What do you think?
Rate this book
Jesus and the Law of Moses: The Gospels and the Restoration of Israel within First-Century Judaism
Jesus regularly engaged the Law and its interpretation in his interactions with both crowds and other teachers. While many scholars have interpreted his teaching as criticizing legalism, nationalism, or external piety, in this groundbreaking study of Jesus and the Law in the Synoptic Gospels, Paul Sloan suggests an alternative.
Putting the Gospels in conversation with other early Jewish sources, Sloan argues that the proper framework for understanding Jesus's legal instruction is his announcement of Israel's covenantal restoration. In this context, the Gospels depict Jesus as the divinely commissioned herald of the restoration and the authoritative interpreter of the Law, criticizing misinterpretation and transgression--not legalism, nationalism, and external rituals. From this perspective, Jesus's disputes with contemporaries constitute intramural debates about the Law's interpretation and proper observance. Sloan also shows how Jesus's action in the temple and his crucifixion are better understood within this restorationist context, and he concludes by examining the congruity between Jesus's teaching of the Law and the use of the Law in Acts and in Paul's Letters.
This thorough study contributes to the ongoing discussion of Jesus and the Law in the first-century Jewish context. It will challenge students of the Gospels and readers of the broader New Testament to reconsider some common misunderstandings of the Law and its reception in early Christianity.
Putting the Gospels in conversation with other early Jewish sources, Sloan argues that the proper framework for understanding Jesus's legal instruction is his announcement of Israel's covenantal restoration. In this context, the Gospels depict Jesus as the divinely commissioned herald of the restoration and the authoritative interpreter of the Law, criticizing misinterpretation and transgression--not legalism, nationalism, and external rituals. From this perspective, Jesus's disputes with contemporaries constitute intramural debates about the Law's interpretation and proper observance. Sloan also shows how Jesus's action in the temple and his crucifixion are better understood within this restorationist context, and he concludes by examining the congruity between Jesus's teaching of the Law and the use of the Law in Acts and in Paul's Letters.
This thorough study contributes to the ongoing discussion of Jesus and the Law in the first-century Jewish context. It will challenge students of the Gospels and readers of the broader New Testament to reconsider some common misunderstandings of the Law and its reception in early Christianity.
278 pages, Kindle Edition
Published August 19, 2025
37 people are currently reading
216 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
August 26, 2025
You need this book - it's literally one of the most significant NT studies books in a decade. Taking Jesus as the agent of Israel's promised restoration Sloan analyzes the (synoptic) Gospel accounts with an eye to Halakhic perspective. He demolishes the trope of a merciful Jesus rejecting the harsh legalism of the Jewish leaders. Consider the issue of circumcision, with the Law stipulated circumcision on the 8th day - but what if the 8th day fell on Sabbath? The Rabbis say that circumcision takes precedent. So too Sloan sees a Jesus who never dismisses Torah, but rather upholds it, and does so using Halakhic arguments. Eating grain on the Sabbath? Forbidden? Yes - but since Jesus is God's agent of restoration, following Him takes precedence. So just as the priests who work in the Temple on Sabbath are innocent, so too are Jesus's disciples. Sloan reproves the shortcomings of Borg, France, and Wright and comes up with a more satisfying model for how Jesus saw the Law and Temple. The Mishnah comes up often, as do the works of Jewish scholars including Yonatan Adler, Yair Furstenberg, and Isaac Oliver. Essential reading!!!
August 29, 2025
Excellent stuff. Should be read widely and deeply and seriously engaged with!
August 21, 2025
Sloan makes a powerful argument that scholarly study of Jesus's teachings on the Law of Moses must attend much more closely to Jesus's alternative interpretations (not rejections!) of the Law as well as Jesus's eschatological conviction that he has inaugurated Israel's restoration. Truly, a fresh, creative, and convincing argument!
The strength of the book will allow one to overlook Sloan's goofy usage of blammo and other made-up slang.
The strength of the book will allow one to overlook Sloan's goofy usage of blammo and other made-up slang.
September 16, 2025
2025 reads: 20
Rating: 5 stars
I should not have read this. I should be studying for comps. But I couldn't put this down. Sloan has provided an astounding argument here. He's brought together several strands that I've been mulling over and writing about but the way in which he has so succinctly and clearly presented the data is exemplary. I have no doubt this will be field defining--or at the very least, it should be! We simply cannot afford to read the Gospels (and the Mosaic Law therein) with collapsed categories and severe misunderstandings. Our caricatures of Jewish Law and Judaism have to be looked at again, and in turn, the NT in relation to it. I hope to see more scholarship like this in the near future.
