"What is the Euthyphro's Dilemma?" CARM video on YouTube [Archive]

Russ

10-03-2009, 04:16 PM

Matt Slick (CARM pres.) put up a very good video recently on "Euthyphro's Dilemma." (Yeah, I'd never heard of it before today either.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-H1PWFgbyg

It goes like this:

"The Euthyphro Dilemma comes from Plato's Euthyphro Dialog which has had various forms over the centuries. Basically, it is the question: Are moral acts willed by God because they are good or are they good because they are willed by God?

"Another way of saying this is: Does God say that things are moral because they are by nature moral, or do they become moral because God declares them to be?

"The dilemma is that if the acts are morally good because they're good by nature then they are independent of God and God would have to answer to these morals and that would not be a good thing because they would be good in and of themselves apart from God to which God must then appeal.

"On the other hand, if something is good because God commands that it's good, then goodness is arbitrary and God could have called murder good and honesty as being not good.

"The Euthyphro Dilemma is actually, in Christianity, a false dichotomy. It proposes only two options when another is possible. The third option is that good is based on God's nature; on his character; on his essence. See, God appeals to nothing other than his own character for the standard of what is good and then reveals to us what that good is.

"It is wrong to lie because God cannot lie (***us 1:2), not because God had to discover lying was wrong or had to arbitrarily declare that it was wrong. Therefore, for the Christian, there is no dilemma since neither position in Euthyphro's Dilemma represents Christian theology."

It could be said that LDSism suffers from Euthyphro's Dilemma as it attempts to make God accountable to "eternal laws of the universe" by which God supposedly rose to the station or status of a God by obedience to laws not created by God himself.

Just another indicator that LDSism attempts to redefine God's nature and character.

Russ

10-04-2009, 10:59 AM

The question is asked on CARM:

Who made 'god', GOD?
In the 'LDS god system', who appointed god, GOD? Was it a 'council of higher gods' who look and say, 'You've achieved enough Joseph, you're now a 'god'? Or is becoming a 'god' a natural law, like gravity? Who or what, created these laws that create gods?

In light of Euthyphro's Dilemma, do you see the problem?

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-04-2009, 11:59 AM

"The Euthyphro Dilemma is actually, in Christianity, a false dichotomy. It proposes only two options when another is possible. The third option is that good is based on God's nature; on his character; on his essence. See, God appeals to nothing other than his own character for the standard of what is good and then reveals to us what that good is.

And your false dichotomy is that there are only two options: 1. That either all laws are eternal, or 2. that all laws must are set up by God and did not exist until he set them up.

A third option is that some laws are eternal, and some laws are are only in force for a time--such as temporal laws--for which time of enforcement is determined by God.

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 12:23 PM

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-04-2009, 01:01 PM

You don't seem to understand that for there to be "laws", there necessarily MUST be a "lawgiver"...therefore there can be no such things as "eternal" laws, Fig.

Your thinking is akin to arguing for uncaused "effects".

You don't understand the difference between a law like the law of Moses, and a law like "as ye sew, so shall ye reap" (The Law of the Harvest).

When God teaches us eternal laws (which are gospel laws) he IS the law giver. It does not mean He is the original inventor. There is no original inventor of eternal, natural laws.

Russ

10-04-2009, 01:10 PM

There is no original inventor of eternal, natural laws.

That's precisely the problem in Mormonism's dilemma.

If there were no original law giver, then God is but a subject to the laws.

As Slick said in the video: "The third option is that good is based on God's nature; on his character; on his essence. God appeals to nothing other than his own character for the standard of what is good and then reveals to us what that good is."

That is the case.

God appeals to nothing outside himself.

Mormonism continues to attempt to invent a god of its own making; a demigod; a man who "obeyed" enough to become a god.

Just another reason to recognize Mormonism as other than Christian.

Mormonism ignores Psalm 90:2.

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-04-2009, 01:28 PM

If there were no original law giver, then God is but a subject to the laws.

Russ, let's use YOUR God and YOUR definitions, and ignore mine.

Are those laws which bind the TRIUNE God 'co-eternal' with the TRIUNE God, or did the TRIUNE God first have to establish the laws that bind Him?

Answer please.

