Brian,
I'll refute your arguments again if you wish, but I think we've covered these points in the
other thread. It is evident that you don't understand what Clark meant by his Axiom, and you are imposing your own "machinery" onto Clark's system - despite clear statements of Clark that the Axiom's meaning includes "the Word of God is true" and the Bible is the 66 books of the Bible and the verses therein. Clark returns to the Westminster Confession of Faith as the basis for his epistemology, so to understand Clark, look to the WCF. And to dispute Clark, you will have to dispute the WCF.
You have also failed to acknowledge the difference between temporal and logical order. I have agreed there is an a prior knowledge required to derive knowledge with Scripturalism, but this is not the logical priority of knowledge. To justify knowledge, the Axiom is the axiom. Logical and temporal priority are not the same thing.
Scripturalism is very simple and easy to understand. The only way to one can really undermine it is by misunderstanding the fundamental meaning of Clark's Axiom and views of knowledge.
So if you want to rehash this again Brian, we can do that. But I think you will find that the refutation is just the same, and it's
the same one Clark gave to Mavrodes, and that he easily demolished.
I was hoping we'd get past your misunderstanding, at least for the sake of argument, so we could get to more fundamental issues regarding Scripturalism and Christian epistemology.