That is provably false. I have had many dialogues with you in which I have used Scripture to support what I believe. It is not propaganda and no different that what any protestant does here.
****We’re not interested in the mythologies of the RCC that Catholics fall for.****
What you call mythologies are doctrines developed over much time and many years by great minds throughout the history of the Church.
Let's take for example the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception which protestants claim was made up of whole cloth in the 19th century. That is was not a doctrine or belief of earlier Christians. Well, let's just look at the very work in which we have been so engrossed.
From page 30, "for this passage has been applied to her by the Church in the office of the Immaculate Conception." Here St. Ligouris is speaking of a passage from Ecclesiasticus, which I realize is a book that protestants reject. The point is that that doctrine was not one which was suddenly proclaimed out of nowhere. It was something the Church had believed and preached for hundreds of years.
It is one thing to reject the Church, reject her authority and another altogether to be dishonest about her and her members.
****Other than CatholicChristian myth, hearsay, and doctrine made from whole cloth or pagan influences....
Gee, with the slight adjustments I made, that could come from an atheist.
It really is tiresome to see the same falsehoods repeated over and over. I guess that is what one must resort to when faced with the fact that the Church is as old as Christianity itself and that what you claim as "hearsay" are actually the written testimonies of men who lived much closer to the beginning than anyone here.
You do realize don't you that there are groups of people who claim Christianity is nothing more than a myth, who reject that the NT is Scripture and claim what is written is nothing more than hearsay? Why there are groups who discount the whole story of Paul as being impossible!
When attempts are made to inject scripture by Catholics, proofs of error are swift and complete by those who haven’t fallen under the heretical propaganda of the CC.
A matter of one's opinion of what Scripture means, not proofs of error. What makes your interpretation more valid or sure than anothers? I am a believer, I read Scripture, I claim guidance by the Holy Spirit. What gives you the right to dispute that and claim I am wrong and you are right? Only yourself, not God and not Scripture.
Yes they do and lets look at one reason.
Ecclesiasticus 3:30 Water will quench a flaming fire; and alms maketh an atonement for sins.
Alms make atonement for sin?
Colossians 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Christ paid for all our sins, nailing them to the cross. With that kind of error contained in Ecclesiasitcus it becomes obvious that it was not inspired by God and no relevance should be given any part of it. Any reference to it for dogma, doctrine or inspiration should be disgarded.
>> The point is that that doctrine was not one which was suddenly proclaimed out of nowhere.<<
No, the point is that the doctrine was derived from something that was not inspired by God and therefore not to be considered. Using something other than writings that we know were inspired by God are the folly of the CC no matter how long they have done it. Error based on error is no way to build on a “solid Rock” which is Christ.
>> It is one thing to reject the Church, reject her authority and another altogether to be dishonest about her and her members.<<
Nothing dishonest was said. Given the proven errors in books the CC uses for doctrine it can only be said that those books were written from mans hearsay, fantasies, or myths.
>> What gives you the right to dispute that and claim I am wrong and you are right?<<
Contradictions with other portions of scripture.