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 01:33 PM

You don't understand the difference between a law like the law of Moses, and a law like "as ye sew, so shall ye reap" (The Law of the Harvest).

When God teaches us eternal laws (which are gospel laws) he IS the law giver. It does not mean He is the original inventor. There is no original inventor of eternal, natural laws.

Nonsense. There's NO such thing as "eternal, natural laws" in and of themselves. What you perceive as "eternal, natural laws" originate from the ETERNAL God.

In your little Mormon scenario, laws PRECEDE even God Himself which makes Him held captive to "laws" which He had nothing to do about.

But then again, when people hold such absurd views of the Creator...anything goes. :rolleyes:

Russ

10-04-2009, 01:33 PM

Russ, let's use YOUR God and YOUR definitions, and ignore mine.

Are those laws which bind the TRIUNE God 'co-eternal' with the TRIUNE God, or did the TRIUNE God first have to establish the laws that bind Him?

Answer please.

See? You still just don't understand. God has always existed and his nature is what it is. God, being the creator of even time itself, is eternally God and the AUTHOR of all that exists. God gave the laws and now he reveals them to us.

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-04-2009, 01:35 PM

See? You still just don't understand. God has always existed and his nature is what it is. God, being the creator of even time itself, is eternally God and the AUTHOR of all that exists. God gave the laws and now he reveals them to us.

Did God give the laws which define Himself?

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 01:35 PM

Russ, let's use YOUR God and YOUR definitions, and ignore mine.

Are those laws which bind the TRIUNE God 'co-eternal' with the TRIUNE God, or did the TRIUNE God first have to establish the laws that bind Him?

Answer please.

You don't get it, Fig. God is NOT bound to laws. What laws there be come from who he IS...they stem from His NATURE. :)

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 01:36 PM

Did God give the laws which define Himself?

And just which "laws" might these be which "define" Him, Fig? :confused:

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-04-2009, 01:37 PM

And just which "laws" might these be which "define" Him, Fig? :confused:

The laws that if he were to break, it would cause him to cease to be God.

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 01:41 PM

The laws that if he were to break, it would cause him to cease to be God.

Huh? Wanna run that by me again, Fig, 'cause you're not "getting" it.

"Laws" originate from who He IS, Fig. Scripture declares, "God can NOT lie" because it's NOT IN HIS NATURE TO DO SO.

We know the Mormon "god" can cease to be "god"...especially if others stop "sustaining" him as "god". :eek:

That ain't the Biblical God, Fig. :rolleyes:

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-04-2009, 01:56 PM

Huh? Wanna run that by me again, Fig, 'cause you're not "getting" it.

"Laws" originate from who He IS, Fig. Scripture declares, "God can NOT lie" because it's NOT IN HIS NATURE TO DO SO.

We know the Mormon "god" can cease to be "god"...especially if others stop "sustaining" him as "god". :eek:

"The Mormon God can cease to be God if others stop sustaining him?" :rolleyes: :rolleyes: You clearly demonstrate that you have little understanding of LDS doctrine. What willful eggnernce you demonstrate.

So, if it ever becomes in my nature not to lie, does that mean I am a God too?

Of course it is not in God's nature to lie. I don't think it ever was nor will be.

Tell me though, will it always be in YOUR nature to lie?

Just because God is our source for truth and light, does this somehow mean that truth and light and natural law are not co-eternal with God?

akaSeerone

10-04-2009, 02:03 PM

Yep; God cannot lie anymore than Satan can speak truth!

What an absurd notion....God lying.

That idea (God lying) had to have come from Satan himself.

Andy

Russ

10-04-2009, 02:42 PM

Just because God is our source for truth and light, does this somehow mean that truth and light and natural law are not co-eternal with God?

The Mormon God is not eternally God. He had a starting point as a God. He became God by obedience to eternal laws outside himself.

The God of the Holy Bible, on the other hand, is the author and creator of everything, visible and invisible and even his own character which is pure and holy according to his own laws.

That's what Mormonism doesn't (can't) understand.

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 04:11 PM

"The Mormon God can cease to be God if others stop sustaining him?" You clearly demonstrate that you have little understanding of LDS doctrine. What willful eggnernce you demonstrate.

