Proving God Existence

[Tex]

You're not getting rid of the Euthyphro Dilemma here. Does "God's nature" determine what's good, or is what's good "God's nature"? Not only is this even more arbitrary than regular DCT, but it actually fails to give any reason why we should even follow "God's nature" for morality because it seems as if it was out of his control what his own nature was going to be. DCT suggests that God chose certain commands for whatever arbitrary reason, but here you're saying God just... is? It makes less and less sense the more you think about it.

I didn't talk about it much, so let me elaborate here. I hate shoving websites on people, but none of this is my own knowledge (not that I don't understand, but that I haven't memorized this yet). The Euthyphro Dilemma is:

1) Is something (like humility) good because God recognizes it as good? Or,
2) Is something good because God commands that it is good (as Socrates put it, because God loves it)?

The answer is that there is not just two answers, but Christians choose a third. Morality is objective, but not external to God. Like with my organ example, morality is interior. This is actually required for a God, else we have the Euthyphro Dilemma. His commands are not whims, but rooted in his character. If God were to have a different character, would morality change? The scenario of "If God were to have a different character..." actually can't happen and is completely impossible. Since we're assuming God exists for the moment, we must also assume the definition of God as "perfect being". If God is perfect, any slide in any direction is less than perfect. Therefore, if God changes, he's no longer God.

God must be "perfect being" because, as unmoved mover, he cannot get his source of existence, order, goodness, truth, or beauty from outside himself. Not only that, but all of these must be present infinitely because all finite things "rely on the existence of the wholeness" (by this, I mean that if the idea "4" didn't exist, the whole system of mathematics would be chaotic).

What if your god tells you to murder everyone in the world? Is this morally good? No! Of course not! You know that and almost everyone else does! This feeling is the work of millions of years of evolution.

I just commented that Christians don't believe that in the passage you quoted. If you've read anything I write, I've described faith as a relationship, not as a feeling or some bodily function. Please go educate yourself and come back.

The Quran doesn't suggest divine command theory at all.

Al Shafi'i (820 A.D.) seems to think it is a moral code given by God, thus divine command. If you have a JSTOR account, you can get the article free here. If not, google "Divine Command Ethics in Early Islam: Al-shafi'i and the Problem of Guidance by John Kelsay".

Springer (atheist, likes ethics, still alive) published an article by Carney (died 2007 at age 28) wrote a large work on philosophy in religion wrote a tiny bit about divine command in Islam here (JSTOR). If it doesn't work, google "Twilight of the Idols? Pluralism and Mystical Praxis in Islam by Abd al-Hakeem Carney".

Even if you don't like these two articles, since Allah is not subject to anything and is instead the ultimate authority, the Muslim answer CANNOT be that God is subject to a moral code. It's pretty safe to say that Islam follows a DCT. You can say that Allah does what is beneficial, but you cannot say that Allah is subject to a moral code (basically making that moral code Allah). At least not in any Islam I know.