Intelligence implies a standard. A human being who reasons in an anti-social way is considered stupid. But are they? If nature, or God, does not have intentions and is just a force or power then if it has set no standard then stupid is not real. It is just a social construct. What happens is some people in power decide what you should do and call you stupid if you disagree with them.
Are the stupid really so bad when say if most people were above average clever, we might have blown the world to bits decades ago? You have to deny how big and cosmic the picture is and pretend you know enough about the consequences and ignore far-reaching consequences in order to call somebody or their idea stupid.
Smart people are too good at rationalising. They find clever ways to justify insane ideas. If you are clever, you find ways to make the incoherent look sensible. It is not true at all that only stupid people fall for cults and religions. A stupid person could walk away faster from a religious charlatan than a smart one might.
Nothing amazing is just the product of intelligence. A lot of it is luck. An above-average intelligent person can be wrong.
So the standard is a matter of opinion. Nothing else.
That will not do for most of us. We want a standard.
Now nature or God won’t directly tell us what the standard is. It is left to people to do that. This raises red flags. Faith in God is really trusting in those who claim to have revelations from God or to think accurately about him. Devotion to somebody’s vision of God is not devotion to God. Atheism is a noble thing when it actively avoids such dishonesty.
Intelligence is not just human. Many creatures show some degree of it. Even creatures that seem to don't even know they exist. And what about super-computers? Artificial Intelligence AI?
It has been argued by some that the term Artificial Intelligence AI has to go. They say there is no intelligence except human intelligence and all we are doing is setting up devices to mimic our smart minds. So the intelligence remains ours. You look at a beautifully written lucid essay but it is not the masterpiece. The mind that created it is. Yet we will pay lip service to that mind, that person. We want the beautiful object. We value what the person accomplished, not the person. Generally the person lets us do this by taking our awards and our thanks and our praise. In short, we feign value for the person. In fact it is more more than what they produce than them. AI? We already treat the most gifted among us as if that is all they are!
Jesus held that demons had the intelligence to make a person unduly influenced by them - obsession. Such a person may think their ideas are from themselves and not know their true source. He held the demons can actually take over a person. He claimed to break this takeover, this possession, by exorcising. We can be sure that if demons can tamper with intelligence they can do that whether the intelligence is AI or human. Barking religionists are already arguing that AI systems are sometimes demonically possessed. Religion says God can plant ideas in you whether you see it or not. These ideas make it impossible to know if human intelligence is ever human.
Showing that it would take intelligence to bring all from nothing and organise would still not prove there is a God. Just say its an intelligence and leave it there. Don't multiply explanations unnecessarily.