You clearly demonstrate that you have little understanding of Mormon teaching from the 60's, Fig. It's outlined in one of YOUR Mo's writings...a certain W. Cleon Skousen. I suggest you do a little research before revealing YOUR "eggnernce". :rolleyes:

So, if it ever becomes in my nature not to lie, does that mean I am a God too?

Of course it is not in God's nature to lie. I don't think it ever was nor will be.

Tell me though, will it always be in YOUR nature to lie?

Nope. You will NEVER be or become a "god". But the regenerate, glorified Christian has NO sin nature in God's presence and it's not in his nature to lie. It's still in YOUR nature and mine to lie, Fig...and the sooner you come to understand the extent of the Fall...the better. :eek:

Just because God is our source for truth and light, does this somehow mean that truth and light and natural law are not co-eternal with God?

In that God (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) is eternal, his intrinsic attributes are naturally co-eternal with Him. ;)

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-04-2009, 04:54 PM

You clearly demonstrate that you have little understanding of Mormon teaching from the 60's, Fig. It's outlined in one of YOUR Mo's writings...a certain W. Cleon Skousen. I suggest you do a little research before revealing YOUR "eggnernce". :rolleyes:

I'd love to read a quote from Cleon Skousen if you have one. Better yet would be a quote from a prophet or apostle or from our scriptures, rather than an author.

It's still in YOUR nature and mine to lie, Fig...and the sooner you come to understand the extent of the Fall...the better. :eek:

Will it always be in your nature to lie, JD?

In that God (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) is eternal, his intrinsic attributes are naturally co-eternal with Him. ;)

Well, this admission puts you on course for also acknowledging that natural law is co-eternal with God. Are you sure you want to go there?

Russ

10-04-2009, 04:58 PM

Well, this admission puts you on course for also acknowledging that natural law is co-eternal with God. Are you sure you want to go there?

I'll go there. So will da fadda.

God has always existed as God (Psalm 90:2) and, therefore, his own authorship of said laws have always existed with him. It's his universe, his laws, his nature, his character, on and on.

Now, regarding LDSism, God couldn't have been the author of said laws because, according to LDSism, God has not always been God but became God due to his proven willingness to be obedient to laws outside himself.

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 05:30 PM

I'd love to read a quote from Cleon Skousen if you have one. Better yet would be a quote from a prophet or apostle or from our scriptures, rather than an author.

It's in one of his books such as "The Second Thousand Years" or one of it's successors. It was considered authoritative by the LDS hierarchy in its day...being endorsed by the LDS Church, published by Bookcraft...but do I wanna spend an hour or two hunting down this quote which I well remember...maybe.

Will it always be in your nature to lie, JD?

Nope. Either at death or the Rapture. But why do YOU lie, Fig, in light of your denial of Original Sin? :eek:

Well, this admission puts you on course for also acknowledging that natural law is co-eternal with God. Are you sure you want to go there?

God's attributes are co-eternal with Him because He's eternal Fig...unlike your placing created material...such as "matter" on a par with God. :eek:

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 05:31 PM

Yep; God cannot lie anymore than Satan can speak truth!

What an absurd notion....God lying.

That idea (God lying) had to have come from Satan himself.

Andy

Ain't that the truth!! :eek:

Russianwolfe

10-04-2009, 06:39 PM

You clearly demonstrate that you have little understanding of Mormon teaching from the 60's, Fig. It's outlined in one of YOUR Mo's writings...a certain W. Cleon Skousen. I suggest you do a little research before revealing YOUR "eggnernce". :rolleyes:

For which he was soundly renounced by none other than Bruce R. McConkie. I heard about this on my mission and it created quite a stir that was settle by Br. McConkie's talk.

God is God and doesn't need anyone to sustain him. Too bad Br. Skousen has drifted much further off the straight and narrow than just this.

Don't put too much in store with statements by members. They aren't the authority even if they happen to be BYU professors.

Marvin

Russianwolfe

10-04-2009, 06:47 PM

Yep; God cannot lie anymore than Satan can speak truth!

What an absurd notion....God lying.

That idea (God lying) had to have come from Satan himself.

