Ambiguity, Ancient Semantics, and Faith*.

While allowing for polysemy, scholars seem mostly averse to ambiguity, as in the π...στις Xριστo... debate; but, it would seem,without engaging with ancient semantic theory. There the model of 'naming' and so of evoking an otherwise unspecified mental impression, predominates. Meaning is taken to lie in the mind, not in the word or words that are hoped to evoke it, as is also shown in ancient discussions of metaphor, allegory, and paraphrase. Connotations of individual words are rarely distinguished, rarely if ever purged. We are not justified in expecting verbal precision where our ancient authors will neither have attempted it nor will their hearers have expected it; nor, indeed, domodern psycholinguists appear to find space for it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]