Holy Tradition

[BluhdoftheLamb]

Well, I ignored it because it is one of your usual "facts" that are not backed up by anything other than you asserting that they are.

In this case, specifically: "The Christian message is exactly the opposite: all people can freely go to our Great High Priest, and our Salvation depends on Him alone."

You can find references to bishops (and thus, a clearly established hierarchy) even in New Testament scriptures such as Acts, Titus, 1. Peter, and 1. Timothy. Sure, that was not yet the elaborate, stratified clergy that was to come, but you can tell where this was going.

By the time of the Apostolic Fathers, Christianity had already ceased to be an egalitarian movement, with bishops calling the shots and individual communities being subservient to a Metropolitan bishop.

And yet this in no way conflicts with my statement, that all people can freely go to our Great High Priest, and our Salvation depends on Him alone.

I do realize that the Church becoming "the Church of the Bishops rather than the Church of the Apostles" as one ECF put it confuses this issue. Especially to a legitimate outsider sincerely seeking God, I think it would've very much seemed like one must go through the Bishop to get to God according to Christianity, and especially so during the whole time period from 325 - 1054. Even moreso after 1054, in "the Church of the West." Back to that loose cliche, 'living in the dark ages.' I trust you understand this is what Tyndale was all about, as well as the Lollards, and the eventual protestant reformation.

As far as the oft repeated goad "your claim not backed up by anything," you do realize I could give you multiple Scriptures for every point I've ever made, right? That as a new Christian I would've typed those and nothing else? We've both seen posts like that, and how you respond. It took me a very long time to be even willing to put things in my own words, and factually you do appreciate it. You shouldn't be pretending otherwise. If there's a specific point of doctrine you wish to challenge, pointing to practice during the dark ages is not a winning argument. Asking for Scripture supporting coming out of the Dark Ages is legitimate.

On this point of Doctrine, the most direct Scripture off the top of my head right now is (1 Tim 2:5) "For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus"

And no I don't really care if Paul wrote it or not. The Church accepted the concept, which is CENTRAL to every aspect of the Faith, and absolutely ties in to the very beginnings of Judaism seen here:

(Deu 18:18) "I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee." It is Moses being spoken of there. The parallel (and contrast) between Moses (law) and Christ (Grace) applies to every flavor of Christianity, and is accepted across the board. And nobody before Moses can in any way be thought of as Judaism, which is a different way of thinking from what linguistic studies teach you. "The law came by Moses," and that law is Judaism.