From Plato's Euthyphro: “Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?”

Both Socrates and Euthyphro agree that, to put it in more modern (monothesistic) terms, God loves morality because it is moral. I don't know if I agree. If God is Good, then isn't that which is Good, good because it is of God?

It presents a similar question as (my interpretation of) "Nevin's Dilemma" :) I think. (Does logic exist and therefore God must be bound by it; did God create logic and therefore must be bound by it; or did God create logic and because he created it is not bound by it?)

Does morality exist and therefore God is bound by it? Did God create morality and therefore must be bound by it? Or did God create morality, and is therefore not bound by it? Or maybe God and morality are one in the same?

We created good before we created God. God is merely a reflection of the highest attainable good.

We created good?

We created God?

This is probably where the subject-water is way over my head, but here's to making a splash:

This raises lots of dilemmas about "creation" and "Creator". Seeing some of the things in this world, it is hard not to believe in intelligent design. Somtimes, it seems like the Almighty (insert preferred title) is playing a simulation game on His computer. Garden of Eden gone awry... probably supposed to resemble the underwater screen saver... where he could just feed his animals now and then.

If it's one God, many gods or even elemental forces we believe in.. it's almost always a feeling that there is a higher power. This is partly because we place so much store in higher ideas.... like truth, justice, hope, love, etc. Some say hope is an invention of the Devil or evil forces, just so they can disappoint us later. Truth is touted as the double-edged sword. It is always a 2-sided equation... that there is the blessing and the curse. If a person has great beauty, it's clearly both. If they have high intellegence, it is both. This duality supports things like "Good and Evil", "Right and Wrong", the "Ying and the Yang" or night and day if you prefer.

Duality surrounds us. We have two ears, two eyes, two arms and legs... it's like someone thought... "Hmmmmm... maybe redundancy in creating these things would be a good idea". Too bad it takes a while for IT guys to get that idea into practice. This brings us to the Trinity/ies.

Three is a magic number. Mommy, Daddy and Baby make three. The first two aren't what they are without the latter. They are just man and woman. We have Father Heaven and Mother Earth, with all these dang offspring running around on top of momma. Kinda makes you think about all those tiny baby spiders on their mother's back, eh? Well, a higher power is at the top of the Trinity triangle. Lot of folks placed great store in triangles... especially when considering the pyramids of Egypt and the Mayans.

If there is a creator... and we go by the Holy Bible, then day was introduced to the night. Night was simply the absence of light. Imagine it as a dark canvas with a painting yet to be done. So God created light... and said that it was good. It didn't necessarily mean light or day was "better than night". He just said, "Hey, look, it's different, which is a lot better now!". People allude to the night's evils..... not realizing that means the things that happen at night which are evil... not that the night creates or generates this evil.

So we have duality in night and day. There wasn't anything else... so then it was time for the Creator to add more stuff. God might have been pretty bored, which led to all of the creation. He was on a roll, so he kept it going... liking everything. He created lots of good stuff.

Now here is the sensitive, tricky part. If God created angels... and Satan was a fallen angel, then God ultimately created evil. He gave man free-will, probably knowing full well that he'd be capable of evil. He planted a tree right smack dab in the middle of the Garden and said "No, don't eat that fruit". That's early negativity... but that's also funny in that any time a parent tells children not to do something, they do it. So God's children ate the fruit. Lots of folks like to blame Eve for giving in to temptation, Satan or just natural curiousity. That doesn't make her any more evil than Adam. Females shouldn't be considered the weaker gender or mother of all evils. Adam would have gotten around to eating from it anyway, I suppose.

So God's two children ate the fruit... and received knowledge. God didn't have to put that Tree there... or maybe he didn't have a choice? Maybe that's where he'd gotten his knowledge. Or maybe he put everything he knew into that Tree... kind of like a knowledge-base on a computer. And if it was truly great knowledge that they'd received when eating fruit, they were probably struck dumb.

