One person of great authority (claimed to be God) gives His servant (claimed to be Moses) a set of instructions to write down to preserve and protect His people in how they live and progress.
However, if one is truly following the person of great authority, then man has no ability to control him. Therefore, man—believing he has the right of control over other men—must figure out how to pervert God's instructions to usurp His power and authority over men.
We firmly believe that we can show that according to the text of scripture, the Mosaic Law which God gave Moses to guide man in a proper direction, was vastly more simple and less detailed than what we now read.
We believe that we can show that over the years while the government of Israel was becoming more sophisticated, men were working diligently to wrest the control of the nation from God's authority to place it within their hands.
During that time span, the Mosaic scripture had to be hand-copied over and over to preserve it. From the time of the first writing, it would have to have undergone re-writing at a minimum of twelve times covering a span of over 1,000 years.
During this process, it gave the priests and their scribes the opportunity to create new rules, regulations, and laws, while inserting them into the text and claiming them as originating within the writings of Moses. This allowed them to construct a man-made state system under the guise of divine law, oppressing the people to secure their own wealth and power. We will now bring forth some starkly obvious examples of these misdeeds to demonstrate that this technique was in fact being utilized.
Deuteronomy 17:17 (KJV):
"Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold."
This Command was supposedly given to the nation while they were in the desert wilderness. Yet no such prohibition against multiple wives existed prior to this time, and Virtually ever King in the history of Israel either never heard of that rule or they openly ignored it, including King David!
1 Kings 15:5 (KJV):
"Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite."
If King David was a man after Yahavah's own heart, and he followed righteousness in everything but one, then he did not violate the no multiple marriage for a King Law.
Had Deuteronomy 17:17 have actually existed then this passage centuries later would make no sense!
2 Samuel 12:8 (KJV):
"And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things."
Yahavah does not give that which He prohibited!
That means Deuteronomy 17:17 was a much later addition to Deuteronomy placed in the writing many centuries after moses!
Then we have:
Leviticus 18:9 (KJV)
"The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover."
Leviticus 20:17 (KJV)
"And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister's nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity."
Deuteronomy 27:22 (KJV):
"Cursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother. And all the people shall say, Amen."
Yet we are told that all of Yahavah's Laws are eternal, but Abraham married his half sister and was considered righteous by God!
Then we find many centuries after this law was supposedly written:
2 Samuel 13:11–13 (KJV)
11 "And when she had brought them unto him to eat, he took hold of her, and said unto her, Come lie with me, my sister."
12 "And she answered him, Nay, my brother, do not force me; for no such thing ought to be done in Israel: do not thou this folly."
13 "And I, whither shall I cause my shame to go? and as for thee, thou shalt be as one of the fools in Israel. Now therefore, I pray thee, speak unto the king; for he will not withhold me from thee."
This story involves the son of King David raping his half sister. When she said: Now therefore, I pray thee, speak unto the king; for he will not withhold me from thee."
Had that prohibitionary law have been in effect, she would have never ever suggested going to King David and him being ok with her half brother marrying her. That specifically identifies that the Levitical and Deuteronomy prohibitionary laws against this act were not instilled into Moses writing until many centuries after Moses!
Then we have:
Exodus 23:15-16 (KJV)
"Thou shalt keep the feast of unleavened bread: (thou shalt eat unleavened bread seven days, as I commanded thee, in the time appointed of the month Abib; for in it thou camest out from Egypt: and none shall appear before me empty: And the feast of harvest, the firstfruits of thy labours, which thou hast sown in the field: and the feast of ingathering, which is in the end of the year, when thou hast gathered in thy labours out of the field."
Here Moses is listing out the three main High Holy Days that Yahavah requires us to go before Him. The Feast is originally called the Feast of Ingathering (not Tabernacles) and is celebrated in the same exact method as the first two.
Now we find in Leviticus the name changes and much has been added.
Leviticus 23:34 (KJV)
"Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, The fifteenth day of this seventh month shall be the feast of tabernacles for seven days unto the LORD."
Leviticus 23:35–41 (KJV)
(Covers the holy convocations, offerings made by fire, and gathering the branches of palm trees and leafy trees for the seven days.)
Leviticus 23:42 (KJV)
"Ye shall dwell in booths seven days; all that are Israelites born shall dwell in booths:"
In Deuteronomy the feast retains the name Feast of Tabernacles, but Deuteronomy is completely void of the requirement to dwell in booths.
Then centuries later we see:
Nehemiah 8:14–17 (KJV)
14 "And they found written in the law which the LORD had commanded by Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month:"
15 "And that they should publish and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying, Go forth unto the mount, and fetch olive branches, and pine branches, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written."
16 "So the people went forth, and brought them, and made themselves booths, every one upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the street of the water gate, and in the street of the gate of Ephraim."
17 "And all the congregation of them that were come again out of the captivity made booths, and sat under the booths: for since the days of Jeshua [Joshua] the son of Nun unto that day had not the children of Israel done so. And there was very great gladness."
This means that during the time of the Righteous King David, Israel did not celebrate the feast living in booths.
When Joshua brought Israel into the promised land they stopped dwelling in tents (temporary housing) and had homes. Had the command to dwell in booths for the feast of Tabernacles been within Leviticus, the righteous King david would have made it a requirement in all of Israel.
That means the command to live in booths was created centuries later, and back dated into the book of Leviticus as if Moses had written it.
But would the later Priest and Scribes really commit such of an atrocity?
Jeremiah 8:8:
"How do you say, 'We are wise, and the law of Yahavah is with us'? Behold, certainly the false pen of the scribes has worked falsehood [made it into a lie]."
Ezekiel 22:26:
"Her priests have violated my law, and have profined mine holy things..."
Malachi 2:7–9:
"For the priest's lips should keep knowledge... But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have been partial in the law."
These examples are merely the tip of the iceberg! A small sampling of a much broader, systemic pattern of priestly additions and textual expansions. They are presented here to establish a clear and undeniable precedent: the text as we have received it bears the distinct fingerprints of scribal alteration and political centralization.
For anyone truly seeking original, uncorrupted truth, these glaring contradictions prove that we cannot blindly accept every layer of scribal addition as original divine law. The duty falls on us to dig deeper, test the text against itself, and strip away the hand of man to uncover what was actually given."