Andy

Please identify the true and false portion of this scripture, use scriptures to support your ***ertion

Genesis 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Marvin

Russ

10-04-2009, 06:48 PM

Don't put too much in store with statements by members. They aren't the authority even if they happen to be BYU professors.

Marvin

And even Bruce R. McConkie was soundly rebuked and edited. Is "Mormon Doctrine" still Mormon doctrine. Nope!

And you are an authority?!

LOL

Just who speaks for Mormonism?

I watched President Monson today. He didn't talk about men becoming Gods over their own planets.

So I decided to ask Loren at Mormon.org.

He hemmed and hawed and otherwise beat around the bush, but finally admitted it. (YouTube coming soon. Stay tuned.)

Have you been soundly denounced in your defense of Mormonism? Have you been sustained as a defender of all things Mormon.

Man, oh man, just who can we turn to to give us the real deal?

Russianwolfe

10-04-2009, 06:54 PM

Tinkling cymbals and sounding br***.

Marvin

And even Bruce R. McConkie was soundly rebuked and edited. Is "Mormon Doctrine" still Mormon doctrine. Nope!

And you are an authority?!

LOL

Just who speaks for Mormonism?

I watched President Monson today. He didn't talk about men becoming Gods over their own planets.

So I decided to ask Loren at Mormon.org.

He hemmed and hawed and otherwise beat around the bush, but finally admitted it. (YouTube coming soon. Stay tuned.)

Have you been soundly denounced in your defense of Mormonism? Have you been sustained as a defender of all things Mormon.

Man, oh man, just who can we turn to to give us the real deal?

Russ

10-04-2009, 06:55 PM

Tinkling cymbals and sounding br***.

Marvin

Translation: Since the Wolfe can't meet the challenge, run away with tail between legs.

Russianwolfe

10-04-2009, 06:59 PM

Translation: Since the Wolfe can't meet the challenge, run away with tail between legs.

I'm still here.

Marvin

Russ

10-04-2009, 06:59 PM

I'm still here.

Marvin

But you're silent.

Tail tucked between legs.

Russianwolfe

10-04-2009, 07:02 PM

But you're silent.

Tail tucked between legs.

Russ has redefined the meaning of the word silent.

Marvin

Russ

10-04-2009, 07:18 PM

Russ has redefined the meaning of the word silent.

Marvin

You claim that Skousen was rebuked by McConkie, yet McConkie himself was clearly rebuked by the hierarchy.

I want to know who really speaks for Mormonism.

FAIR? FARMS? You?

Where is your certificate allowing you to be the be-all end-all of LDS doctrine?

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-04-2009, 08:36 PM

Will it always be in your nature to lie, JD?

Nope. Either at death or the Rapture. But why do YOU lie, Fig, in light of your denial of Original Sin? :eek:

What is so magical about death or the rapture that will change you from a lying nature to a truthful nature?

I'm responsible for my own sins, JD. Adam isn't responsible for them.

akaSeerone

10-04-2009, 08:46 PM

What is so magical about death or the rapture that will change you from a lying nature to a truthful nature?

I'm responsible for my own sins, JD. Adam isn't responsible for them.
What you seem to refuse to see is that there would by no sin if Adam hadn't sinned/fallen.

As has been explained over and over, we inherited the "sin nature," from Adam consequently we all sin.

Andy

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 10:53 PM

What is so magical about death or the rapture that will change you from a lying nature to a truthful nature?

Duh. That's WHEN the Christian will be PURGED of the sin nature in toto, Fig.

I'm responsible for my own sins, JD. Adam isn't responsible for them.

Then WHY do you lie, Fig? Why haven't you stopped? And we all know that at some point, whether out of desperation, convenience, what have you, we ALL LIE.

So WHY are you still a liar, Fig...seeing you believe in a completely "free" will? :eek:

Father_JD

10-04-2009, 10:54 PM

What you seem to refuse to see is that there would by no sin if Adam hadn't sinned/fallen.

As has been explained over and over, we inherited the "sin nature," from Adam consequently we all sin.

Andy

Fig and other Mormons recognize that EVERYONE sins, and yet they somehow can't reconcile this FACT with their "free will" doctrine...that anyone can simply "choose" NOT to sin.

