What is your view of this: did G-d’s establishment of laws of morality in itself make them good and virtuous, or did G-d establish these laws because they are good and virtuous? I believe the Christian viewpoint is largely the former, whereas the Jewish one is largely the latter; but there may be several intra-religious variations, as well as heresies, associated with this topic.
There are a host of questions that arise from this:
-Is God a being of Laws or Laws are a creation of God.
-If God is a being of Laws, is it possible for him to have made moral laws opposite to what is placed in existence, (For example, Infidelity is good, marriage is not a covenant of God).
-If God cannot work outside of the nature of His existence, does that mean He is not omnipotent, or does omnipotence mean being able to do anything within the nature of God.
-If God can make His own rules for what is ‘morale’ and what is not, does that mean God has neither a good nor evil nature, or does he have both.
Gary John said, “God IS good. Nothing is good that doesn’t come from God…so I’d say both. God establishing a moral makes it good. Also, he established them because they are good”. God established a moral seems to imply God was before all, Yet if a ‘moral’ is ‘good’ because the moral is inherently good (also implying there are immoral and bad/evil laws), does that not seem to state the morality laws were prior to God?
Aquinas seems to associate will as one of the natural attributes of God. To will is assigned the moral laws. He also says the ‘good’ is an essence of God (Q5A3). If one were a cynic, one could say that it is fortuitous for us the essence of God is ‘good’ rather than otherwise.