Euthyphro Dilemma: Morality is arbritary

The Euthyphro Dilemma raises the following questions: "Is what is morally good, morally good because god commands it?" or "Is it because it is morally good, god commands it?" The two questions raises a "Dilemma," in that in situation number one, where what is morally good is morally good because god commands it, morality is arbitrary. Where as in situation number two, god commands because it is morally good, it raises the point that morality is separate from god. In order to say something is "morally good," we must first establish that there is something that separates good from bad. Once we establish this, this means that there is a moral law, which draws the line in between good and bad. Once we established that, we agree that there is a moral law giver, which instilled this moral law. Now if that law is given to us by god, it tells us that the moral law is arbitrary. This becomes a problem in which god can make anything morally good, as he pleases. He can make murder, rape, and theft, morally good at his leisure. Here is the simple response to this "problem." God's moral law cannot and will not be changed. His moral law has already been given to us, and has been revealed through the Holy Scriptures. God has already decided what is good and what is bad, god will not suddenly change this, just because he can. The moral law has been set. Morality is arbitrary, but once we have established that there is a moral law giver, we also establish that morality HAS to be arbitrary. In the case that society is the moral law giver. It raises the simple problem of perception and diversity. The struggle is evident this very day as people argue about the morality of abortions, gay marriage, and incest. If society is the moral law giver, then morality truly becomes something that is completely liquefied and unstable. God is unchanging; he is the god of yesterday, today, and tomorrow. God is constant and consistent. We, as a society, are not. This simply raises the problem that morality becomes something that is completely gaseous and insecure. Another problem is that morality becomes an opinion rather than something that is absolute. Once morality becomes an opinion, which we are starting to see in this postmodern secular world, then the moral law is broken. Once the moral law is broken, there is no good or bad. To deduce everything written so far, once we establish that there is something "morally good" and "morally bad." We also establish there is a moral law that separates good and bad. Once we establish that there is a moral law, we also must establish that something gave us this moral law, hence there must be a moral law giver. If there is a moral law giver, morality must have been decided by that moral law giver, and therefore morality must be arbitrary. Once we establish that morality is arbitrary, we come to the fact that the moral law giver must be the unchanging, constant, consistent, eternal, and infinite, and the only being capable of that is God. If the moral law giver is NOT unchanging, constant, eternal, infinite, and consistent, there cannot be a moral LAW (since a law cannot be amended) hence there cannot be morality (good or bad). And if there is no good or bad, the Euthyphro Dilemma self-destructs. As you have read, I am arguing that morality is arbirtary. There is no Dilemma.