447: Talmudic Matthew — Wages

Summary

The BEMA Podcast: Episode 447 - "Talmudic Matthew — Wages"

Hosted by: BEMA Discipleship
Released on: April 24, 2025

---

Introduction

In Episode 447 of The BEMA Podcast, hosts L. Grover Fricks and Brent Billings delve into the intricate concept of rewards—or wages—as taught by Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew. This episode, titled "Talmudic Matthew — Wages," explores the biblical context, Jewish literature, and Greco-Roman cultural influences to unpack the multifaceted understanding of divine rewards.

---

1. Opening Remarks and Episode Outline

00:00 - 00:59

The episode commences with a light-hearted exchange between Fricks and Billings, highlighting the extensive research undertaken for this discussion. They outline the episode’s structure:

1. Reading of the Selected Verses: Matthew 6:1-4 (NIV).
2. Identifying Personal Challenges: Examining their own "problems" with the passage.
3. Biblical Contextualization: Delving deeper into related scriptures.
4. Jewish Literature Exploration: Investigating Talmudic perspectives.
5. Greco-Roman Cultural Insights: Understanding external influences on biblical texts.

Notable Quote:
Brent Billings humorously remarks on the difficulty of reading the King James Version (KJV), saying, “I mean, we can quibble. We're going to break this whole passage apart, so we'll see what happens.” [00:26]

---

2. Reading and Initial Interpretation of Matthew 6:1-4

00:59 - 02:20

Brent reads Matthew 6:1-4 from the NIV, which emphasizes the importance of performing righteous acts in secret to receive rewards from the Father in heaven, rather than seeking public recognition.

Notable Quote:
Fricks emphasizes the repetitive mention of "reward" in the passage, saying, “Reward, reward, reward. Or if you're in a different translation, wage, wage, wage.” [02:08]

Challenges Identified:

• Theological Implications: Concerns about associating rewards with righteousness, potentially leading to prosperity gospel distortions.
• Afterlife Concerns: Questions about the nature and fairness of eternal rewards, reminiscent of doctrines like those in Mormonism.
• Present vs. Future Rewards: Ambiguity about whether rewards are received in the present life or solely in the afterlife.

---

3. Exploring "Reward" and "Wage" in the New Testament

07:52 - 14:31

Fricks and Billings investigate the Greek term misthos (reward/wage) as it appears in the New Testament. They reference several passages:

• Romans 4: Abraham’s faith is accounted as righteousness; misthos is a due, not a gift.
• 1 Corinthians 3: Each will receive misthos based on their labor.
• 1 Timothy 5: Laborers deserve their misthos.
• 2 John 1: The faithful are to win a full misthos.
• Revelation 22: Jesus will bring His misthos to repay everyone.

Notable Quote:
Fricks articulates the central issue, stating, “We have an issue with reward and wages in the world to come in heaven, in the afterlife. And we also probably have limited interest in reward on earth.” [04:04]

---

4. Talmudic Perspectives on Wages and Rewards

15:37 - 25:33

The discussion shifts to Jewish Rabbinic literature, examining how the Hebrew term sakar (wage/reward) is understood within the Torah and Talmud.

Key Insights:

• Immediate Compensation: In biblical society, wages were expected promptly. Delaying payment was deemed theft.

  “The wages of a laborer shall not remain with you until morning.” [Leviticus 19:13] [15:37]

• Divine Patronage: God is portrayed as a fair employer who ensures timely rewards.

• Separation of Jewish and Gentile Rewards: A Talmudic story illustrates that righteous Jews receive greater rewards in the future, while Gentiles receive smaller rewards in the present world.

Notable Quote:
Fricks highlights the immediate nature of divine rewards, “God is a good patron, a good employer, a good head of household. So God doesn't withhold his wages for them.” [17:03]

Challenges Highlighted:

• Cultural Differences: Modern Western aversions to self-oriented rewards contrast with biblical and Talmudic norms.
• Ambiguity in Reward Timing: Questions remain about whether rewards are primarily future, present, or both.

---

5. Greco-Roman Cultural Influences on Biblical Texts

31:10 - 37:43

The hosts explore how Greco-Roman values, particularly those of Aristotle and Cicero, have influenced Christian perceptions of duty, virtue, and compensation.

Key Points:

• Aristotle’s Cynicism: Aristotle viewed the pursuit of wages for good deeds as unnatural and morally corrupting. His elitist views on slavery and social hierarchy colored his philosophy on labor and rewards.

  “Some are marked out for subjection and others for rule.” [36:18]

• Cicero’s Advocacy for Duty: Cicero argued that public service should be motivated by duty and virtue, not by personal profit. This ethos discourages the pursuit of financial rewards in roles of public trust.

Notable Quote:
Fricks contemplates the historical roots, “Maybe some of our ideas about reward from God maybe came from these pagan Greco Romans who were talking about wages in a context where they had immense wealth and slaves.” [36:25]

---

6. Integrating Perspectives and Theological Implications

38:25 - 46:55

Brent and Fricks synthesize insights from biblical texts, Talmudic literature, and Greco-Roman philosophy to address contemporary theological dilemmas surrounding divine rewards.

Discussion Highlights:

• Jesus’ Teachings vs. Early Church Practices: While Jesus discourages seeking earthly recognition for righteous acts, historical practices like synagogue inscriptions indicate that early Christians did honor their benefactors publicly.

