The prize of Christianity

[Esquilax]

...I'm having trouble envisioning a reason why one wouldn't be able to just reduce the question from multiple gods to one god.

In Greek polytheism the various gods and goddesses acted capriciously and often at odds with each other. As such obedience to Zeus, for example, would defy Hera. Each god having its own distinct nature gives rise to the dilemma. Since a monotheistic God has only one nature, the good is based on God’s inherently good nature. God does not ignore his own nature when he declares something good. Nor does He need to refer to any standard outside Himself. He serves as His own standard. Thus there is no dilemma.

... Except that the dilemma can be shrunk down, removing the plural noun, and still convey the same basic principles. Many have done so just fine; the basic theme remains intact.

It seems to me that you're trying to argue the former point, that things are good because god commands them, but then adding this additional layer of "inherent goodness" over the top, as if that alters the issue. It doesn't; your divinely based moral standards are still commands, you're just accepting them from a being you've supposed can only command morally good things.

I would argue that you're wrong on that point, but that's beside the point. You don't need to tart up your answer to avoid the very real contradiction there, when all you're really saying is that it doesn't matter to you. That's fine, believe what you want, but it does matter to me. In the end, what will happen is I'll post examples of god murdering people and whatnot, and you'll either argue that it's a metaphor, or that the old testament was different, or that god was justified in doing so, and I'll disagree...

In the end, it just comes down to the fact that all of these problems don't matter to you.