Pentateuch

[Ezra 7:10] For Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the LORD, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and judgments.
The references in Ezra to the Law of Moses (v. 6), the Law of the L-rd, and the book of Moses (6:18) point to the Pentateuch in the form close to which we have it now. There are, some differences, for example in 6:18 states: ‘And they set the priest in their divisions and the Levites in their courses, for the service of G-d at Jerusalem, as it is written in the book of Moses.’ Although pentateuchal passages speak of the duties of priest and Levites (Lev. 8; Num. 3:5-10), there is no specific mention of the structures mentioned in 6:18. According to 1 Chron. 23-26, this development is due to David. But in general it may be said that the Law tradition is which Ezra was a skilled perceptive interpreter was the pentateuchal tradition.
In Ezra’s emphasis on the Torah we see the beginning of the development, it must be emphasized that this development stands in strong permanence with the Temple and its traditions. A life lived in accordance with the Law was of many psalms (Ps. 1, 15, 19, 119). One might say that the Temple was made for Law and not Law for the Temple. Israel could survive without the Temple, but she would cease to exist without the Torah.
This view of Torah is due in part to the use of the term ‘Law” as a translation of Torah. It is the Law of the Covenant; it is the Law for people who already are in relationship with G-d. Torah is more than Law; it is teaching or instruction for a people whom G-d has delivered and called to be His own.
Paul’s statements come first to our memory when we think of the Law or Torah, and postexilic Judaism; for example, see such words as the following:
1. Rom. 4:15 For the Law bring wrath.
2. Gal. 3:13 Messiah redeemed us from the curse of the Law.
3. Gal. 2:16 Because by the works of the Law shall no one be justified.
These words of Paul created a misunderstanding of the Jewish Law tradition because they are not interpreted in the context of Paul’s purpose of audience. He speaks in opposition to some people who have a wrong view of the Law. They have forgotten the covenant setting of the Law and have turned it into legality. The people that Paul attacks are likely those that Amos and Jeremiah would have opposed (Rom. 2:17-29; Jer. 7:1-28 and Amos 5:10:24).
Paul does make some affirmative statements about the Law (Rom. 3:31: 7:12), but because he is in conflict with those who misuse the Law, he chooses not to mention passages in the OT or in post biblical Jewish literature that speak of the Law with warmth and love. Paul nowhere refers to the following view of the Law:
1. The Law of the L-rd is perfect reviving the soul
2. The testimony of the L-rd is sure, making wise the simple
3. The precepts of the L-rd are right, rejoicing the heart
4. The commandment of the L-rd is pure, enlightening the eyes
5. The fear of the L-rd is clean, enduing for ever
6. The ordinances of the L-rd are true, and righteous altogether
7. More to be desired are they than gold, even much fine gold
8. Sweeter also than honey and drippings of the honeycomb. (Ps. 19:7-10; and 119).
9. The Law crates harmony
For the classical prophets, the psalmists, Ezra, and those following him, the Law was not a burden of legalistic requirements or an expression of wrath. It was the gift of G-d to a people He had rescued in the Exodus 20:2. It was not a Law that killed, but one that made alive; it was a way of ordering life so that a community could live in harmony with G-d and each other. Life in a community must have some structure; if it is not ordered in one way in terms of love and justice, it will be ordered in another manner.