• Cultural Imprint on Theology: The conflation of Jewish and Greco-Roman perspectives has led to complex and sometimes conflicting views on divine rewards.

• Modern Application: The hosts caution against adopting prosperity gospel narratives, emphasizing the need for humility and a redefined understanding of God’s generosity.

Notable Quotes:
Fricks challenges modern perceptions, “If we're imagining God distantly snorting at us down here on our earthly abode while he floats somewhere out in the stratosphere, rolling his eyes at us, being worried about our circumstances because he knows how irrelevant they are in the light of the glory of eternity.” [41:00]
Brent reflects on the complexity, “It's convicting and I think there's no simple answer to it.” [44:21]

---

7. Conclusion and Ongoing Dialogue

46:37 - 47:52

As the episode concludes, Fricks and Billings acknowledge the unresolved nature of the discussion, inviting listeners to engage in ongoing conversations and study groups. They emphasize the importance of community and humility in grappling with theological complexities.

Final Thoughts:

• Continued Exploration: The hosts encourage listeners to explore the provided resources, including Greg Gardner’s Wealth, Poverty, and Charity in Jewish Antiquity.

• Invitation to Dialogue: They welcome questions and participation in future Q&A sessions to further unravel the intricate topic of divine rewards.

Notable Quote:
Brent summarizes the journey, “We are doing our best, but thank you for sharing all those resources. Thank you for walking us through those passages.” [47:40]

---

Key Takeaways

• Complexity of Divine Rewards: The concept of rewards or wages in biblical texts is multifaceted, influenced by Jewish law and Greco-Roman philosophy.

• Present vs. Future Rewards: There is ongoing debate about whether divine rewards are received in this life, the afterlife, or both.

• Cultural Influences: Modern Christian understandings may be inadvertently shaped by historical cultural norms that conflict with biblical teachings.

• Theological Humility: Navigating these topics requires humility, community engagement, and a willingness to question and refine one’s understanding.

---

Resources Mentioned

• Book: Wealth, Poverty, and Charity in Jewish Antiquity by Dr. Greg Gardner.
• Transcript Reference: Leviticus 19:13, Romans 4, 1 Corinthians 3, 1 Timothy 5, 2 John 1, Revelation 22.
• Contact: For further questions, listeners can reach out via [e-mail].

---

Closing Remarks

Brent and Fricks wrap up the episode by acknowledging the depth of the discussion and the importance of continued study and dialogue. They express gratitude to listeners for their engagement and invite them to join future episodes for more in-depth explorations of biblical contexts and doctrines.

---

Thank you for joining this detailed summary of Episode 447: "Talmudic Matthew — Wages" from The BEMA Podcast. For a deeper dive, consider listening to the full episode and exploring the recommended resources.

Transcript

[L. Grover Fricks]

Foreign.

[Brent Billings]

This is the BMO podcast with Marty Solomon. I'm his co host, Brent Billings. Today I'm with L. Grover Fricks. To take a spin with Jesus's concept of rewards or wages.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Oh, man, Brent, this one took so much work. Probably the most research I've done for the whole series.

[Brent Billings]

Also the most effort we've spent writing the intro.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Yeah, we've had two fights already, but they. They were good. They were fine. Lots of, lots of laughter. Here's the outline of what we're doing today. Number one, we're gonna read the verses in Matthew we're talking about today. Number two, we're gonna look at our own quote unquote problems with this passage. Then we're gonna, number three, dig through more Bible. Number four, explore the Jewish literature. And then number five, get some insight from Greco Roman culture.

[Brent Billings]

Sounds beautiful.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Let's get into it.

[Brent Billings]

So fight number one. You wanted me to read this in the King James, and I'm not exaggerating. It took me four attempts reading the first part of the first sentence to even understand what this was trying to say.

[L. Grover Fricks]

The King James is so good, though. It's so special. It clings to the truth.

[Brent Billings]

It's so corrupted by the Textus Receptus.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Wow. Wow. Okay, well, I'll leave it in your hands.

[Brent Billings]

So, I don't know, we could. We could compromise and go new King James. Or you could just let me read the niv. I don't know. What do you think?

[L. Grover Fricks]

You are the one doing the reading. I will submit to your role.

[Brent Billings]

Okay, well, Niv it is then.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Oh, boy.

[Brent Billings]

I mean, we can quibble. We're going to break this whole passage apart, so we'll see what happens. Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets to be honored by others. Truly, I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

[L. Grover Fricks]

I'm going to try so hard not to get waylaid by the NIV There. I have more quibbles that are not important. So what's important is what comes up three times, no fewer than three times in this passage. Reward, reward, reward. Or if you're in a different translation. Wage, wage, wage. And few of us like the idea of wages or reward for any kind of righteousness as rendered in the NIV There. We should all just be doing the things that we're supposed to be doing, and that's the reward. Right. Maybe there's some sanctification along the way and you are serving God and that should be enough. We have limited interest in talking about eternal reward, because in most of Protestant theology, Wesleyan tradition aside, heaven is like a blanket equal celebration of God's presence. There's no distinction between people who have done more works than others. Kind of feels like Mormon theology. And to me, it's not really a party if there's like a VIP room that's full of people who really pleased God and then there's everybody else. So we have an issue with reward and wages in the world to come in heaven, in the afterlife. And we also probably have limited interest in reward on earth. Why? It can give us some super shaky theological implications. Does that mean if God rewards people in this life, that billionaires are just super holy people who. Who do everything right, and so God has rewarded them? Hmm, interesting. Or does it mean that people who are fighting from paycheck to paycheck just really aren't holy enough and they need to repent and do some good works and then God will reward them with more physical prosperity? Right. That feels terrible to me. That feels super problemat headache. Feels prosperity gospel. Both feel bad.