Rating: 5 stars
I should not have read this. I should be studying for comps. But I couldn't put this down. Sloan has provided an astounding argument here. He's brought together several strands that I've been mulling over and writing about but the way in which he has so succinctly and clearly presented the data is exemplary. I have no doubt this will be field defining--or at the very least, it should be! We simply cannot afford to read the Gospels (and the Mosaic Law therein) with collapsed categories and severe misunderstandings. Our caricatures of Jewish Law and Judaism have to be looked at again, and in turn, the NT in relation to it. I hope to see more scholarship like this in the near future.
January 9, 2026
Geez, yet another paradigm-shifter! This will be especially enlightening if you’ve not spent much time on Law in Jesus and Paul or studied eschatological restoration expectations. Great book on Jesus’s attitude towards the Law and how His work did not abolish it. Sloan dos a great job showing how Jesus’s self-understanding as him being the authorized bringer of the eschatological restoration (Jubilee) colors his interactions about the Law with the Pharisees. Jesus did not try to abolish any of the Law, nor show how it’s “unachievable anyways so all you need is faith.” Rather, Jesus keeps the Law in relation to His work as Israel’s Messiah coming to announce the coming of God’s kingdom. The so-called broken laws are not broken but superseded by his mission in the same way several similar Laws are superseded during Jubilee years. The book did not deal too much with arguments of “Works of Law” verses “works” explicitly, but does deal with the Law responsibilities expected of Jews versus gentiles. This is one I’ll be referencing for a while!
December 20, 2025
Sloan's work is important as it furthers the understanding of biblical law, yet Sloan rests heavily on later rabbinic writings. It is anachronistic to read literature that is written 400 tears after Jesus and the Apostles back into the first century. Beyond this, Sloan assumes Jesus is resting on rabbinic discussions instead of vis versa which, at times most certainly happened.
Finally, Sloan takes views that have already been written by scholars such as Mark Kinzer. Kinzer was wrong in his assessment of the place of Torah for the Gentiles in 2005 and so Sloan is still wrong when he takes the same views.
Finally, Sloan takes views that have already been written by scholars such as Mark Kinzer. Kinzer was wrong in his assessment of the place of Torah for the Gentiles in 2005 and so Sloan is still wrong when he takes the same views.
December 3, 2025
Absolutely incredible book. Even though I don't agree with all of Sloan's conclusions regarding wider implications in the NT as a whole, when it comes to his treatment of Jesus and the Law in the synoptics, this is one of the best and most beautifully-argued books I've ever read.
December 14, 2025
This book is incredibly thought-provoking! Really interesting. I love these kinds of books, the ones that get me thinking and that take me deeper into the text of God’s Word. While I can’t say for sure right now whether I agree with his arguments/thesis (need time to reflect), I can definitely say I learned a ton reading this. Highly recommended, if for nothing else for the challenge.
December 15, 2025
This book will make you think. I really enjoyed his conclusion and conversation on Mark 7 where Jesus "declares all food clean." His section on the continuity of the Old and New was so helpful. Pick this up and read if your interested in the way we can read the law and gospel. It may not be as hard as we have made it at times.
September 18, 2025
This may be a bit premature, but I suspect Jesus and the Law of Moses will end up being my top book of 2025.
Sloan convincingly develops a framework for understanding Jesus’ sayings about the Law through the lens of “restoration eschatology.” Early in the introduction, he summarizes his thesis:
“This book argues that Jesus’ legal teaching, his disputes about the Law’s proper keeping, and his calling sinners to repentance are not in opposition to the Law but are an intramural discourse about its keeping in light of the dawning of the eschatological age.”
The book is dense with Old Testament quotations and allusions, showing the depth of Sloan’s work in rooting Jesus’ legal teaching within the Law and the Prophets.
My favorite section came in his treatment of The Cross and the Restoration. Sloan argues that on the cross Jesus bears the weight of Israel’s covenant failure and takes on the punishment due for the people’s unrepentance and subjugation to foreign powers. In doing so, he drains the curse of its power and secures forgiveness for those who repent. His death and resurrection thus mark the decisive turning point in Israel’s restoration, inaugurating the renewed covenant.
At several points, I found myself wondering how Sloan’s framework interacts with certain Pauline passages. He does address this in the conclusion, though only briefly (about five pages). While I wish this section had been longer, his arguments were nevertheless persuasive. I was especially hoping for a direct engagement with Paul’s statement in Romans 6:14 (“you are not under law but under grace”), but even without that, I am confident Sloan would have a satisfactory explanation.
Sloan closes with these words:
“Thus, while much else could and will be said about Jesus and the Law, I hope this interpretation at least causes a fresh look at the Gospels’ portrait of Jesus.”
Mission accomplished. This book has given me just that, and I look forward to seeing more scholarship in this direction.
Sloan convincingly develops a framework for understanding Jesus’ sayings about the Law through the lens of “restoration eschatology.” Early in the introduction, he summarizes his thesis:
“This book argues that Jesus’ legal teaching, his disputes about the Law’s proper keeping, and his calling sinners to repentance are not in opposition to the Law but are an intramural discourse about its keeping in light of the dawning of the eschatological age.”
