Euthyphro dilemma

 
 
Avatar
 
 
gamma
Total Posts:  8
Joined  23-09-2005
 
 
 
23 September 2005 19:06
 

Hi everyone

I was reading your posts for quite some time and i finally decided to write.  It's been quite some time since i wrote in english so i'm sorry if i'm not making myself clear or else.

I know that you all think that TheChampion is a lost case (and he probably thinks the same about you) but still, i have to give it a shot.

The question i want to ask you come from Plato's work. It's not exacly the same question (because christians believe only in one god) but i would like to have an answer from a christian perspective.

The dilemma is:"is something good because god loves it, or do god loves it because it is good?"

I came across this by reading Plato's euthyphro and at  

Nic

 
 
Avatar
 
 
Iisbliss
Total Posts:  1229
Joined  22-12-2004
 
 
 
23 September 2005 20:46
 

If God has the three attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolance, then all things are created by God and all things are good, and God loves all things.

If God does not have those three attributes, and did not create all things, then he isn’t God.


LOL

 
 
Avatar
 
 
gamma
Total Posts:  8
Joined  23-09-2005
 
 
 
24 September 2005 07:09
 

Hello Isbliss

I guess it was easy to answer after all… I asked it because i tought god didn’t love sin and consequently, its origin in humanity.

If something need god (his love for instance) to be good, then sinners have no chance of becoming good unless god start to love them in the first place. Since god is good and doesn’t love evil and sin, there is no hope in god because he will not start to love evil. If there is no hope in god, then it’s pointless to waste time on him.

If god created things to be good independently from him, then we don’t need god to be good. If we don’t need god to be good, we just don’t need him (for moral and ethical purpose at least).

So i thought that in either way, it is pointless to rely on him…

 
 
Avatar
 
 
Iisbliss
Total Posts:  1229
Joined  22-12-2004
 
 
 
24 September 2005 11:39
 

gamma, the arguement I gave you back is old too, its about the existance of evil.

It’s another one of those conumdrums of faith.

Basically it says if God is good, then why does evil exist?

I really didnt answer your question, I just posited another : )

Since I think man created God in his image, neither question makes any sense to me, but both show that the relationship between man and God is illogical and irrational.

 
 
Avatar
 
 
gamma
Total Posts:  8
Joined  23-09-2005
 
 
 
25 September 2005 07:20
 

Sorry i misunderstood you

LOL

 
 
Avatar
 
 
ShieldAxe
Total Posts:  237
Joined  28-04-2005
 
 
 
26 September 2005 08:57
 

[quote author=“gamma”]Hi everyone

I was reading your posts for quite some time and i finally decided to write.  It’s been quite some time since i wrote in english so i’m sorry if i’m not making myself clear or else.

I know that you all think that TheChampion is a lost case (and he probably thinks the same about you) but still, i have to give it a shot.

The question i want to ask you come from Plato’s work. It’s not exacly the same question (because christians believe only in one god) but i would like to have an answer from a christian perspective.

The dilemma is:“is something good because god loves it, or do god loves it because it is good?”

I came across this by reading Plato’s euthyphro and at  

Nic


Your question is another example that god is a paradox.

If god is all powerful can he make a rock so heavy that even he himself could not lift it? 
smile

 
 
Avatar
 
 
27288
Total Posts:  3
Joined  12-08-2012
 
 
 
12 August 2012 16:58
 

” If something is moral is it moral because God is moral, or is it moral because God commands it ” ?

So we have to see how God became moral.

Simply, stating that Gods nature is good doesn’t seem to make sense.
-
(A) If what is good is inherent (ie) noble morals are a universal fixed structure, this makes God the middle man. Because noble morals are fixed and unchanging, therefor God is just the mouthpiece of morals - he is subject to an already existing moral law.

(B) But if noble morals exist because God made them (ie) if God decided what is noble or abhorrent, his rules are arbitrary. If he has the power to make them he has the power to change them.
-
Then a christian might try to make a third argument, they might state: “God = Good” they will also say that god is eternal and doesn’t change his standards.

But stating that “Gods nature is good” doesn’t make sense it needs to be accounted for, we need to see how it is good, is it inherent or arbitrary ?

A or B ?

 

 

 
 
Avatar
 
 
toombaru
Total Posts:  800
Joined  12-11-2010
 
 
 
13 August 2012 09:35
 
gamma - 23 September 2005 07:06 PM

Hi everyone

I was reading your posts for quite some time and i finally decided to write.  It's been quite some time since i wrote in english so i'm sorry if i'm not making myself clear or else.

I know that you all think that TheChampion is a lost case (and he probably thinks the same about you) but still, i have to give it a shot.

The question i want to ask you come from Plato's work. It's not exacly the same question (because christians believe only in one god) but i would like to have an answer from a christian perspective.

The dilemma is:"is something good because god loves it, or do god loves it because it is good?"

I came across this by reading Plato's euthyphro and at  

Nic

 

When the mind attempts to study the consensus conceptual overlay by factoring in the influence of an imaginary deity, any conclusion that it can come up with is meaningless.
Trying to determine the relationship of a god that doesn’t exist to the mind’s label “morals” can result only in more confusion.
One might as well try to study how fairies influence global warming in Shangra-La.