[Brent Billings]

Well, my. My high school self did a pretty substantial study on this one time. I don't know if it was this passage that kicked it off or something, but I went through and I found all the passages that talked about reward. Of course, I was only looking in English, so who knows what I actually came up with behind the scenes? But I was like, there are so many passages that talk about this. And I came to the conclusion that there is some sort of variance in reward in heaven. So I guess I'm Wesleyan.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Okay.

[Brent Billings]

Or Mormon, whatever. It didn't come to me in a way that was like, I'm concerned, like, oh, this isn't fair. Like, I was like, I don't know what the reward is or how it will look, but, like, I trust that God will distribute that in a just way. But also I was like, but it's not the. It's not the thing that we should be striving for. Like, whatever you do or don't do, you'll get the proper reward in a just way in heaven. And I never felt like it was supposed to be something that was supposed to play out on Earth, but that was my concept of it. And I was like, there are so many passages that talk about this way more than I realized.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Very prescient. I love high school print.

[Brent Billings]

Yeah, well, I was a nerd and also an idiot.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Weren't we all? I would love, by the way, some alternate time machine reality where we could take the Maymont teaching team and take each of us in high school and put all Each of a high school and like a ring and be like, who shall prevail in the cringe.

[Brent Billings]

I'm sure we would be so obnoxious.

[L. Grover Fricks]

It would be great. I would be entertained. My ego would be destroyed along the way. But that's for better than for worse. Well, the stuff that you are keying into there and a high school brand is keying into. And the problem that we've been talking about here was a point of discussion up for debate in the Greco Roman Mediterranean 2000 years ago as well. So we have lots of company along the way in this puzzle, which is good news, at least to me. It feels like a tightrope trying to figure all of this stuff out. And maybe listeners at home, they don't feel this way at all. Maybe y'all have oceans more understanding than me or current Brent or high school Brent do, and that's awesome. But we're going to take a crack at walking this narrow path. And if at the end of this episode you're like, I don't know, Elle, I'm not totally confident either. I'm just trying to do my best with the things I've learned. I want to be faithful to the Word and faithful to Jesus, the living word. And not skipping over the concept because it feels tricky and we won't have all the answers at the end of the day. But also, I want to try to develop a rigorous functional concept for what these verses in scripture and the concept across scripture is even talking about. So I want to try to stand a little further out on this bluff and point at the sunrise that I think I can see peeking over the horizon. And if I trip and plunge into heresy and oblivion, I'll count on Brent. Two points be like, seems sketchy. And that's okay with me, too.

[Brent Billings]

Well, and maybe there are so many passages about this because it was never quite settled. Like, they could never quite communicate it in the way that was like, ah, yeah, we said that. And. But now the way you're living that out, like, that's not it. So let's Try to say it a different way.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Sure.

[Brent Billings]

So they kept coming back to this because it was just a common issue.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Threading the needle, getting that camel through. Through the eye.

[Brent Billings]

Yeah.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Amazing. So, like you said, this concept of wages or reward, which is the Greek word misthos, it's taught by Jesus no fewer than 14 times in the Gospels. And that's a lot. It surprises me. It's more than like, lust comes up. Right. But in my circles, it's still understudied, and I think that's because we're trying to avoid harm. Right. So noble goal, not firing shots at anybody for not knowing what to do with this concept when it does feel. How? Like it's a minefield. But we're going to take a mini jaunt through a concordance to give us a feel for show how this shows up in the rest of our New Testament. I'm going to save Jesus's 14 other teachings for when we run into them again in Matthew in the future. So this isn't comprehensive. It's just a taste of where misthos, wages, or reward shows up. In Romans 4. We have now, to the one who works his mistos is not reckoned as a gift, but as his due. First Corinthians 3. He who plants and he who waters are equal, and each shall receive his mistos according to his labor. If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a misthos. There's a little dot, dot, dot in the middle there, but it's still in first core three. First Tim five quotes earlier Scripture by saying, you shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain, and the laborer deserves his mistos. 2nd John 1 says, look to yourselves that you may not lose what you have worked for, but may win a full mistos. And then finally, in Revelation 22, behold, I am coming soon, bringing my mistos to repay everyone for what he has done. What stands out to you, Brent Billings so far?

[Brent Billings]

High school Brent feels vindicated.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Good.

[Brent Billings]

The. Yeah. Adding the Greek in does not seem to change anything yet.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Three cheers for High School Brent. We laud him with medals and honors.

[Brent Billings]

What is the saying? Even a blind pig roots up something or other. I don't know.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Feel like a broken clock is right twice a day?

[Brent Billings]

Yeah, something like that. Yeah.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Why not both? A blind pig with a clock. Okay, well, here's what stands out to me. One of my big questions is, when does this wage or when does this reward come through? Right. We're talking about the problematic nature of present Tense reward with prosperity, gospel and billionaires. And then some of it feels like future, right? In that we're worried about are there tears in heaven? As in T I E R S. So if we look at this, Roman says to the ones, to the one who works his mistosis rendered not as a gift, but as his due. That's talking about Avraham. If you go and look at Romans.

[Brent Billings]

4 and Abraham context, I like it. What?

