Euthyphro Dilemma Paper

The intent of this paper is to argue how Christianity must be the one true religion by presupposing monotheism, specifically by looking at the monotheistic view that God is the greatest conceivable being and how ethics must then be rooted in His nature. Note, in this paper I do not wish to argue for monotheism as that is the main purpose of most apologetical material but rather wish to expound further on the presupposition of such material in order to get to Christianity. Specifically I will be arguing from what the three great monotheistic faiths (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) believe as a polemic tool of sorts against non-Christian views while also arguing from a basic, or stripped, monotheistic claim in an apologetical sense for Christianity. In doing so, I will use scriptures from these religions’ holy books but not as the basis of my claims but rather as confirmation. All of monotheism agrees upon the central tenet that God is the greatest conceivable being. This notion will be the focal point of the argument. The idea of the greatest conceivable being was posited by St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033 - 1109). Anselm is quoted as saying that God is “that than which nothing greater can be thought” (Williams). In essence, this argument claims that if you could think of something that is greater than our notion of God then that would actually be God because by this definition nothing could possibly be greater than God. The greatest conceivable being then is made up of great making properties, or properties that in lieu of having them would contribute to making one great. For example, a great making property would be goodness. Surely we would say it is greater to be good than evil. So the greatest conceivable being must be all good, or the essence of goodness, as He must have the greatest amount of a great making property. All goodness must then come from the greatest conceivable being. "Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow" (James 1:17 NASB). Another example of a great making property would be power. Intuitively we understand power is greater than weakness. He must be all powerful, or the essence of power. All power must come from Him. "Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God" (Romans 13:1 NASB) Another example would be wisdom, for it is better to be wise than foolish. He must be all wise, or the essence of wisdom. All wisdom must come from Him. "For the Lord gives wisdom; From His mouth come knowledge and understanding" (Proverbs 2:6 NASB). Another translation reads, "All wisdom comes from the Lord, and so do common sense and understanding" (Proverbs 2:6 CEV). Notice again how I am not making these claims based on scripture, but rather I am using these scriptures to affirm how Christianity falls in line with this view of the greatest conceivable being. Now that we have established the monotheistic tenet that God is the greatest conceivable being, allow us to tackled then the Euthyphro Dilemma. The Euthyphro Dilemma comes from Plato's dialogue "Euthyphro" where Socrates poses the question "is the pious loved by the gods because it's pious, or it is pious because it is loved?" (Plato 8) Today's translation would read somewhere along the lines of "is something good because God wills it, or does God will it because something is good?" Both of these answers have devastating consequences to theism. For if something is good because God wills it then goodness is merely arbitrary. God could have willed rape, murder, and torture to be good and then we would be morally obligated to commit such acts. Goodness is completely subjective upon God's whims in such a scenario, which undermines the greatest conceivable being notion as it is seemingly irrelevant on such a view that God is all good. Similarly, if God wills something because it is good then goodness is found outside of God and He would then not be the creator of goodness, this cuts into God’s aseity and He therefore would not truly be the greatest conceivable being on this view either. However it might seem through the way the dilemma is worded, these are not the only two options. In fact, most theists would answer this dilemma by saying that God wills something because He is good. Goodness is then found in God's nature and therefore not arbitrary while also being dependent upon God. So what God commands is ultimately rooted in His nature. Now I suppose that the next step of this paper would naturally be to go into what God has willed and how we come to know this, but given how this argument presupposes monotheism I don’t find this necessary since the monotheistic faiths agree on what God has willed almost entirely. Instead, I wish to simply look at love, specifically in the three main monotheistic faiths. Below are the commandments each of the three main monotheistic faiths have given regarding love. Judaism: “You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the Lord.” (Leviticus 19:18 NASB) “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.” (Deuteronomy 6:5 NASB) Christianity: Jesus answered, “The foremost is, ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:29-31 NASB) Islam: “Yet there are men who take (for worship) others besides Allah, as equal (with Allah): They love them as they should love Allah but those of Faith are overflowing in their love for Allah. If only the unrighteous could see, behold, they would see the Penalty: that to Allah belongs all power, and Allah will strongly enforce the Penalty.” (Quran 2:165) “And among His Signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that ye may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has put love and mercy between your [hearts]: Verily in that are Signs for those who reflect.” (Quran 30:21) Through these passages we see that God (in every monotheistic view of God) has commanded us to love one another and love Him. If what is good and what God wills comes from His nature, then we see that love is a part of God's nature. Now herein lies the differences in these faiths: Christians and Jews argue that God is all loving. Muslims argue that He is not. "The one who does not love does not know God, for God is love" (1 John 4:8 NASB). This scripture is opposed "Say, (O Muhammad, to mankind): If ye love Allah, follow me; Allah will love you and forgive you your sins. Allah is Forgiving, Merci... But if they turn away, lo! Allah loveth not the disbelievers" (Quran 3:31-32). Therefore, it goes to show that the Judeo-Christian God and the Islamic God are not one and the same. If the two are made up of different characteristics then they themselves must be different. God's love is unconditional, independent from the circumstances. Allah's love is conditional, contingent upon the circumstances. So, which one of these two is the greatest conceivable being? God must be either all loving or completely absent of love due to the Greatest Conceivable Being Theory. A point of argument to this claim could be to bring up Aristotelian ethics. Aristotle has a doctrine of virtue as a mean where he claims that excellence is found between excess and deficiency (Aristotle 18). The issue here is that both "excess" and "deficiency" would imply an error. So, a potential argument that would be presented by Aristotelian ethics against God being all loving would be that an excess of love would ignore justice because God would overlook the sin of those whom He loves. However, that is certainly not the case. God holds all accountable to their sins and yet loves all; there is no contradiction here (as we will further explore towards the end of this paper). Similarly, through the lens of the Greatest Conceivable Being Theory, we would say that being all powerful is certainly a great making attribute. Having a balance between strength and weakness would not be great. Having a balance between knowledge and ignorance would not be great. So why then would having a balance of love and indifference be considered great? The Greatest Conceivable Being must have the greatest amount of great making attributes, so great making attributes must fall on one of the two ends, not in the middle. So again, God must be either all loving or completely absent of love due to the Greatest Conceivable Being Theory. Here it is shown that Allah, with his contingent love, must not be the greatest conceivable being. Now that we have established that the greatest conceivable being must be either all loving or completely absent of love, we must then see which of these two are great making properties. I would argue that since we know what God has willed, as we saw through moral epistemology, and how what He has willed must be rooted in His nature, as we saw through moral ontology, and we know that what He has willed is love, that therefore God must be love. The biggest objection to love as being a great making attribute though is that it cuts into God's power. The issue then is to compare love versus apathy and see if they cut into God's power and other great making attributes in order to determine which is truly greater. Which requires more power? I would say love requires more power, for it is easier to be indifferent or even have hatred than it is to love especially for those who do not love us. "You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also... You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven... For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matthew 5:38-48 NASB). It requires discipline and willpower to love in such a manner. Restraint requires greater strength. Unconditional love overcomes passions while hatred and indifference are both subjected to them. I would argue as well that God must also be personal (in the sense of relatable, or the ability for one person to relate to another person) for it requires greater strength to reveal one's self than to remain hidden. Revealing one's self requires an action, while remaining hidden requires nothing more than for one to remain dormant. Furthermore, revealing one's self requires the ability to express one's self to another, which involves power. Through being personal His attributes are greater shown and magnified, thus making a personal God conceivably greater than an impersonal God. From our rebuttal of Aristotelian ethics we deduce that great making properties fall on the ends and not the middle. So if being personal is a great making attribute, what could be more personal than love? Ergo by being loving, God is more personal, making His attributes greater revealed and magnified. Therefore, unconditional love magnifies power rather than inhibits it. Furthermore, righteousness and mercy are also magnified through unconditional love, ultimately magnifying God's glory. Logically, I can only see how love magnifies power while hatred diminishes it. Seeing how love is a great making attribute, I wish to then observe self-sacrifice and whether or not it is a good thing. Intuition immediately hints towards yes, it is a good thing. In fact, a strong objection to Utilitarianism is how the utilitarian would claim that a viable, young woman saving her grandmother at the cost of her own life is a morally reprehensible act; this claim seems blatantly false. Furthermore, sacrificing one’s self for another is driven itself by love. Christianity affirms this claim when Jesus says “greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13 NASB). So we can confidently claim that self-sacrifice is intuitively good and the greatest example of love, and we can also say with confidence (given monotheism) that God has willed love and what God wills is a part of His nature; it therefore concludes that self-sacrifice is inherently a part of God’s nature. Christianity is the only monotheistic religion in which God exemplifies such a love as self-sacrifice, particularly through Jesus’ death on the cross. In fact, God’s great making attributes, specifically His love, mercy, justice, power, and glory are most greatly revealed at the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Let us then briefly examine each of these attributes and how they can be tied to the sacrificial death of Christ. Love: "Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends" (John 15:13 NASB). There is no greater love than giving up one's life for another. Love cannot be expressed any greater than in such a sacrifice. Through dying on the cross, God ultimately reveals His love. Mercy: According to Merriam-Webster, mercy is "compassion or forbearance shown especially to an offender or to one subject to one's power" (Merriam-Webster). We are subjected to God's punishment and power (He is the essence of power, all power comes from Him) for acting in defiance against His laws. Mercy cannot be expressed any greater than fully removing the penalty that we justly deserve. Through His sacrificial death on the cross, God ultimately reveals His mercy. Justice: There is no punishment suitable for us. By sinning against the Good there came a chasm which none but the essence of goodness could bridge. Only a perfect being (God) could properly pay for the crimes which we have committed against Him. For if God is the essence of Good, then even the slightest imperfection removes us completely from Him. As imperfect beings, we could not reconcile ourselves with perfection; it is on part of perfection to do so. In order to be in right-standing once more would require the assistance of one who is already in right-standing for there is no other way for us to relate. Justice cannot be expressed any greater than God satisfying His wrath on Himself. Through His death on the cross, God ultimately reveals His justice. Power: "Who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 1:4 NASB). The Christian view of God is the only one in which God personally overcame death. There is no greater power exemplified than overcoming death. Power cannot be expressed any greater than personally destroying death itself. Through His resurrection, God ultimately reveals His power. Glory: "Praise, honor, or distinction extended by common consent" (Merriam-Webster). No greater praise, honor, or distinction can there be than personally saving mankind by sacrificing one's self while perfectly exemplifying love, mercy, and justice; and also personally overcoming death while perfectly exemplifying power. Glory cannot be expressed any greater than this. Through His death and resurrection, God ultimately reveals His glory. Christ’s death (an act of perfect love) is the only possible way to reconcile perfect justice with perfect mercy and in so doing He furthers His perfect power and glory. Christianity is the only religion that shows God having absolute justice and mercy. If God were to brush aside our sins, then they have not been paid for and thus God inhibits His justice. On the other hand, absolute justice would require that none are saved; similarly, we can never pay for our crimes against God, this would inhibit both His justice and mercy. The only way for God to have both absolute justice and absolute mercy would be for Him to pay the punishment Himself. That is exactly what Christianity claims. Furthermore, God coming down as man and taking our punishment in our stead shows the greatest amount of love. No other view of God shows such love. Furthermore, by personally overcoming death God reveals the most power. No other view of God shows such power; because of this, God's glory is revealed to the greatest extent. Through the aforementioned, we can see how God personally revealing Himself through Jesus Christ is the greatest expression of His great making attributes. Because this view of God is conceivably greater than any other view of God, the Christian Godhead is the greatest conceivable being. Therefore, it concludes that Christianity must be the true religion.

Works Cited
Aristotle, and Anthony Kenny. Eudemian Ethics. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2011. Print.
 CEV Bible. Swindon, Wiltshire: Bible Society, 1997. Print.
 Ganeri, Anita. The Quran. London: Evans, 2002. Print.
 Plato. Euthyphro. Trans. Woods & Pack. San Francisco: Cathal Woods, 2011. Print.
 The Holy Bible: New American Standard Bible: Updated NASB. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. Print. 
The New Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, 1989. Print.
 Williams, Thomas. "Saint Anselm." Stanford University. Stanford University, 18 May 2000. Web.