Conflicting statements in the bible

[Sal]

Nice hand-wave.

That's all an appeal to that 'dilemma' deserves because it only applies to polytheistic gods.

It's origins were between Socrates and Euthyphro discussing moral actions, but it has been a stop-gap for monotheistic religions as well ever since it was first worded with plenty of hand waves against it, From Socrates to Thomas Aquinas to William James. No theologian has been able to explain it away without a considerable effort of edifying their terms upon how they view their particular version of god.

Essentially, it's a dilemma because it makes an astute observation about the question of morality and where morals come from. Plainly stated it's:

"Is what is morally good commanded by God because it is morally good, or is it morally good because it is commanded by God?"

Source

All the "answers" to this dilemma are built upon submitting that one cannot understand god's reason for authoring morality, IOW: we're incapable of understanding god's moral authority. There's one major problem with this approach, which Aquinas missed (and several theologians have echoed throughout history) yet used: If humans are unable to understand the basis of morality of that god authors, then they're equally unable to understand the moral itself and thus it falls back to an arbitrary command.

Saying stuff like "God's nature is good" or that "God's nature is beyond reproach" just makes it a corollary regression, i.e. instead of god it's his nature that's in question, which ultimately changes nothing about where morals come from.

But really, all this hand-waving really accounts for is that people have decided beforehand what is moral and what isn't before even hearing of Euthyphro dilemma, which only elicits rationalizations by theists.