[L. Grover Fricks]

Yeah, it's talking about Avraham and he definitely lived in the past, right? So maybe that's helpful. Maybe it's not. First Corinthians, at least the second part there is talking about the refining fire. The if the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a mistos. Most of us, I would think in context, would say that that's a future Orient, Judgment day type of situation. We go through the refining fire and whether we have absolutely nothing, our eyebrows are burnt off. We have the things that we've built life on. Right. You can go read the rest of that scripture and I believe Marty's taught on that before. So that seems future. First Timothy and another pretty much exact section in James seems to be present tense and not afterlife based because it's talking about ministers. The laborer deserves his mistos. That's about how people doing kingdom work shouldn't be ill compensated just because they're like doing God's work. Which is interesting and kind of counter to Christian culture, which is like, well, if you want to make money, you shouldn't have gone into ministry. Yep, yep. Second John, that's the do not lose what you worked for. But when a full mistos is ambiguous, right. That could be future if you can lose it somewhere along the way. But maybe it's present, I don't know. And then Revelation 22 definitely feels future. Right? Because Jesus is returning, he's bringing his mistos, he's repaying everyone for what they they've done. If we pivot over to Tanakh, the word is Sakhar for wages or reward. And if we zoom in on the spots where God is the patron. Genesis 15, God's telling Avraham, do not be afraid, I am your shield. Your reward will be very great. Still ambiguous. Can't tell there if he's talking about Isaac or if he's talking bigger picture, that could even you could make an argument that that's afterlife based reward. And I wouldn't be super enlightene. Isaiah 40 and 62 say the same things about God as patron giving Sakhar. So I'll read it. See, the sovereign Lord comes with power and he rules with a mighty arm. See, his Sakhar is with him and his compensation accompanies him. Still feels ambiguous. Is this about Jesus coming? At which time in chapter 40, it goes on to talk about the coming good shepherd, which feels like Jesus coming for the first time. But in 62 it's talking about the liberation of Yerushalayim, maybe when they return from exile. Or it could be the new Earth, I don't know. It feels future, but present. So when is this wage or reward received? And if it's only received later, when the full revelation kingdom of God on earth has happened, is there anything that still happens on Earth? We have more questions than answers here. What do you think, Brent?

[Brent Billings]

Yes. High school Brent's conception is beginning to crumble a little bit because I thought it was entirely future at that time. But yeah, it's definitely murkier in general than I thought.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Perfect.

[Brent Billings]

And also, I'm still just wondering, what does this word actually mean? Excellent. How are we translating it? Is this the best way? How else is it used in. I mean, you already said we're going to talk about Greco Roman culture, so I'm hoping that that brings a little bit of insight.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Yeah.

[Brent Billings]

Because all these people are talking about this thing, but what was their understanding of how that word was used? So I look forward to the rest of this episode.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Great. I love muddying the waters. We've been successful. We've caused more problems than we had when we started. Perfect. Okay, well, this is called Talmudic Matthew or Talmudic conversations in Matthew. So let's crack open that rabbinic conversation. They, of course, are going to be rooted in Torah's teaching on Sahar. So let's see whether they give us an insight into these questions, especially around whether God's wages are present or future. So in Leviticus 19:13. Can you read that for us in the JPS print?

[Brent Billings]

I love this verse so much. The wages of a laborer shall not remain with you until morning.

[L. Grover Fricks]

I love it too.

[Brent Billings]

It is a passage that I send to my friend after we have shot a wedding together. If we are getting into our cars to drive away after the wedding, and he has not sent me my money on Venmo yet. I sent you Leviticus 19:13.

[L. Grover Fricks]

That's incredible. I love that so much. High school, you and you are knocking it out of the park, right? Yep. So for the rest of us who don't get to harass people we work with on Venmo, you might have noticed that this is not how our society works at all. That in biblical society, an employer not paying a laborer at the end of the day is stealing. It's wrong. The laborer earned pay. And if you wait until the end of the month or the end of two weeks to give them their pay, you're withholding it from them. And the employer is considered in debt to the laborer. If you've worked 28 days or whatever that month, where's the money? So there's no payday loans in biblical society. No trying to get from paycheck to paycheck. You work, you get the money. No trying to explain to your landlord when your paycheck's coming in any of that, you work, you have it immediately.

[Brent Billings]

We see this in the parable of the workers, where the guy goes out and hires people throughout the day, and then at the end of the day, everybody gets paid.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Poof, Boom. Done. Exactly, done. Rabbinical comment. There's this emphasis that God is a good patron, a good employer, a good head of household. So God doesn't withhold his wages for them. Keeping all wages for some future afterlife feels like it would break Torah, even though for us it's normative in our culture. So Talmud Bava Matziah says, for what reason did this laborer ascend on a tal ramp or suspend himself from a tree and risk death to himself? Was it not for his wages? How then can an employer delay his payment?

[Brent Billings]

So is this a modern Jewish practice in at least maybe Orthodox communities, where they do a daily paycheck situation?

[L. Grover Fricks]

That is a great question. In my experience, when I was a private chef for an Orthodox couple, it would be after I sent, like the grocery receipt, they would pay me immediately, though. Maybe, but I don't know. Probably differs community to community.

[Brent Billings]

Yeah, yeah.

