Theistic morality

[rjh4 is back]

The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)

Chasm said that the Bible says that slaves should be beaten. Your quote does not appear to provide support for such a proposition.

1) I don't think the context of these verses is to explain how a slaves are to be treated. It seems to me the context goes at least as far back as Luke 12:31.

2) There is nothing there that says or implies that slaves "should" be beaten. It is a leap (an unreasonable one IMO) to go from something that says that a certain lord will beat (punish) a servant for doing or not doing something to take this to mean the general proposition that slaves "should" be beaten (Chasm's proposition).

If you disagree, please explain why.

---

Exodus 21:20-21: 'If a slave owner takes a stick and beats his slave, whether male or female (well, at least there's sexual equality... how enlightened!), and the slave dies on the spot, the slave owner is to be punished (alright so far). But if the slave does not die for a day or two, the master is not to be punished. The loss of his property (note the masculine possessive pronoun) is punishment enough.' So it doesn't say they should be beaten, but its tone isn't exactly condemnatory of slave-beating, let alone slave-owning. This is taken from the Good News Bible, by the way. Other versions are slightly different, but the gist of the passage is the same.

So are you saying then that the Bible doesn't say that slaves "should" be beaten, as Chasm says?

Well the verse is certainly condemnatory of beating a slave to such a degree that he/she dies on the spot...and you seem to agree with this based on your commentary on the verse.

It seems to me the "tone" of the verse is the same tone used for many laws...here is the offence, here is the punishment, here is when the punishment doesn't apply. (Take a look at some statutes online.) I do not see this as approving of or condoning slave beating at all or saying that slaves "should" be beaten. Do you?