traderdrew writes:
However, I.D. has given me some possible insights into the intentions of our creator.
The problem here is that you assume that there is a designer to have intentions. This is putting the cart before the pony.
Rather than say "my hypothesis is that there is a designer; now I shall attempt to falsify my hypothesis" you appear to be saying "I assume my hypothesis of a designer existing is correct and now I go on to hypothesise as to it's intentions".
That is not a rational way to gather information. It's like assuming someone is guilty and then assigning the motivations she must have had to commit the crime.
In the words of the late 20th century poet philosopher Neil Tennet
"Think about it seriously; you know it makes sense".