[L. Grover Fricks]

So that's present reward, right? God gives you a mistos or a sahar as a servant in his household on the day that you do the thing. There's this passage in Tractate Sotah where they're talking about how Moshe's mom got paid to be the wet nurse for her own son when the daughter of Pero adopts Moses. And it says this, this teaches that with regard to righteous people, not only is it so that God arranges that their lost items are returned to them, but he also arranges that they get their sichar, their wages, as the son of Yocheved was returned to her, and she also received payment for nursing him. So that's a present reward, Right? God finds this mysterious backward Upside down, way to pay the servants of his house. And it's life giving and redemptive and beautiful than Moshe's mom Yocheved could have anticipated. Right. That's one of the ways that the prosperity gospel gets tripped up. It's really focused on money and private jets, when obviously, Moshe's mom preferred her son being returned to her a million times more than she would have wanted financial compensation. She was faithful to risk her life and that of her family to fight for the life of her son. And God, miraculously, through the back door, gave her son back to her in the present tense, not a future thing. Upside down, miraculous, mysterious. So that's part of the problem, right? When we're trying to implement, okay, maybe I'm open to present tense, reward. Then we start trying to come up with an if then, right? If I do this, if I practice generosity, then God will. Why God will automatically give me more money. Maybe. There's lots of kinds of wealth, though, and God is not hedged in by our limited imaginations of nuance. Right.

[Brent Billings]

My conception of this whole thing continues to crumble.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Great. Okay. So to get a bit further into this potentially uncomfortable territory, it's not just doing extraordinary things like sticking your son in a basket that has this expectation of a wage. There's research from Dr. Greg Gardner, who's the Chair of Jewish Law out of University of British Columbia. And he thankfully pulled together texts from Talmud. And he makes the argument very persuasively, in my opinion, that a wage is required in the various relationships described between humanity and the Lord, Master and servant, tenant and farmer, landowner, sharecropper. Those are all situations where you get a wage. And he makes the argument that reward isn't as good of a translation, because sahar in Hebrew means to, like, hire somebody, Right? Versus a reward is, oh, you found my dog on the street. Now I will think to myself of what I would like to bestow upon you, versus a wage is predetermined and contractual, even though we go contractual. But it's a relationship. But Gardner says that every mitzvah, every commandment earned sahar. No commandment exists, according to Talmud, without. Without a wage. So the Makiltah talks about Moshe going up and down, over and over and over at Sinai. And they posit that Moshe did that because he knew he'd get another wage for every trip he took, which is great. A quote from Gardiner on the Talmud quote, teaching the Torah to one's child earns one sahar in the form of earthly social honor. God promises Land as pay for keeping the commandments. In some cases, sakhar is defined as God simply answering one's prayers.

[Brent Billings]

Yeah. So if you're thinking of it as a reward, like I'm looking at the Abraham story, Moses story, it's like, oh, well, if it's a reward, and I think that I didn't get whatever it is, it's like, well, I should have been. I mean, both of those cases are like, parents willing to completely give away their child. Abraham sacrificing, Isaac, Yaakov putting Moses in the basket. No expectation of, like, just completely willing to let go. So then if you're like, well, I didn't get the reward that I think it's going to be, I didn't sacrifice enough. I didn't do this. So then thinking of it as wages, it's like. And the idea that everything gets a wage, I think is helpful.

[L. Grover Fricks]

I'm glad. I think that it's still super tricky, right?

[Brent Billings]

Yeah, definitely tricky, but just like, less. Less potentially toxic.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Okay.

[Brent Billings]

Less. Less of a chance of somebody like, oh, well, things didn't work out for you because you didn't go far enough. You didn't do enough. You didn't. Whatever.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Okay, I think I hear what you're saying. Yeah. I'm still leery of people in authority being like, look, there's this horrible thing I need you to do and sacrifice for your family. But, yeah, I know that God will give you a promotion. Yes.

[Brent Billings]

Or whatever. Still a dangerous framework potentially, but I think less danger of, like, taking it to an extreme.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Hopefully.

[Brent Billings]

Maybe.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Hopefully. Okay, so if that's the Jewish rabbinic literature around present tense, reward or wages, rather, do they have anything for the future for, like, well, in heaven, blah, blah, blah. Or is that ignored? Well, it is also looped into the Jewish conversation. Here's a story from Sifra which seems to be saying that the Gentiles get the reward now, while faithful Jewish folks get it in the afterlife. So here's the quote to what can this be compared? It is. Is similar to a king who saccharred many laborers. And there was one laborer, and he worked for him for many days. The other laborers entered the king's presence to receive their sakhar, and the aforementioned laborer entered with them. The king said to the first laborer, my son, I will look with favor upon you. These other laborers have done a small amount of work for me, and I will give them a small sakhara, but a large sum I will calculate for you in the future. So too, in this world, Yisra'el asks for their Sakhar before God, and the nations of the world ask for their Sakhar before God. God says to Yisra'el, my children, I will look with favor upon you. The nations of this world have done a small amount of work for me, and I will give them a small Sahar, but a large sum I will reckon for you in the future.

[Brent Billings]

That feels backwards from what I normally think about with Jewish understanding and not really thinking about the afterlife. And what does that date to? What kind of time frame is that?

[L. Grover Fricks]

Zephra? Yeah, I'd have to look it up. To me, it does feel in line with there being a different rule for Gentiles and Jewish people.

[Brent Billings]

Right, sure.

