What IS good, and how do we determine it?

[Esquilax]

*EDIT*
I should add, Esquilax knew he messed up which is why he changed his position from

you do not have a passage that says they "CAN" be beaten, you have a passage that says what happens "IF" they are beaten.

to

Now who's being dishonest
this was your exact quote..

I believe you guys refer to that as "moving the goal posts"...

You dishonest ass. The second quote, read in context, is me expanding upon my initial claim, not changing it. Your self serving unwillingness to think through the consequences of your scriptures is not an argument, just a testament to your own willful ignorance and lack of honesty. Do you really need me to walk you down the garden path?

1. Within the bible, there is no explicit law against the beating of slaves.
2. Insofar as the bible addresses the issue at all, it excuses it, offering no consequences for an act that, in most other contexts, it would consider murder and actually offer consequences for.
3. These two facts, taken together, mean that the verse in the bible that addresses the beating of slaves does in fact say that you CAN beat them, in that it doesn't require one not to, provides no pressure to abstain from doing so, and excuses the action if it does happen. This is a binary proposition: either the bible specifically states that you cannot do something, or it doesn't. If it doesn't, then the act is permissible under the biblical commandments. There is no third state: you either CAN do something, or you CANNOT do something, and the bible does not state that you CANNOT beat your slaves, in the area where it addresses that subject. Therefore, the verse in exodus has at its conclusion that you CAN beat your slaves.

Please, do disagree with this: you're going to anyway, to appease the shuddering core of dishonesty that I think you have instead of a mind, but it'll at least be instrumental in scuttling your credibility yet further.