The argument just doesn't work - it is too easy to play back.
i hear what you are saying, but the difference is one rejected new Divine Revelation which was true and it was God’s will that they believe it, as opposed to new doctrines that were not a result of any new Divine Revelation given in the 16th century, but rather, privately interpreting the Catholic Scriptures differently than what the Church taught and believed from the Apostolic Age. for example, baptism became merely symbolic, done after one was “saved” as an act of obedience. Scripture doesn’t teach this and no one believed it until the 16th century. remember, the Holy Spirit will not lead you to believe one thing in the 1st and 2nd centuries and something 100% opposite in the 16th.