[L. Grover Fricks]

And then the idea of the world to come comes up all the time. Right. We've had that earlier in the season of, like, if you talk to a woman, even if you're really good at studying Torah, you have no part in the world to come. Right. It's this. It's an expectation that's always on the horizon, and it's something that you can lose hold of or not. And then the separation between what happens for Jewish people and what happens for the quote, unquote, righteous gentile. And if we compare this to Jesus's teaching that we're basing this up episode on, in Matthew 6, he bases Sakar mistos off of what if we look at the text, Take heed that you do not do your alms. Wow, I can't read it either. Take heed, King James strikes back, ye do not your alms before men still can't read it to be seen of them. Otherwise you have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. Therefore, when thou dust thine alms do not sound a trumpet before thee, as hypocrites do in the synagogues, in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, they have the reward. But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth. That thine alms may be in secret, and thy father, which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. So the point of Jesus's teaching is not about, is it Jew or gentile? Is it how long you've been working or how great your contribution to kingdom has been? That doesn't come into play at all. In fact, Jesus's parables on laborers showing up at different times during the shift and getting the same wage directly goes against that. What he is concerned about is our heart motivation. Are we doing our service Our labor force, the glory of men for the praise of men. To look good, to get the trumpet blown like an actor. Which throw back to old school Bama material. Or are we doing it for God? Right. And everybody gets paid the same, doesn't matter who they are. Heart motivation feels pretty Jesus y to me.

[Brent Billings]

Yeah. It's not even about what the thing is. It's like, ah, you're gonna get whatever you deserve. Like that's done. But it's. Yeah. It has nothing to do what with what. What the action is.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Right. It's all parable. It's all story. There's no, like your insula in heaven. You'll get eight extra rooms for someone next to you will only get the Harry Potter closet. Right. Is not defined. Which is. Is almost designed to drive Westerners insane. Right? Like, well. But what does it mean? Nobody seems to be interested, as far as I can tell, in describing what that means and what it looks like and what we can expect. It's just like God's going to do what God's going to do. Back to high school Brent. Like, don't worry about it.

[Brent Billings]

Yeah.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Reward is what the reward is. Dr. Gardner spends a good amount of time pointing out how culturally embedded it is that anything that's perceived as self oriented is inherently unrighteous. So Dr. Gardner pulls on lots of early Jewish literature, but also verses like Deuteronomy 24:13 to point out that receiving personal credit is an inherent part of doing the right thing. And we can't pretend otherwise. To that verse. It's talking about when someone has loaned their cloak away and making sure that you get the cloak back to them when there's been an exchange. The verse goes like this. So that he may sleep in his cloak, and may bless you, and it shall be considered righteousness on your behalf before Yahweh your God. So systematic theology aside, right. We would not expect to see any righteousness on our behalf credit to us in any way. Right. Like that's throwing a giant stick into our. Our cog of what we expect the Bible to say about righteousness. But Gardner says self interest need not be sinister. Modern moral aversions to self oriented behavior are strongly tied to attitudes toward wealth, which should be seen as culturally specific. Because as soon as we're talking about reward and okay, like God, I don't get to know what the reward is. Maybe that's fine, maybe I don't feel fine about that. But it shouldn't be that we're thinking about our reward at any point. We should just be doing the right thing thing and stop worrying about it, stop thinking about that. Just be grateful for what you have. We, or at least I anyway speaking for myself, have all these like immediate visceral responses to even talking about reward. And so it just might help us understand and generate some curiosity about like, oh, where, where is this aversion coming from? How did Christian culture get to be the way that it is? Why were we trained in that? Like, well, if you are in ministry, you won't have any money and you should suffer. How did we get there? We're gonna check out another angle that I think is very influential and that's the Greco Roman angle.

[Brent Billings]

This will be my salvation, I hope.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Wow. No pressure.

[Brent Billings]

L bring it all together. Help me understand what's happening.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Let's see. Let's see if we get anywhere in the Roman context. Cicero, first century bce says that we should only engage in our good deeds and our public service for duty, for virtue, for honor. These are big, big, big, big, big, big, big values in Roman society. It's a who Wikipedia links and resources to go in the show notes just on these Roman values that define what it meant to be in a Roman. In the same way, caring about like freedom is American, right? You cannot overestimate how important duty and virtue are in Rome. So when we say only do good works because we're supposed to, that's speaking the language of duty. We are obligated to do something. When we say only do works, good works because it's good for you and it sanctifies you, which I not going to argue with that I do think doing good work sanctifies you and it's good to do. But that is virtue. That's a Roman concept that we're bringing in. And potentially you can try to find Bible verses to that support this particular thing, that those are the only reasons you should be doing any mitzvot. But potentially that's pulling from this Roman context in which at least modern American culture is still enmeshed. Cicero says all things should be done for the good, but never for disgraceful profit. He argues that because of this high calling of duty and virtue and honor, for instance, senators shouldn't get wages, they shouldn't get a stipend for serving in the Senate, even if they want one. It is worth noting though that Cicero is coming from a high level in the Roman social hierarchy, doesn't have a lot of needs compared to the common person at Rome. He's an equestrian, which means he has between 50 to 100 slaves.

[Brent Billings]

That's some wealth, I guess at the time, yes.

[L. Grover Fricks]

So there's a difference between someone who doesn't have enough and who's trying to get by choosing to say what? You shouldn't get anything. It should just be for your honor, and someone who has more than enough and is oppressive. People saying, oh no, it's only for duty and virtue that you should do good things. So if our heartstrings sing at the idea of doing things for duty and virtue alone, Is that biblical? Is that Roman? Just asking question. We're gonna hang out with the Greeks for a minute before reflecting.

