Gaps in theistic arguments. Secular theism vs religious theism

[Angrboda]

Final cause is always at play because there are no undirected actions;… I supported this statement earlier in the post by referring to an empirically verifiable fact. That fact is this: barring any impeding circumstances, particular efficient causes always produce the same specific ends. It is not necessary to show that it is possible to be otherwise, since this is not speculation, but an observation of how things work in reality.

It would seem that you are burying the problem of induction underneath a metaphysical assumption here. The alleged fact isn't empirically verifiable because the problem of induction greets you at its root. What's left seems little more than metaphysical uniformitarianism, which could equally as well be lifted from this context to undermine the whole basis of belief in final causes. At least that's how it appears to me. Granted I don't know much about Aristotle and Aquinas, but I don't see how this assertion is justified.