[jennyp]

Equating God == good is a reification error

Are you seriously implying that good is not an abstraction? Or are you asserting that God is material?

As I said in the rest of the paragraph,

Equating God == good is a reification error. Just like saying God == a supernatural man on a supernatural throne would be an anthropomorphization error, a specific kind of reification error. It's like saying "God is profit and profit is God", or "God is the color blue and the color blue is God", or "God is hurry up and hurry up is God". It's a category error. The Good is a class of actions and attitudes, and God is a supernatural person. They're fundamentally different things. So you can't solve the Euthyphro dilemma that way.

[AndrewC]

As I said in the rest of the paragraph,

That still doesn't answer which one is material. That is, unless you are redefining reification or admit to misusing reification.

re·i·fy   Pronunciation Key  (r-f, r-)
tr.v. re·i·fied, re·i·fy·ing, re·i·fies

To regard or treat (an abstraction) as if it had concrete or material existence.

Equating two abstractions(from your viewpoint) is not reification. From my viewpoint, God is the embodiment and foundation of good. He defines good. But I understand you have to cast about to find good.