Anthony,
If you feel I have mischaracterized something please elaborate. I quoted two statements about words right next to each other above. If you want to explain to me how you resolve the two then I'm all eyes. Perhaps it's an apparent contradiction.
Perhaps it appears that way to you. But two people making two different statements at two different times in two different posts are hardly grounds for a real contradiction. I think you should first try to understand them one at a time first. And then if you still can't resolve it, explain what the contradiction appears to be. Frankly, I don't see any contradiction, so you'll have to spell it out since this is your claim.
Now your impugning my motives when I answered questions as best I could - and also being honest about what I can answer with confidence and those things which I'm uncertain about. Do you think being open about limits to what I can say is a sign of being disingenuous? I don't recall your giving a solution.You also previously could not answer how a person becomes aware of a thing in guarding against a question I had about learning how to use words in sentences, etc.
Well what it seems to your is different than what I mean. I've never devalued words, grammar, or syntax. That's another mis characterization.It seems in one conversation you want to devalue words, grammar, and syntax but in another you want to insist they are used in a very precise way to convey meaning.
I understand that your not "getting" what I'm saying. But these kinds of uncharitable and unwarranted generalizations against Scripturalism are not going to help you understand it. I think you are arguing from a gut level and not really trying to understand exactly what I've been saying. You think things don't "resonate" with Scripture, or things "seem" to be this way or that. These are not strong arguments. You need to be more specific and support your gut reaction with real substance.