I didn't twist it at all, you just picked a poorly thought out metaphor. You picked a metaphor that was perfect for my position but absolutely worthless for yours.
I've read what you wrote. I'm repeating myself because that is my position and nothing you've put forth has given me even the slightest reason to change it. Effectively you have posted not a word, at least not a word that had any ability to convince or persuade.
Again, I think you just don't understand the comparison. When the fathers wrote about the Creeds, it would be line by line. An entire book. But yet, there was that creed, nonetheless. A succinct statement of the Faith. And if you'll recall, the point of that was the suspicion that much could be written about the Faith, so much could be written about a scientific field. And yet in science, people must be clear about what they mean. There is an efficiency in the formulas, and a clarity of definition, if there is. But evolution remain a vague superstition by comparison, as you yourself have demonstrated. Is it science?