The book is dense with Old Testament quotations and allusions, showing the depth of Sloan’s work in rooting Jesus’ legal teaching within the Law and the Prophets.
My favorite section came in his treatment of The Cross and the Restoration. Sloan argues that on the cross Jesus bears the weight of Israel’s covenant failure and takes on the punishment due for the people’s unrepentance and subjugation to foreign powers. In doing so, he drains the curse of its power and secures forgiveness for those who repent. His death and resurrection thus mark the decisive turning point in Israel’s restoration, inaugurating the renewed covenant.
At several points, I found myself wondering how Sloan’s framework interacts with certain Pauline passages. He does address this in the conclusion, though only briefly (about five pages). While I wish this section had been longer, his arguments were nevertheless persuasive. I was especially hoping for a direct engagement with Paul’s statement in Romans 6:14 (“you are not under law but under grace”), but even without that, I am confident Sloan would have a satisfactory explanation.
Sloan closes with these words:
“Thus, while much else could and will be said about Jesus and the Law, I hope this interpretation at least causes a fresh look at the Gospels’ portrait of Jesus.”
Mission accomplished. This book has given me just that, and I look forward to seeing more scholarship in this direction.
December 27, 2025
Definitely worth reading more clearly to understand the context of the New Testament, particularly what is really going on in the Gospels. Leaves some bigger questions unaddressed and I’m not sure I agree with his conclusions about the ongoing relevance of the Law of Moses to gentile Christians, but he does make a strong case, I will admit.
December 13, 2025
Read this one in tandem with Dru Johnson's latest Understanding Biblical Law. Sloan is far from a lone voice pushing this modern stream of theological interest in Christianity's relationship to second temple Judaism into areas of more and more confidence, adding fresh questions and observations as it goes along and gains momentum. The seedbed here is the new perspective on Paul, something that reaches back to Sanders and Dunn and remains most prominantly represented on a popular level by N.T. Wright.
This particular work belongs more in the company of Jason Staples, who's latest work mines some similar territory. I will say, of all the potential inroads into the modern state of this discussion (Wright being that necessary entry point into what has become a larger field of interest) this is one of the most concice and clear and accessible treatments I have come across yet. For my part that has the slight affect of not bringing anything qualitatively new (especailly having just read Staples), but he does bring his own flavour and spin. And without question this would be a source I would happily recommend and put in the hands of anyone wanting to jump in with both feet.
To qutoe from his conclusion,
"For centuries, NT scholars have (inadvertently or not) maligned or misintepreted Jews, Judaism, and the Law in the process of explaining the supposed uniqueness of Jesus' legal or ethical instruction. Such interpretation (which often ignored, intentionally or not, the work of Jewish scholars whose expertise greatly aided the writing of this book) often lamentably traded in misrepresentations of Jewish literature and the Gospels, depicting a Judaism and a Jesus available in neither... I hope this interpretation at least causes a fresh look at the Gospels' portrait of Jesus, who, when asked "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" responded: "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?"
This brings to light one of Sloan's particular contributions, that being his specific focus on the Gospels rather than the usual emphasis on Paui. Here he gets knee deep into the world that the Gospel writers, and indeed Jesus, inhabits. Right out of the gate he goes after the common western framework that has led to readings that name the problem as Jewish legalism and "grace versus works" or Law versus Gospel, and establishes the necessary stepping stones into recovering the world of the Gospels and Jesus as distinguishing between the terms Law, Judean, Jew and Israel, all which mean something categorically different when it comes to the larger narrative of second temple Judaism and its appeal to an eschatological hope. Indeed, it is the collapsing of these terms into a singular law and Gospel dichotomy that leads to problematic interpretations which displace both Judaism and Jesus from the world that informs their stories.
Indeed, what drives Sloan forward is anchoring his exploration in the idea of "restoration eschatology." This is a crude summarization, but it could be said that at its heart this simply means that restoration precedes the eschatolgy. And that restoration, in the story of Israel that informs second temple Judaism, is built on this notion of "punishment" (or exile) for a time. What frames the expectation of restoration eschatology is the idea that obedience to the Law is commanded but that it was always understood that the failture to keep the Law perfectly would be a necessary element of this call.
While this might not seem like a signifcant distinction, it has a lot of implications for how we enter into the narrative of ancient Israel and second temple Judaism. What we find in a good deal of western evangelical theology is this inbedded assumption that the story is one of expectation towards perfect obedience and the consquence of eventual failure. This then tends to see ancient Israel, largely captured through the lens of second temple Judaism in the scriptures, as responding to the problem of this failure to keep the law perfectly by endeavoring to "keep the law perfectly." To which western theology props up Jesus as the one who inserts grace into the picture. Here we arrive at the conclusion that no one can keep the law perfectly, thus the often described "legalism" of the Jews becomes the primary enemy of Jesus.