[Brent Billings]

I would be curious to know what other cultures do as far as their government. But I. I like when I. Whenever I've seen the wages of the highest elected people in our country. Yeah, it seems really low to me, especially considering they have to do a lot of traveling to D.C. and then they gotta come back and talk to their people. And like, there's just a. And I don't know how much of that stuff is compensated in other ways. Maybe they have some travel stipends and stuff, but yeah, it seems like we've held onto that. That value system of not giving people that much money for that kind of service.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Yeah, I don't know. Maybe I'm okay with raising that wage if they aren't allowed to go, like, be lobbyists after government.

[Brent Billings]

I mean, yeah, there's. There's all sorts of complicated ways you can look at that. And it's like, I don't think any of them are really hurting that much.

[L. Grover Fricks]

But yeah, not to mention.

[Brent Billings]

Yeah, just the raw wages. It's. It's interesting how that is structured.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Sure. Okay. In our Greek worlds, we have Aristotle. Plato's pupil is one of our primary Western sources for finding wages and money broadly distasteful. Why is that? He had a resurgence after the Crusades, during the Middle Ages, when his writing Greco Roman era, really, really early. But it was trafficked across Europe post Crusades, and it ended up massively influencing the overall zeitgeist and church doctrine. So he believed that the pursuit of wages in exchange for good deeds was unnatural and would lead to moral decay. Sounds familiar to me. Maybe your church context has been different than mine, but when we again peek at his personal context. Aristotle had his own estate. He had royal patronage from Alexander the Great. He had a research institute which included a whole library and plenty of slaves. He said about slavery, that for some that should rule and others be ruled is a thing that not only is necessary but expedient from the hour of their birth. Some are marked out for subjection and others for rule.

[Brent Billings]

Real Calvinist.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Yeah. Yeah. A slave is a living tool, just as a tool is an inanimate slave.

[Brent Billings]

Oh, dear.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Fun guy. Fun guy to hang out with. So, on the one hand, maybe it's not crazy to not want to give wages to someone who already has more than enough. But it is suspicious to me that some of our ideas about reward from God maybe came from these pagan Greco Romans who were talking about wages in a context where they had immense wealth and slaves. And they were landowners. People who received wages at that time weren't really landowners. Right. They're artisans. And there's been an interesting historic economic. Economic distaste for artisans as compared to landowners. But if you want to read more about that, which is way too complicated for this episode, read the book that we're putting in the show notes from.

[Brent Billings]

Dr. Gardner, Wealth, Poverty, and Charity in Jewish Antiquity.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Yeah, it's incredible. It's a great book. It's very academic. So know what you're getting into going into it in their context, doing these good deeds, dispensing charity and generosity to those in need. Need was embedded in the system of your gittism, possibly your jettism. I'm guessing it's gatism. We're all just doing our best.

[Brent Billings]

Okay.

[L. Grover Fricks]

And if you want to read more about that, there's also a link in the show notes, but the general idea is if you give money to the building of an aqueduct or the games at the Coliseum, you'd get a big plaque and. Or a statue that says thanks to the generosity of this very important benefactor. Or you'd get the best seats in the fanciest box by the emperor at the games. And everyone have to clap for you when the emperor announces you. So Aristotle and Cicero are partially complaining about this practice. And when we loop Jesus back into the conversation, it does feel kind of like Jesus is dissing it. Right. Don't worry about getting a statue. Don't do things for the applause of humans. Worry about getting that wage or reward from the Lord.

[Brent Billings]

And yet a practice that seemed to be carried on by the early church, like the synagogue in Sardis that we have visited together, actually.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Yes.

[Brent Billings]

Has inscriptions that says so and so has contributed such and such to this synagogue. I went to the Museum of the Bible last year, and they had this big mosaic display from some church, and it was, like, funded by a Roman centurion or something, and there was a big portion of the mosaic that was describing how he was the one who made this thing happen.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Right. And it's also modern practice. If you go to any, like, university campus or whatever, it's like, welcome to the Brent Billings center for Learning. Oh, dear. Normative. Yeah. So I don't know if the early church, like, still did a better job at not, like, making a huge deal about their donors or like, maybe they didn't take the statue of the centurion on a little parade where everyone, like, partied and yay, maybe just putting it on a plaque was restraint for them. I'm not sure. Or maybe it's just, like, so much part of a culture that they couldn't fathom not doing that.

[Brent Billings]

Right.

[L. Grover Fricks]

But Jesus is still calling and inviting us into this idea that we do get a plaque of some kind. Right. Not literally, but it's from God and so don't worry about how it's received here. And all of that is still enmeshed in this more Eastern context where the ties between different parties are good and you're always giving gifts to one another and you're always celebrating one another in ways that, again, outside of these ceremonies that we have in the Western context of, like, ribbon cuttings, where you specifically thank your donors by name and everything, we don't like that we adjure public thanks most of the time as distasteful. And that just doesn't carry over into the context that the Bible is written in. But there's going to be some of us who still hate this idea and still want to say we should be doing the right thing because Jesus told us to. And I hear you.

