God's wants/needs are unknown and unknowable.

======== Argument 1 ======== "wants/needs are what God *seeks to obtain*, not what he *has already obtained*" So he agrees that wants/needs are things that we seek to obtain. (Premise I) He also agrees that God is omnipotent and omniscient. (Premise II) Thus Conclusion (III) follows. If we seek to obtain our wants/needs and God knows and has the power to obtain all of his wants/needs, then by definition, he obtains them. I can't say that I want X and, when I could obtain X, I instead forego it for Y. I instead would (by the definition) want Y. Humans don't obtain their every want and need because we do not have the knowledge nor power to. God, however, has both the knowledge and power to achieve any possible want and need. However, PRO uses an example of a maze: "if I am in a maze, according to Con's syllogism I can surmise that God might have placed me in the maze, but I cannot use that fact to determine if God currently wants me to turn left or right." As I stated, we can determine Gods wants/needs from the current state of affairs. In the given example, we can know that God wants PRO to be in a maze. Once PRO turns left or right, we then know that God wanted him to turn left or right. ======== Argument 2 ======== "a bird starts from a tree limb. If a down feather drops from the bird at that moment, the dropping feather is not necessarily what God wanted, it may simply be a random event that God cared nothing about." A. We have some opinion on everything we know. I want to win this debate. I want to pass my final exam. I want not to go to school tomorrow. Once I have knowledge of something, I cannot have complete indifference towards it. For example, if I know that a tree is about to fall in a forest with noone around to hear it, I can't be completely indifferent as to whether it makes a sound. My desire to see a common cliche disproved might outweigh my desire to continue to use the cliche or vice versa. Knowing that the tree will fall in the forest with noone around to hear it, I can't be indifferent of whether it makes a sound. Indifference only comes from a lack of knowledge. Because God is omniscient, he either wants X or wants Y in every scenario. As per Conclusion III, these wants are always fulfilled, thus we can conclude that if a feather drops from a bird as it starts from a tree limb, that God wanted it to be so. B. As per Premise IV, God controls the universe. Therefore, every action within said universe is necessarily dictated by God. We can then conclude that is impossible for a feather to drop from a bird as it starts from a tree limb, unless God wills it to be so. If the feather does not fall from the starting bird, we can then know that God willed that it was so. ======= Conclusion ======= "In summation, Con is incorrect. The current state of the universe does not allow us to know God's wants/needs, nor even necessarily what he wanted or needed. Thus my position still stands, God's wants/needs are unknown and unknowable." Corrected: In summation, Pro is incorrect. The current state of the universe not only allows us to know God's wants/needs, but also (knowing history) what he wanted or needed. Thus my position still stands, God's wants/needs are known and knowable."