This is a narrative as old as western theology and its protestant expression. The problem is its grossly misplaced and misread. Which is where this whole stream of scholarship is doing the necessary work of correcting those misplaced and misread assumptions. Again, shiting us towards the basic observations above. It was always understood that any call to obedience to the "Law" assumes that Law cannot be followed perfectly. That was never the intent of the Law being given to Israel. This is why consequence was written into how the Law functioned. Within the Law however this always held a restorative purpose. This is why the Law occupies the space it does withint a creation enslaved to the Powers of Sin and Death. The Law is responsive to this problem, not the cause of it. And it is always embedded in that larger eschatological hope- through the restoration of this idea called Israel would come God's promised new creaiton.
There's another qualitative aspect to this picture however. And that is the reality of this exile. For second temple Judaism the concern was both aware and real. As Sloan puts it, "God promised restoration would come, and so they believed. But trusting that the promise of restoration would benefit those who returned (the dead tribes of Israel scattered among the nations) raised a question: How shall we return." This is the debate that we find captured in the Gospels. This is what frames Jesus' discourse with a second temple community of Judeans.
Hopefully I'm capturing this, but it should be noted that one clear implication of this is a corrective against tendencies to step into this discourse and assume that all of the harsh words indicate a categorical judgment of the "the Jews" or the jewish religious leaders as is so often assumed. As though the point of the Gospels is Jesus walking around lobbying modern western conceptions of individual salvation and judgment on a random and select group of Judeans occupying this period in time. Such assumptions are simply a failure to understand the idea of the restoration of Israel within first century-Judaism. What Jesus is engaging, as a second temple Judean, is an inner critique that uses this notion of the Law of Moses as a foundation for interpreting the present moment in relationship to this expected restoration of the idea of Israel. And while this is a concern that we find more readily represented in Staples work, it is worth parsing out these terms using the necessary distinctives:
The Law: a covenent or the story of the covenant between God and the formed people for the sake of the whole of creation (read: not reducible to "moral rules")
Judean: a second temple community which reflects the sole suriving tribe (discussions of Benjamin aside) from exile
Israel: the idea of the restored community that would bring about and inaugerate the Day of the Lord
Jew: a wholesale term in the world of second temple Judaism that has different applicaitons, but most readily gains its force in later history when we find a historical divide between "Jew" and "Christian" force its way into the conversation
Which of course brings to light how collapsing these terms together, as we often do when we step into the scriptures, clouds and muddles the narrative. Yes, Jesus is bringing the announcement of something new: the promised restoration has arrived. But Jesus' discourse with the religious leaders is deeply immersed in discussions of the Law, in such a way as to reflect common forms of debate which uses the argument of those Jesus is debating with against their own course of reasoning. But what's crucial to understand is the larger narrative framework that these conversations about the Law belong to: restoration eschatology. And what makes this point of history signficant is the way in which Jesus proclaims Himself as the restoration. The arrival of God's kingdom on earth. Which is precisely why, as Sloan so wonderfully fleshes out, Jesus' specific application of the Law is reimagining within the eschatological reality that reflects its perfected (fulfilled) expression. This becomes the heightened point of tension: Jesus doing what only God can do, and in this light announcing the resurrection of Israel and the eschatological reality that this inaugerates has arrived.
Another way of putting this: the essential rule of thumb for approaching the story of salvation within the context of second temple Judaism and Jesus is always to ask, where is second temple Judaism and Empire in these writings and history. If we have jettisoned this or made secoind temple Judaism, whether using the language of Jew or Jewish religious leaders or not, the enemy on our way to formulating an eschatology of "individual salvation" then we have missed the story. Worse yet, its likely we have inadvertently made "individual salvation" synonymous with western evangelicalism.
Now, a brief clarification for anyone approaching this book or these ideas with that ready label of "heresy" in tow. Usually in my conversations what loses people is this fear that what is being advocated for is universalism and the dismantling of the place of individuals and individual response in the story of salvation. To be clear, universalism is a seperate question. Wherever people land on that question doesn't change what the story of salvation is within this restoration eschatology of the idea of Israel. What is of concern is how we undestand salvation to be the person and work of Jesus and how we understand that work in relationship to the promised renewal of Israel. At a base level this requires us to hold this in necessary relationship to any conception of individual participation in this new, proclaimed reality, Jew or Gentile. One way it was often to put to me: just as the exodus precedes the call to participation, so does the new exodus of Jesus' liberation of creaiton from slavery to the Powers of Sin and Death precede the call to participation. The first is contained within the means of God's promise to act through Israel for the sake of creation, the second is God's fulfillment of this action. Same story, but the important distinction is how we define that action and where we locate the point of that action. The common western evangelical approach tends to find itself stuck in this framework of demand for perfection and consequence for failing to live up to this perfection. Which ends up theologiziing the entire narrative into a largely incoherent stream of individual soteriology- a story that becomes about individuals being saved and going to heaven.
