I have no problem believing He made DNA to be something that changes with circumstance and time. I notice that even though "evolutionism" was used before creationists coined the phrase, that in our time it is largely a response. When evolutionists started calling the belief in creation to be "creationism" that those Christians and Jews who believe in a creator called what SOME evolutionists teach (in response) "evolutionism".
That's symmetrical. There is a huge difference between evolution and "evolutionism", just as there is a huge difference between creation and "creationism."
For example, though NOT a "creationist", Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin once said, “It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”
That quote has been widely twisted to mean that scientists can't accept the divine acting in this world. But that is obviously false, since the many, many scientists who are devout Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. recognize the fact of God, while accepting that science is unable to include the supernatural in its workings. Science can't say anything at all about God, but scientists can.
So it is not that the possibility is not an equally legitimate position to assume, it is that Atheists CANNOT allow for consideration of the data in light of "God" or primordial intelligence.
They can, and occassionally do. However, it is like a creationist opening himself to the possibility that his interpretation of scripture might not be correct. It's slippery slope, because once you open yourself to the truth regardless of where it goes, you don't know where you'll end up, except with the truth. So such atheists and creationists quite often become theists and evolutionists.
heir unfounded beliefs (see the two demarcations above) are equally a faith system...equally a philosophical point of reference...hence an -ism...
Yes. If you accept evolution as a given ideology that cannot be questioned, then you don't understand evolution at all. Likewise, if you accept a particular interpretation of the Bible as a given ideology that cannot be questioned, then you don't understand creation at all. The good news is that you don't have to understand creation in order to be saved.
But notice that scientists are constantly questioning evolution. Indeed, major revisions to Darwin's theory have been made precisely because we constantly question it. Similarly, our understanding of creation, if it is correct, will thrive when questioned critically.