Talk about deceived! :rolleyes:

akaSeerone

10-04-2009, 11:29 PM

Duh. That's WHEN the Christian will be PURGED of the sin nature in toto, Fig.

Then WHY do you lie, Fig? Why haven't you stopped? And we all know that at some point, whether out of desperation, convenience, what have you, we ALL LIE.

So WHY are you still a liar, Fig...seeing you believe in a completely "free" will? :eek:
He has to lie to keep supporting mormonism.

He is trapped in the web of deceit.

When people get in that deep, they believe their own lies and can no longer discern truth from lies and .......what a web we weave when we practice to deceive!

As always it will take God's calling to save him.

Andy

nrajeff

10-05-2009, 04:29 AM

What you seem to refuse to see is that there would by no sin if Adam hadn't sinned/fallen.
As has been explained over and over, we inherited the "sin nature," from Adam consequently we all sin.
Andy

---Should ANYONE be punished for hereditary defects, which by definition were not their fault? Sounds kinda unfair.

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-05-2009, 07:25 AM

Duh. That's WHEN the Christian will be PURGED of the sin nature in toto, Fig.

Then WHY do you lie, Fig? Why haven't you stopped? And we all know that at some point, whether out of desperation, convenience, what have you, we ALL LIE.

So WHY are you still a liar, Fig...seeing you believe in a completely "free" will? :eek:

This has been explained to you over and over and over again. This is a world of temptation, and learning, and experience, and falling and redemption. We 'fall' for the same reason Adam fell--succumbing to temptation. You believe Adam and Eve had free will, don't you? So, why not ask them why they fell?

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-05-2009, 07:27 AM

---Should ANYONE be punished for hereditary defects, which by definition were not their fault? Sounds kinda unfair.

Come on, Jeff. If the Bible says that God is actually a respecter of some persons, and not others, then who are you and I to argue with that?

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-05-2009, 07:29 AM

Fig and other Mormons recognize that EVERYONE sins, and yet they somehow can't reconcile this FACT with their "free will" doctrine...that anyone can simply "choose" NOT to sin.

Talk about deceived! :rolleyes:

Did Adam and Eve have free will? You don't seem to see how they are a shadow and type for all humanity.

nrajeff

10-05-2009, 01:30 PM

Come on, Jeff. If the Bible says that God is actually a respecter of some persons, and not others, then who are you and I to argue with that?

---Well, we could not argue with that idea, if the Bible really taught it. Maybe I got a defective Bible, because mine doesn't teach it. Can there be such a thing as a defective Bible, though? Isn't God able to protect all Bibles and keep them from being defective? Because otherwise, they would not be inerrant. :)

Fig-bearing Thistle

10-05-2009, 01:33 PM

---Well, we could not argue with that idea, if the Bible really taught it. Maybe I got a defective Bible, because mine doesn't teach it. Can there be such a thing as a defective Bible, though? Isn't God able to protect all Bibles and keep them from being defective? Because otherwise, they would not be inerrant. :)

Wha...?

You mean that the Bible doesn't teach that God is a respecter of persons?

Dang!

Father_JD

10-06-2009, 05:52 PM

Did Adam and Eve have free will? You don't seem to see how they are a shadow and type for all humanity.

Yes, they sure did, Fig. And they were the LAST ones to have it as well. You keep IGNORING the FALL, dude. :rolleyes:

Father_JD

10-06-2009, 05:57 PM

This has been explained to you over and over and over again. This is a world of temptation, and learning, and experience, and falling and redemption. We 'fall' for the same reason Adam fell--succumbing to temptation. You believe Adam and Eve had free will, don't you? So, why not ask them why they fell?

And it's beene explained to you over and over and over again the SEVERITY of the Fall, which YOU refuse to take seriously with your Pelagian view-point.

You don't understand that your answer has NO MERIT, Fig. It doesn't address the ISSUE OF SIN, DEATH, etc.

Since YOU believe in a complete FREE will, it's for you to demonstrate the reality of people who have NEVER SINNED, exercising that free will of theirs despite a "world of temptation, and learning, and experience...blah, blah, blah".

The question regarding Adam and Eve is a GREAT one!! Why? Because they truly HAD free will. We do NOT because we're FALLEN. :eek: