecies, this counsel applies to everything. (This literal application to prophecies is also something worth reflecting on, but it is not the topic here.)
The other foundation I adopted comes from the Gospel of Luke: “I too have investigated everything carefully from the beginning, and I decided to write it down in an orderly way, just as it happened.” Luke investigates and organizes the accounts about Jesus. I took that same attitude in order to put my own spiritual belief in order regarding what I had been taught—because my intuition told me that not everything was from God.
To summarize: the “Law of Moses,” as we know it today, was in reality a later construction of the priesthood and not a code delivered directly by God at Sinai. This is what we now identify as Levitical law, which includes the ritual of sacrifices and burnt offerings. These laws were not commanded by God and do not belong to the Covenant made in the wilderness, as was written and demonstrated by the prophets:
“If you want, keep piling up the offerings and the animals you present in My honor, and stuff yourselves with the meat. For the truth is that when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt, I did not command them to present offerings or animals to Me.”
Here it is clear that God Himself denies having established the sacrificial system. This is direct proof of the falsification of His Law.
The addition of these laws as if they were part of God’s will is what the Lord warned as a lie through the prophet:
“How can you say, ‘We are wise and possess the Law of Yahweh,’ when in reality the lying pen of the scribes has turned it into a lie?”
And Zephaniah also warned us:
“Her prophets are reckless, lawless men; her priests have profaned the sanctuary and falsified the law.”
With these texts it is confirmed, without a doubt, that the scribes and priests falsified the Law, adding human precepts that distorted the character of God.
When we explain Hebrews and the contradiction it presents, another evidence of error appears: instead of eliminating the sacrificial system as a human invention, it was replaced with a greater sacrifice, perpetuating the original lie. This is the direct consequence of sustaining a deception for centuries: we end up accepting as divine will something that was born from man.
So if the error was perpetuated for centuries, if the Law was falsified and the image of the true God was distorted, perhaps the time has come to re-examine what we believed without asking questions. If God never demanded blood sacrifices—neither of animals nor of men—what does He expect from us today?
Perhaps, as in the days of Jeremiah, He only expects us to return to His Voice. To leave behind inherited traditions that have no root in His Word, and to return to the original source: sincere reconciliation, humble submission, and inner transformation.
And now the question is inevitable: will we continue believing the Levitical tradition that attributed sacrifices to God, or will we choose to listen to the prophetic voice that denies them in the Name of God?