Our handling of what we call biblical law veers between controversy and neglect. On the one hand, controversy arises when Old Testament laws seem either odd beyond comprehension (not eating lobster) or positively reprehensible (executing children). On the other, neglect results when we consider the law obsolete, no longer carrying any normative power (tassels on clothing, making sacrifices). Even readers who do attempt to make use of the Old Testament "e;law"e; often find it either irrelevant, hopelessly laden with "e;thou shalt nots,"e; or simply so confusing that they throw up their hands in despair. Despite these extremes, people continue to propose moral principles from these laws as "e;the biblical view"e; and to garner proof texts to resolve issues that arise in society. The result is that both Christians and skeptics regularly abuse the Torah, and its true message often lies unheard. Walton and Walton offer in The Lost World of the Torah a restorative vision of the ancient genre of instruction for wisdom that makes up a significant portion of the Old Testament. In the ancient Near East, order was achieved through the wisdom of those who governed society. The objective of torah was to teach the Israelites to be wise about the kind of order needed to receive the blessings of God's favor and presence within the context of the covenant. Here readers will find fresh insight on this fundamental genre of the Old Testament canon.

IntroductionPart I: MethodologyProposition 1: The Old Testament Is an Ancient DocumentProposition 2: The Way We Interpret the Torah Today Is Influenced by the Way We Think Law and Legislation WorkPart II: Function of Ancient Near Eastern Legal CollectionsProposition 3: Legal Collections in the Ancient World Are Not LegislationProposition 4: Ancient Near Eastern Legal Collections Teach WisdomProposition 5: The Torah Is Similar to Ancient Near Eastern Legal Collections and Therefore also Teaches Wisdom, not LegislationProposition 6: The Israelite Covenant Effectively Functions as an Ancient Near Eastern Suzerainty TreatyProposition 7: Holiness Is a Status, Not an ObjectivePart III: Ritual and TorahProposition 8: Ancient Near Eastern Ritual Served to Meet the Needs of the GodsProposition 9: Ancient Israelite Ritual Serves to Maintain Covenant Order Because Yahweh Has No NeedsPart IV: Context of the TorahProposition 10: The Torah Is Similar to Ancient Near Eastern Legal Collections Because It Is Embedded in the Same Cultural Context, Not Because It Is Dependent on ThemProposition 11: The Differences Between the Torah and the Ancient Near Eastern Legal Collections Are Found Not in Legislation but in the Order Founded in the CovenantProposition 12: Torah Is Situated in Context of the Ancient WorldProposition 13: Torah Is Situated in the Context of the CovenantProposition 14: Torah Is Situated in the Context of Israelite Theology Regarding Yahweh's Presence Residing Among ThemPart V: Ongoing Significance of the TorahProposition 15: Discussions of Law in the New Testament Do Not Tell Us Anything About Old Testament Torah in ContextProposition 16: The Torah Should Not Be Divided into Categories to Separate Out What Is RelevantProposition 17: Torah Was Never Intended to Provide SalvationProposition 18: Divine Instruction Can Be Understood as a Metaphor of Health Rather than a Metaphor of LawProposition 19: We Cannot Gain Moral Knowledge or Build a System of Ethics Based on Reading the Torah in Context and Deriving Principles from ItProposition 20: Torah Cannot Provide Prooftexts for Solving Issues TodayProposition 21: The Ancient Israelites Would Not Have Understood the Torah as Providing Divine Moral InstructionProposition 22: A Divine Command Theory of Ethics Does Not Require that the Torah Is Moral InstructionProposition 23: Taking the Torah Seriously Means Understanding What It Was Written to Say, Not Converting It into Moral LawSummary of ConclusionsAppendix: The DecalogueFurther ReadingSubject IndexScripture Index