The story is so much bigger and richer than this. The entry point into that narrative is the story of Israel, which awakens us to this portrait of an enslaved creation. This doesn't diminish our own call to participation, it awakens it.
This particular work belongs more in the company of Jason Staples, who's latest work mines some similar territory. I will say, of all the potential inroads into the modern state of this discussion (Wright being that necessary entry point into what has become a larger field of interest) this is one of the most concice and clear and accessible treatments I have come across yet. For my part that has the slight affect of not bringing anything qualitatively new (especailly having just read Staples), but he does bring his own flavour and spin. And without question this would be a source I would happily recommend and put in the hands of anyone wanting to jump in with both feet.
To qutoe from his conclusion,
"For centuries, NT scholars have (inadvertently or not) maligned or misintepreted Jews, Judaism, and the Law in the process of explaining the supposed uniqueness of Jesus' legal or ethical instruction. Such interpretation (which often ignored, intentionally or not, the work of Jewish scholars whose expertise greatly aided the writing of this book) often lamentably traded in misrepresentations of Jewish literature and the Gospels, depicting a Judaism and a Jesus available in neither... I hope this interpretation at least causes a fresh look at the Gospels' portrait of Jesus, who, when asked "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" responded: "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?"
This brings to light one of Sloan's particular contributions, that being his specific focus on the Gospels rather than the usual emphasis on Paui. Here he gets knee deep into the world that the Gospel writers, and indeed Jesus, inhabits. Right out of the gate he goes after the common western framework that has led to readings that name the problem as Jewish legalism and "grace versus works" or Law versus Gospel, and establishes the necessary stepping stones into recovering the world of the Gospels and Jesus as distinguishing between the terms Law, Judean, Jew and Israel, all which mean something categorically different when it comes to the larger narrative of second temple Judaism and its appeal to an eschatological hope. Indeed, it is the collapsing of these terms into a singular law and Gospel dichotomy that leads to problematic interpretations which displace both Judaism and Jesus from the world that informs their stories.
Indeed, what drives Sloan forward is anchoring his exploration in the idea of "restoration eschatology." This is a crude summarization, but it could be said that at its heart this simply means that restoration precedes the eschatolgy. And that restoration, in the story of Israel that informs second temple Judaism, is built on this notion of "punishment" (or exile) for a time. What frames the expectation of restoration eschatology is the idea that obedience to the Law is commanded but that it was always understood that the failture to keep the Law perfectly would be a necessary element of this call.
While this might not seem like a signifcant distinction, it has a lot of implications for how we enter into the narrative of ancient Israel and second temple Judaism. What we find in a good deal of western evangelical theology is this inbedded assumption that the story is one of expectation towards perfect obedience and the consquence of eventual failure. This then tends to see ancient Israel, largely captured through the lens of second temple Judaism in the scriptures, as responding to the problem of this failure to keep the law perfectly by endeavoring to "keep the law perfectly." To which western theology props up Jesus as the one who inserts grace into the picture. Here we arrive at the conclusion that no one can keep the law perfectly, thus the often described "legalism" of the Jews becomes the primary enemy of Jesus.
This is a narrative as old as western theology and its protestant expression. The problem is its grossly misplaced and misread. Which is where this whole stream of scholarship is doing the necessary work of correcting those misplaced and misread assumptions. Again, shiting us towards the basic observations above. It was always understood that any call to obedience to the "Law" assumes that Law cannot be followed perfectly. That was never the intent of the Law being given to Israel. This is why consequence was written into how the Law functioned. Within the Law however this always held a restorative purpose. This is why the Law occupies the space it does withint a creation enslaved to the Powers of Sin and Death. The Law is responsive to this problem, not the cause of it. And it is always embedded in that larger eschatological hope- through the restoration of this idea called Israel would come God's promised new creaiton.
There's another qualitative aspect to this picture however. And that is the reality of this exile. For second temple Judaism the concern was both aware and real. As Sloan puts it, "God promised restoration would come, and so they believed. But trusting that the promise of restoration would benefit those who returned (the dead tribes of Israel scattered among the nations) raised a question: How shall we return." This is the debate that we find captured in the Gospels. This is what frames Jesus' discourse with a second temple community of Judeans.
