[laughs hysterically]
Even if all you say after "I think not" were true, I don't see how it touches on my contention about (for brevity less than accuracy) "Zero-sum theology".
In fact, it seems to me to support my suggestion.
with insets of foreign language, because of course that foreign language is much more holy,
You think that moves the ball? I think Latin and Greek have a certain dignity, yeah, but I think it almost meaningless to suggest that one language is holier than another -- except that we students of Hebrew used to razz the head of the NT department because Paul said that Jesus spoke to him "te Hebraidi dialekto" which, we argued, meant that they speak Hebrew in Heaven. (I don't think he was persuaded...)
through some secret orally handed down “truths” Same question here. The only secrecy involved is that of the purloined letter. If you want to play the theology game, at which I am a rank beginner, you have to steep yourself in prayer,worship, scripture, theologians,and philosophers. It is a blessing that the body has many different members with different functions. Not everyone has the gifts to play theology in the majors, nor should they. The body needs all the members.
But here, to allege "secret orally handed down" just sets up another straw man. These things were not done in a corner.
As far as I can see your post confirms rather than refutes the contention with which you disagree, with the overstating of "more holy language" and the "secret orally handed down" giving examples of truth-obscuring, either/or thought.
Straw man? If it’s a straw man then find for me from scripture the bodily assumption of Mary. Or for that matter from the writings of anyone prior to 200AD. It surely must have been “secret orally handed down” prior to that.