Anyone have any input on this topic? I was just curious.

"...is the holy loved by the gods because it is holy? Or is it holy because it is loved by the gods?"
- Socrates to Euthyphro

quote:

It is holy with or without God. This would make God's existence arbitrary.

Yea, I mean, it's really hard to say. From the Christian perspective I would make the argument that anything that is of God is holy and anything that is not of God is not holy. Therefore there would be no separation or any difference between God and holiness. This would go along with the beliefs because God is basically the master mind behind the creation of the earth and all living things. Since God created things from the beginning, then anything that he intended or willed to be good would be holy.
And then again, say that things were, for instance, holy with or without God. I don't really think that would make God's existence arbitrary. It would make God seem alot less influential over what he created, but all in all this would just mean that God takes the side of whatever is inherently holy. But finding an argument for what is inherently holy or good is a difficult thing in and of itself. Who can possibly determine what is "good" and what is "bad"? (I hate to sound like a relativist here)

But then the question always comes back to which supposed "God" is the right one and which book of "holy laws" is the correct one? I think that's the bigger dilemma in our day and age that Socrates was never faced with. I would have loved to hear what he would have said on the subject.

Holliewood,

Good point, part of trying to solve the dilemma is trying to determine whether or not the first horn of the dilemma puts an external limitation on God. Which I feel it does, because for the holy to be loved by God because it is holy. It is holy with or without God. This would make God's existence arbitrary.

Now the second horn places God at the helm of what is or is not holy. This is more along the lines of what you were talking about. Because God deemed homosexuality wrong, it is therefore wrong. I always thought this is very interesting, because God would HAVE to be right all the time or he would not be God.

So lets say God said you, Hollie, was always right, and you said one day the sky was purple.
Then it would look something like this:

1. God is always right
2. God said Hollie is always right
3. Hollie said the sky was purple

1 would make 2 right, and 1 and 2 make 3 right.

Now if you said the next day, the sky was green, and the sky had not actually changed color, then presumably the day before you would have been wrong, correct?

What do you think?

:-D

Well, I don't know too much about Euthyphro's dilemma, but that question is really fascinating. As much as I remember from Greek history, the people were always questioning the gods and even viewed them as part human. So, I could definitely understand why Socrates would ask this. But it definitely still applies to today when looking at the relationship between religion and what it views as right and wrong. This is almost like a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" question in a way. People who believe in their religion and the rules set down by their god(s) would probably think that the two go hand in hand: what is holy and what is loved by the gods. To them there would be no difference.

But, it also makes you think about certain issues as well. For example, many Christians claim that the Bible condemns homosexuality, and therefore God would see this as a sin and not holy. But if it weren't for God and the supposed verses in that Bible, would people really see anything wrong with it? What if there was something in the Bible that celebrated homosexuality. I'm thinking that people would probably be reacting a hellavu lot different towards it today. Then we also have the issue of murder. Christianity, and many other religions, condemn it, but what about other people who claim that their God celebrates it? We have all these different "gods" claiming different things, so it kind of makes you wonder that if there was absolutely no such thing as religion and no higher beings in anyone's minds, what would people see as right or wrong? Its really difficult to say. This is like one of those questions that causes you to unravel everything in your mind and make your brain hurt. I like it.

Pretty disappointed in the responses :-(