Hopefully I'm capturing this, but it should be noted that one clear implication of this is a corrective against tendencies to step into this discourse and assume that all of the harsh words indicate a categorical judgment of the "the Jews" or the jewish religious leaders as is so often assumed. As though the point of the Gospels is Jesus walking around lobbying modern western conceptions of individual salvation and judgment on a random and select group of Judeans occupying this period in time. Such assumptions are simply a failure to understand the idea of the restoration of Israel within first century-Judaism. What Jesus is engaging, as a second temple Judean, is an inner critique that uses this notion of the Law of Moses as a foundation for interpreting the present moment in relationship to this expected restoration of the idea of Israel. And while this is a concern that we find more readily represented in Staples work, it is worth parsing out these terms using the necessary distinctives:
The Law: a covenent or the story of the covenant between God and the formed people for the sake of the whole of creation (read: not reducible to "moral rules")
Judean: a second temple community which reflects the sole suriving tribe (discussions of Benjamin aside) from exile
Israel: the idea of the restored community that would bring about and inaugerate the Day of the Lord
Jew: a wholesale term in the world of second temple Judaism that has different applicaitons, but most readily gains its force in later history when we find a historical divide between "Jew" and "Christian" force its way into the conversation
Which of course brings to light how collapsing these terms together, as we often do when we step into the scriptures, clouds and muddles the narrative. Yes, Jesus is bringing the announcement of something new: the promised restoration has arrived. But Jesus' discourse with the religious leaders is deeply immersed in discussions of the Law, in such a way as to reflect common forms of debate which uses the argument of those Jesus is debating with against their own course of reasoning. But what's crucial to understand is the larger narrative framework that these conversations about the Law belong to: restoration eschatology. And what makes this point of history signficant is the way in which Jesus proclaims Himself as the restoration. The arrival of God's kingdom on earth. Which is precisely why, as Sloan so wonderfully fleshes out, Jesus' specific application of the Law is reimagining within the eschatological reality that reflects its perfected (fulfilled) expression. This becomes the heightened point of tension: Jesus doing what only God can do, and in this light announcing the resurrection of Israel and the eschatological reality that this inaugerates has arrived.
Another way of putting this: the essential rule of thumb for approaching the story of salvation within the context of second temple Judaism and Jesus is always to ask, where is second temple Judaism and Empire in these writings and history. If we have jettisoned this or made secoind temple Judaism, whether using the language of Jew or Jewish religious leaders or not, the enemy on our way to formulating an eschatology of "individual salvation" then we have missed the story. Worse yet, its likely we have inadvertently made "individual salvation" synonymous with western evangelicalism.
Now, a brief clarification for anyone approaching this book or these ideas with that ready label of "heresy" in tow. Usually in my conversations what loses people is this fear that what is being advocated for is universalism and the dismantling of the place of individuals and individual response in the story of salvation. To be clear, universalism is a seperate question. Wherever people land on that question doesn't change what the story of salvation is within this restoration eschatology of the idea of Israel. What is of concern is how we undestand salvation to be the person and work of Jesus and how we understand that work in relationship to the promised renewal of Israel. At a base level this requires us to hold this in necessary relationship to any conception of individual participation in this new, proclaimed reality, Jew or Gentile. One way it was often to put to me: just as the exodus precedes the call to participation, so does the new exodus of Jesus' liberation of creaiton from slavery to the Powers of Sin and Death precede the call to participation. The first is contained within the means of God's promise to act through Israel for the sake of creation, the second is God's fulfillment of this action. Same story, but the important distinction is how we define that action and where we locate the point of that action. The common western evangelical approach tends to find itself stuck in this framework of demand for perfection and consequence for failing to live up to this perfection. Which ends up theologiziing the entire narrative into a largely incoherent stream of individual soteriology- a story that becomes about individuals being saved and going to heaven.
The story is so much bigger and richer than this. The entry point into that narrative is the story of Israel, which awakens us to this portrait of an enslaved creation. This doesn't diminish our own call to participation, it awakens it.
December 14, 2025
Helpful and illuminating— I will return to this book in the future.
December 3, 2025
There are books that contribute meaningfully to discussions, and then there are books that “move the needle.” Paul Sloan’s Jesus and the Law of Moses moves the needle. Rarely have I found myself setting a book down so much to reflect and document how it is forcing me to rethink issues. Sloan walks the reader through the exegetical details of Jesus’s engagement with the scribes and Pharisees in relation to the Law, and presents a compelling and groundbreaking perspective rooted in restoration theology. I highly recommend this work and with it, the podcast Sloan cohosts with Logan Williams, “Jesus and Jewish Law” where many of the same passages and thought lines are discussed.
October 3, 2025
Really enjoyed this read. He explained the Law really well and made a great case for Jesus being pro-Law. The conclusions he drew were really interesting, and while some of them I have questions about, they really got me thinking.
December 27, 2025
Solid, all things considered.
