Some assert that Ezra wrote the Torah, or at least compiled it. While I might be able to understand such a theory in some sense, it is a rather problematic one when considering the text of the Torah. Ezra and Nehemiah, according to the TNK, were working with reestablishing a temple. It would thus be perplexing for a supposedly newly written Torah, which they were supposedly intending to enforce, to contain so many self-indicting commands, especially in the case of rituals. For what reason would "Ezra" write that the rituals are supposed to be done at the Tent of Appointment/Tabernacle, or that the giving of the Tabernacle would be a blessing for Israel's obedience (Lev 26:11), if he intended no such observance whatsoever? If one is creating a new theological authority, then for what reason would one not write it to support one's intentions?
There are few secondary gains to Ezra writing that the commanded rituals be done at the Tent, only for him to enforce that they be done at a temple. It seems very likely that the rituals were being interpreted by Ezra to be applying to a temple structure rather than the Tent, despite the wording of the commandments, just as many of us had done in the past as well.
I can certainly understand someone misreading the rituals of the Torah or otherwise reading and misinterpreting them. However, it makes little sense to supposedly be writing new rituals only to do them in a way other than the way they are written. Therefore, in the light of certain components of my current understanding, I think the Ezra authorship argument is very flawed.
