“That doesn’t follow, my friend. Lutheranism WAS one of the protesting groups.”
But according to your logic that doesn’t matter, my friend: “And ‘methodists’ didn’t even exist during the protest and the reformation.” Well, none of the Lutherans today existed then either, right?
“Methodists weren’t one of the protesting groups....ever.”
And ELCA is? The ELCA came about in 1988. Yes, it’s roots are older, but the ELCA certainly didn’t exist in 1520 or even 1600 or even in 1700 or even 1800 or even in 1900. DO you now see the problem with your logic.
“Didn’t arise because of it, didn’t continue because of it.”
And the ELCA didn’t “arise” because of it either, and “didn’t continue because of it” either but the ELCA is still Protestant.
“And you are a believer in sola fide, sola gratia, solus Christus, and soli deo Gloria.”
I don’t believe in sola fide. You can keep falsely claiming I am, but I’m not and I never will be. I have mentioned this more than once, but you keep making that false claim. Protestants apparently don’t value intellectual honesty.
“4/5th of the reformer’s message.”
Wow, you are struggling to make a sensible argument, aren’t you?
“You don’t like “sola scriptura”, but even you hold scripture in extremely high regard.”
I do hold scripture in high regard. I don’t hold heresies like sola fide or sola scriptura in high regard.
Yes, Vlad, the ELCA has the magic word “Lutheran” in their name.
So far as ‘sola fide’ is concerned, you have already given assent to the idea that Catholics must be believers. It is not possible to be a Catholic and be an unbeliever is it?