As the title implies, Sloan tackles the (always hotly debated) relationship between Jesus and Torah. Per Sloan, the controversies between Jesus and the Pharisees did not derive from Jesus's supposed condemnation of their legalism and differing patterns of religion (contra Borg and Bultmann) or from his critique of zealous nationalism (contra Wright). Instead, Sloan understands Jesus as situated in an intra-Jewish dialogue regarding how best to "return" to YHWH after exile. The disputes with the Pharisees should thus be analyzed as a halakhic debate – i.e. attempting to resolve the implicit legal tensions within Torah. Notably, Jesus' interpretation of Torah is driven by what Sloan terms "eschatological nomism." Because Jesus views himself as the active agent of God's in-breaking restoration (and/or Jubilee), his kingdom mission necessarily takes precedence over Sabbath or Temple law. This is should not be understood a rejection of Torah, but rather a fulfillment of a series of nested priorities inherent in Torah.
I think the broad strokes of Sloan's argument make sense, and it goes a long way in clearing up a lot of muddy-headed confusion about Jesus and "the law." But I'm not sure I can endorse Sloan's exegesis of each individual passage. He gets deep in the weeds with the contemporary rabbinic debate, and I'm pretty ignorant in that area. I remember my eyes glazing over when Sloan was summarizing a hair-splitting distinction about wiping/washing the inside/outside of a vessel depending on whether the impure substance touched the inside/outside. As helpful as this book is, it might leave more questions than answers (not necessarily a bad thing). I thought Sloan's exegesis of Peter's vision in Acts 10 was particularly weak (it got tacked onto the conclusion, so at that point, space may have been an issue).
I'm curious to see what the broader response to this book will be. On the first page of the introduction, Sloan takes a potshot at the Gospel Coalition, but as of today, Themelios (journal affiliated with G.C.) has yet to publish a review. Also, perhaps because I'm not from churches with a harsh Lutheran "law"/"gospel" distinction, some of Sloan's truth bombs didn't have had the desired effect and just left me thinking "Ok...and?"
Anyways, worth the read.
As the title implies, Sloan tackles the (always hotly debated) relationship between Jesus and Torah. Per Sloan, the controversies between Jesus and the Pharisees did not derive from Jesus's supposed condemnation of their legalism and differing patterns of religion (contra Borg and Bultmann) or from his critique of zealous nationalism (contra Wright). Instead, Sloan understands Jesus as situated in an intra-Jewish dialogue regarding how best to "return" to YHWH after exile. The disputes with the Pharisees should thus be analyzed as a halakhic debate – i.e. attempting to resolve the implicit legal tensions within Torah. Notably, Jesus' interpretation of Torah is driven by what Sloan terms "eschatological nomism." Because Jesus views himself as the active agent of God's in-breaking restoration (and/or Jubilee), his kingdom mission necessarily takes precedence over Sabbath or Temple law. This is should not be understood a rejection of Torah, but rather a fulfillment of a series of nested priorities inherent in Torah.
I think the broad strokes of Sloan's argument make sense, and it goes a long way in clearing up a lot of muddy-headed confusion about Jesus and "the law." But I'm not sure I can endorse Sloan's exegesis of each individual passage. He gets deep in the weeds with the contemporary rabbinic debate, and I'm pretty ignorant in that area. I remember my eyes glazing over when Sloan was summarizing a hair-splitting distinction about wiping/washing the inside/outside of a vessel depending on whether the impure substance touched the inside/outside. As helpful as this book is, it might leave more questions than answers (not necessarily a bad thing). I thought Sloan's exegesis of Peter's vision in Acts 10 was particularly weak (it got tacked onto the conclusion, so at that point, space may have been an issue).
I'm curious to see what the broader response to this book will be. On the first page of the introduction, Sloan takes a potshot at the Gospel Coalition, but as of today, Themelios (journal affiliated with G.C.) has yet to publish a review. Also, perhaps because I'm not from churches with a harsh Lutheran "law"/"gospel" distinction, some of Sloan's truth bombs didn't have had the desired effect and just left me thinking "Ok...and?"
Anyways, worth the read.
December 30, 2025
Jesus and the Law of Moses by Sloan is a carefully researched and persuasive contribution to New Testament studies. Drawing extensively on scholarship related to Second Temple Judaism, the book situates Jesus firmly within his Jewish context and treats the Mosaic Law with historical and theological seriousness.
One of Sloan’s main strengths is his engagement with Jewish sources and interpretive traditions of the period. Rather than presenting Jesus as opposing the Law, the book shows how Jesus participates in ongoing Jewish debates about the meaning, purpose, and proper interpretation of Torah. This approach helps avoid anachronistic readings and offers a more historically grounded understanding of Jesus’ teaching.
The analysis of key Gospel texts is thoughtful and precise, showing how Jesus both affirms the Law and reorients it around ethical depth, intention, and covenant faithfulness. Sloan’s argument is well balanced, interacting critically with modern scholarship while remaining clear and readable.
