Has William Lane Craig and his ilk ever addressed Euthyphro?

[Underseer]

WLC: "It's good when God kills babies because they go straight to heaven, see?"

Does that mean that abortion and infanticide are good things?

WLC: "Oh no, that's a taking of innocent life. That's forbidden outright by God."

So to sum up: When people kill babies, that's bad. When God kills babies, that's different.

Yeah, pretty much. One of the predictions of Euthyphro dilemma is that it results in an extreme form of moral relativism in which morality is completely arbitrary. Things are not good or bad based on what is done, but based on who does it or who orders it.

Anyway, if I can interject on the rest of the conversation, I have my own formulation of Euthyphro that I think makes it easier to spot the shell game they play with their "false dichotomy" argument.

Me: You can't get morality from an authority. How do you know the authority is moral unless you develop a definition of morality that is independent of the authority? But the moment you do that, the definition is the source of your morality, not the authority.

Them: False dichotomy! What if the source of morals is god's nature?

Me: Then all you did was change what you are claiming as the authority, and we still have the same dilemma. Now instead of the authority being god, the authority is god's nature. How do you know that god's nature is good unless you develop a definition of morality that is independent of god's nature? But the moment you do that, the definition is the source of your morality, not god's nature. All you did was play a shell game with what you are claiming as the authority that is the source of your morality.​

Anyway, what do you think about phrasing it this way? Does it make it easier to point out the shell game they play with their various "third options"?