The way you word ideas always makes my brain jerk sideways. Kind of like that.
I am guessing your association with the word dogma is positive and useful. Mine has some of that but not in general. I find religious dogma stagnant, which hides false doctrine and kills God’s inspiration. So we start off on different ends of probably the same stick.
You want scientists to examine their wording. I believe they generally choose the most appropriate words and generally try to be specific (I do like how physics words match biblical concepts). Old philosophy tried to do the same. However, that never meant meanings were always understood. Communication is definitely the key. Today’s religious writers are not that way. Too many cannot use the rules of logic. Too many prefer propaganda to actual proofs. Too many redefine meaning to fit a particular theology so understanding is confused.
I want the Bible to be real. I want the Genesis texts to show divine inspiration. Too many interpretations of these texts lack reason to believe. I want a reason to believe. I want a reason that will jerk the brains of atheists and believers alike.