The Coyne-Mayr-Lamberth teleonomic argument alone affirms God as vacuous! I t contend that as science finds no divine intent, then He'd lack all referents as the Grand Miracle Monger and so forth and thus cannot be Himself and thus cannot exist, affirming ignosticism.
No theist can overcome the teleonomic and its application for ignosticism. Science finds no intent so that with John Hick to argue for his epistemic argument that He deceives us with ambiguous evidence for His existence, so as not to overwhelm our free wills, cannot gainsay that exposing Him thus as nebulous.
To content nevertheless that He does have intent is no more than Lamberth's new Omphalos argument that He deceives us with apparent mechanism.
Theists,no matter in what direction they turn, face the reality that they lose all arguments as in the end, He is indeed vacuous!