Can anyone make the teleological argument without mentioning any clearly well known, man made items?

Until about 150 years ago, it was thought that complexity could derive only from even greater complexity. If that were true, then it made sense that the First Cause would be the most complex thing of all --- that's the teleological argument in its basic form. We now know, however, that complexity can arise from simpler origins by a variety of naturally-occuring processes, such as spontaneous symmetry breaking and evolution by natural selection. Furthermore, we now know that the early Universe was utterly simple, and understand many of the physical mechanisms by which it developed without supernatural intervention into the world as we see it today.

The teleological argument now depends on denying this relatively-new understanding of the origins of complexity.

"In the beginning the Univercoelumm was one boundless, indefinable, and unimaginable ocean of Liquid Fire. The most vigorous and ambitious imagination is not capable of forming an adequate conception of the height and depth and length and breadth thereof. There was one vast expanse of liquid substance. It was without bounds - inconceivable - and with qualities and essences incomprehensible. This was the original condition of Matter. It was without forms, for it was but one Form. It had no motions, but it was an eternity of Motion. It was without parts, for it was a Whole. Particles did not exist, but the Whole was as one Particle. There were not suns, but it was one eternal Sun. It had no beginning and it was without end. It had not length, for it was a Vortex of one Eternity. It had not circles, for it was one infinite Circle. It had not disconnected power, but it was the very essence of all Power. Its inconceivable magnitude and constitution were such as not to develop forces,