[Brent Billings]

That's me.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Yeah. Roman virtue and piety aside, that's fine. You can try to make an argument from, like, Tanakh. Whenever God gives, like, a whole bunch of mitzvot and he says why? He says, because I am out. And I. Right. And there's other reasons. Right. He talks about caring for the poor and what happens if you don't care for the poor is something that you should fear. And yet we can still feel that way and also start to invite in this concept that Jesus teaches on no fewer than 14 times, that there is some kind of wage, that there is is some kind of reward, and maybe some of it is present and maybe some of it is future. Even if we cannot define how to answer all the questions about present suffering or prosperity gospel or the VIP room in heaven. But wherever we are, I'm curious if we are still experiencing, like, full body revulsion to the idea that God's goodness could include wages is for his Servants. I want to stay curious about that because I think it could be instructive where we've talked about maybe where this cultural impulse could be coming from. But setting that conversation aside, if you're just annoyed by all of that, that's fine. I invite us to think about if we are like, shove it in the trash, shove it out the door. What does God's goodness even mean for us? If we're singing about the goodness of God or that God's a good father, what do we mean? Do we just mean that God is good for not throwing us all into hell where we belong? Is that the limit of it? I'm not saying that we deserve wages from our employer. I hope we don't come away from this episode being like, wow, God. I guess Elle really thinks she should be getting her private jet or whatever because she's serving God. That's not what I'm saying. We all fail all the time and we all sin and we all forget where we're going continually. And so when talking about like, are we good employees to our employer, not particularly ever, right? But I am saying that God, in his infinite mercy and compassion in nurturing goodness, might still choose to hold God self to God's own integrity, even when we are not the servants that we ought to be. And just maybe we're importing an unbiblical, more pagan perspective on who God is. If we're imagining God distantly snorting at us down here on our earthly abode while he floats somewhere out in the stratosphere, rolling his eyes at us, being worried about our circumstances because he knows how irrelevant they are in the light of the glory of eternity. But rather that just maybe as our chief co laborer, God's down here in the muck and the trenches of this earth alongside us and in his goodness, doling out wages as he sees fit. And maybe sometimes when we do get those wages, because our theology has been Greco Roman influenced and we're not sure about all this stuff, we receive wages from God and we're embarrassed and we shove them behind our backs and we don't even enjoy these gifts from God because of the way we've been imagining God.

[Brent Billings]

It's convicting and I think there's no simple answer to it. Like these cultures and the biblical authors, like everybody's been wrestling with this tension for the whole time. Like this. This is, I think if it was supposed to be clear, if it was supposed to be easier, I mean, it felt so clear to high school Brent.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Well, when Jesus brings It. Up, up. He seems to have the expectation that everyone knows what he's talking about. Right.

[Brent Billings]

Yeah.

[L. Grover Fricks]

He's just like, you have a wage coming and you're invited to look for it. Isaiah invites us to look for it. Revelation invites us to look for it, and we should just look for it as coming from God and not from our beautiful statue or the claps of the crab.

[Brent Billings]

Yeah. And perhaps part of the problem is some of these wages or rewards, however you want to look at them, come from other places. And if we attribute everything to God, then some of the stuff that we see feels really weird because it's like, why would God do that for that person and not for this person?

[L. Grover Fricks]

Right. There's so much, again, minefield, potential for offense, because some people, way back then, the whole dynasty of Pero is corrupt and evil, and they're the ones oppressing us. And you want to tell me that God used Paro's daughter to give a wage to Yocheved, to Moshe's mom? Like, she is evil, she's corrupt, she's off the deep end, she's bad. God can't use that in order to pay a wage to Yocheved. And yet God doesn't seem to always be worked up about our problems, our sticky points.

[Brent Billings]

Right.

[L. Grover Fricks]

But he is invested, seemingly, in telling us that we can expect his goodness at some point, whether we're Jew or gentile, whether we've been serving a long time or a short time.

[Brent Billings]

Something that requires a lot of humility and seeking God and holding things loosely, I guess.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Absolutely. I love all those things.

[Brent Billings]

Okay.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Okay.

[Brent Billings]

Well, that's our episode. Al, thank you for bringing it to the table, if not necessarily clearing it up once and for all. We couldn't quite accomplish what all of our ancestors have not accomplished either.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Well, maybe they have and I just missed it. It's totally possible. If you think I'm totally wrong and I've missed it, have mercy upon me, a sinner. Throw a rope down for me to climb back up the cliff. I don't mind being wrong, but this is what I found. And enjoy those resources and work cited. You can read all of Cicero and all of Aristotle if you'd like that resource from Greg Gardner. If you're curious about these giant defining Roman pillars of society. Have I got the Wikipedia articles for you? And then finally, more on your gatism or possibly Getism. No one knows. It's just me. I just don't know.

[Brent Billings]

Oh. In the grand tradition of mispronouncing things on the Bama podcast, You're in good company. So it's all good.

[L. Grover Fricks]

Fantastic. Join the cloud of witnesses, of incompetence.

[Brent Billings]

We are. We're doing our best. We're doing our best, but thank you for sharing all those resources. Thank you for walking us through those passages. And, you know, my instinct growing up was I wanted everything to be black and white. I wanted everything to be simple. So I would. I would read that into all the things that I found, and it's just not that simple. So we have to wrestle with this. We have to do this in community. We. We can't. We can't come to these conclusions on our own. So this is hopefully just the start of the conversation for you. Hopefully, you're in a discussion group. If you have any questions, you can use the contact. Contact [e-mail] to get in touch. We put a lot of those questions into a document for Q and A's. We do these live Q and A's every once in a while, and maybe some of these questions will get set aside for Al and we can REVisit these in six months or a year or whatever. And like this, this is an ongoing conversation. So thank you for joining us on the Bama podcast today. We will talk to you again soon.