A simple test for these “proofs” you give for RCC Mariolatry, priests, celibacy, etc., is the book of Acts. You don’t find Mariolatry, priests, etc., things that identify the RCC, there. You quoted from the gospels and the epistles, so do the cults to allegedly “prove” their beliefs and pracitices, the book of Acts, however, is where the rubber meets the road. The book of Acts is where we should see what we claim in the gospels and epistles played out in real time.
RCC Mariolatry, for instance, is not in the book of Acts. Anybody with half a brain can see that. With all the emphasis Romanists place on Mary, we should see it pop up somewhere in Acts… if it were a true belief held by the Apostles. The same with all these other things the RCC is known for.
Since evidence for the RCC is not there, it follows that the RCC practices and beliefs they are known for everywhere are products of compromise with the pagan world, taking many years to evolve. In the case of such things as rosary beads centuries. The book of Acts full name is, of course, “The Acts of the Apostles.” Anybody can claim apostolicity for their particular practices and beliefs, but can they find it in the Acts of the Apostles? Acts renders RCC “Apostolic” claims bogus.
Protestantism seeks to limit the potential sources of Revealed Truth to a few sources that can be manipulated to meet their theology absent any other context or conflicting proof. When the entire Sacred Deposit of Faith is not rejected, and with the corroboration of Natural Revelation, the truth of Catholic teaching shines brilliantly.
Your efforts here will not sway Catholics away from the Church and we do not need your explanations and rationalizations. In other words these incessant posts are meaningless.
Peace be with you
So, now you’re going from “scripture alone” to “Book of Acts alone”. Could you tell me where “scripture alone” is found in the Bible? I don’t think you can, because it is nothing more than a tradition of (Protestant) men.