The book is especially valuable for graduate students and researchers interested in the intersection of New Testament theology and Second Temple Jewish studies. It would be highly beneficial to see this work translated into Brazilian Portuguese 🇧🇷
One of Sloan’s main strengths is his engagement with Jewish sources and interpretive traditions of the period. Rather than presenting Jesus as opposing the Law, the book shows how Jesus participates in ongoing Jewish debates about the meaning, purpose, and proper interpretation of Torah. This approach helps avoid anachronistic readings and offers a more historically grounded understanding of Jesus’ teaching.
The analysis of key Gospel texts is thoughtful and precise, showing how Jesus both affirms the Law and reorients it around ethical depth, intention, and covenant faithfulness. Sloan’s argument is well balanced, interacting critically with modern scholarship while remaining clear and readable.
The book is especially valuable for graduate students and researchers interested in the intersection of New Testament theology and Second Temple Jewish studies. It would be highly beneficial to see this work translated into Brazilian Portuguese 🇧🇷
September 9, 2025
Very compelling. There's much to ponder here. As with Rillera's book, I agree with much of what is affirmed while question what is denied or notice things are missed altogether. But Sloan is more balanced about what he claims and denies vs Rillera.
My lingering genuine and rhetorical question is: even assuming Sloan is right about Jesus and the restoration of Israel, what happens when this message is applied to Gentiles? Or a similar question: how do we relate this to Paul?
Sloan's position on penal substitution provides a good example. Sloan denies an abstract version of penal substitution (as most express it today), but affirms a version of it that is tied to Israel's story: Jesus suffered Israel's discipline for her historic transgressions against the Law of Moses. This is insightful. But once gentiles come into the fold--those who did not have Torah--how can we avoid universalizing or abstracting Christ's substitutionary death in a way that looks similar to how most express PSA today?
For me, most of Sloan's insights are fascinating and persuasive, but they clarify and nuance more than they overturn and redefine.
My lingering genuine and rhetorical question is: even assuming Sloan is right about Jesus and the restoration of Israel, what happens when this message is applied to Gentiles? Or a similar question: how do we relate this to Paul?
Sloan's position on penal substitution provides a good example. Sloan denies an abstract version of penal substitution (as most express it today), but affirms a version of it that is tied to Israel's story: Jesus suffered Israel's discipline for her historic transgressions against the Law of Moses. This is insightful. But once gentiles come into the fold--those who did not have Torah--how can we avoid universalizing or abstracting Christ's substitutionary death in a way that looks similar to how most express PSA today?
For me, most of Sloan's insights are fascinating and persuasive, but they clarify and nuance more than they overturn and redefine.
October 11, 2025
No matter what one thinks of Paul Sloan's argument in Jesus and the Law of Moses, this is a profoundly important book for gospel studies. While I agreed with Sloan’s argument in some ways, there were also areas of disagreement.
One of the things I felt was very helpful was Sloan’s assertion throughout the book that Christ does not reject, violate, or denigrate the law. Instead, Jesus often reinterprets the law in conversation with the Pharisees. As someone who is Reformed in their theological paradigm, I find this helpful regarding one’s promotion of the Active Obedience of Christ. So, Sloan has done great work in vindicating the reality that Christ did not violate the law but was obedient to it.
While I agreed with Sloan in the areas listed above, I found Sloan’s last chapter and conclusion to be the point of most profound disagreement. His discussion of Christ’s death rejects a penal substitutionary interpretation. I found his comments lacking. There were moments where it felt like the call was primarily to keep the commandments. While I appreciated the arguments presented overall, I felt like this subtracted from his argument.
November 27, 2025
Simply outstanding. Has the potential to be paradigm-shifting, especially for Protestants, and deserves the widest engagement possible. One of my favorite biblical studies books in 2025.
Full video review: https://youtu.be/FRWlY_P6-xE
Full video review: https://youtu.be/FRWlY_P6-xE
January 25, 2026
Total paradigm shifting work. Excellent!
October 9, 2025
I picked up Jesus and the Law of Moses because I wanted to grow in my understanding of the Bible and the gospel. While it is definitely a very academic read and at times a little above my head, I found it deeply worthwhile.
What I appreciated most was the way Sloan connected passages from both the Old and New Testament, along with historical writings that aren’t usually part of a Sunday school setting. It opened up a bigger picture and made me curious to go read more for myself.
The heart of the book, for me, was seeing how the law of Moses and the teachings of Jesus come together with restoration at the center. That perspective gave me a fresh appreciation for how the law and the gospel flow together.
This isn’t a light read, but it left me with a lot to think about and a desire to continue to grow my understanding.
What I appreciated most was the way Sloan connected passages from both the Old and New Testament, along with historical writings that aren’t usually part of a Sunday school setting. It opened up a bigger picture and made me curious to go read more for myself.
The heart of the book, for me, was seeing how the law of Moses and the teachings of Jesus come together with restoration at the center. That perspective gave me a fresh appreciation for how the law and the gospel flow together.
This isn’t a light read, but it left me with a lot to think about and a desire to continue to grow my understanding.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews