The Problem of Evil (XXVII)

[Mister Agenda]

If can be reasoned that logic is not created, it is an intrinsic property of God. It is how the mind of God is ordered. I would therefore be impossible for God to do the illogical. It is the same principle that God does not make up morality, it is part of his nature and cannot be separated (that's why the Euthyphro dilemma does not apply in the moral argument for God).

The Euthyphro dilemma absolutely still applies.  I've seen theists try this word game before.  Saying that "good" is intrinsic to the nature of God versus existing as a separate and independent property, is just a language gymnastic that in no way excuses him of the contradiction.

Attaching "good" to the definition of God's essence is convenient for the theist because it absolves him, and absolves God of the responsibility of defining what "good" actually means.  We are still left with the question of how such a moral determination of his character was reached in the first place.  How do we know that god's nature is "good"?  By what standards are we comparing god's essence in order to make such a judgement about his inherent morality?  Or, is God just circularly declaring that he is good because because he's God, and he is God because he is good?

So, as you can see, "God is inherently good" is just another vague, poorly defined, and essentially meaningless assertion in the end.  It doesn't get you out of Euthyphro's dilemma in the sense that you think; it only takes you safely away from it.  Without venturing to define what "good" actually means, you aren't even coming near the discussion.

That suffering that mortals need to go through to become good? God didn't need any of that crap, he's just good by nature. But it's really, really important that the beings he creates NOT be good by nature, because how can you really be good if you don't learn from suffering? Hmmm.