Now humankind runs amok... all scurrying about like a bunch of ants from various colonies. Maybe we'll eventually get organized like those Argentenian ants and all cooperate. Imagine the knowledge that would have been passed along had the human race learned to avoid conflicts and wars. It's already amazing how much information was lost throught the many generations. Look at the various marvels of the word.. the Wonders. Good examples of what we can do as a whole.

And all this time, we have the ability to create. We can compose symphonies, draw extravagent pictures, sing with clarity with words while words join up in an instant. Where'd that come from? Someone created us with the ability to also create... as well as procreate. I personally spend to much time procrastinating.. my only pro versus all these cons.

Am I good because I do good works? Or do the good works make me good? Or maybe we are all equally good and evil... but those terms are very subjective to interpretation... as varied as the number of people that have perspectives on it. So if we are all equally able to do good or bad things... does it really matter what label we slap on it?

If God exists, he created all things that we know in Nature. What he created was "good", but still had the ability to do bad or go wrong. Hence, the duality that will continue to exist... because everything is relative... and if there were only day, how could we see it's advantages without it's opposite? If evil never existed.. then neither would good... because everyone would be behaving the same way. There wouldn't be a frame of reference.

Yes, as in morality. We created the actual ablity to judge it as we doi.

And yes.

Alright,

Firstly our debate differs from Plato's in many aspects (yay being a classics major and knowing useless things that only really come in handy in instances such as these) so allow me to provide some context.

Our debate inherently takes for granted (or is arguing from) the existence or correctness of the Judeo-Christian God.

Plato's debate was obviously based off of the Greek Pantheon.

Now the Judeo-Christian's would look at scripture (and my hebrew skills are non-existant so I'm dependant on a translation here...) and quote Genesis 1:1-5

God recognizes their creation (I use their because the translation I'm using, and apparently the hebrew as well uses plural pronouns to refer to God when God refers to well... themselves..." I'm not going into the various interpretations of this at this time, that's another post) as good.

NOW this doesn't answer did God create the Good, or merely recognize their creation as good. That answer will come a bit later, for we still need, I feel, more context.

The Greek Gods creation myth says Chaos existed first. From Chaos came Earth, then Uranos then Tartarus. Then the titans and finally the pantheon of Gods that the Greeks (and Plato) worshipped.

None of these gods made things... they well gave BIRTH to them, physically. And the Pantheon that was worshipped really didn't give birth to much in the grand scheme of things. Mostly heroes who were extraordinary humans.

But these gods wanted humans to do good and they themselves, as Plato and Eurhtyo decided, the good is loved by the gods because it is good. It wouldn't be as radical for them to determine their gods were bound by someother entity or system of rules that was in place before they became gods. In fact none of the gods they worshiped could change a mortals fate. What was fated for a mortal was destined to happen, not even Zeus, mightiest of the gods, could save a mortal from their fate. Ergo a god being bound my morality? Well, why not, they're already bound by fate. But even then their gods did things that we, from our safe western point of view would look upon with horror. They tormented mortals for their enjoyment, Zeus raped a few because he could and found them to be physically beautiful. I doubt they were bound by what we would consider "morality"

Also their understanding of morality was different. There were certain things that you didn't do and would be looked upon with horror and punished by the gods for doing, not just you, but your children and your children's children. As Eristophanes ( I think it was Eristophanes, I get my tragedy writers mixed up a lot) said "the sins of the fathers are visited upon the sons" Most people avoided doing that which was immoral for fear of divine retribution upon, not only themselves, but their progeny.

So I'm assuming here, since our discussion, up to this point, has been from the judeo-christian viewpoint of God that we want to continue in that vein... and post my response to that later, but if I am incorrect, please correct me and let me know which "God" we're debating is bound or not bound by morality.

I never found this question to be particularly vexing. Mostly because if God is defined as the highest good (as Deltasix suggested), then there is no separation. To suggest that God loves the good because it is good is redundant/inane. The "good" is God. And God is good.

Amen.