Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism

[Pizza]

Anyone that calls this mere assertion only does so because they do not like the result and not any flaw in the demonstration.

The flaw is this kind of reasoning rests on ill defined, unsupported, false analogy and empty metaphor because how can an unmoving, immaterial thing "bear some remote analogy to" a pool player, or to anything with "intention" or to anything we've seen in this universe at all. Anthropomorphism of "supreme being" will always be undefined garage and empty rhetorical posturing. This isn't even to mention the ill defined notion of "directed actions," and "directed toward specific determined ends." What? That things are order in such a way that things the produce effects that they produce and not others? This supports a thinking thing making things just so how? We could say the thinking producing order is the human mind and if a human mind can't create order because of unlikelihood or paradoxes then a non-human cannot for the same reasons.
If anything we could just use a formal cause as a final cause: Math and Logic produces the world just so and they are outside minds.