Does the (Christian) God Exist?

[Pritsapidoulas]

Chill out. Who cares.

If you don't care, why did you post?

You can't confirm it or reject it. [...]

Many who've posted here would dispute that.

First foul kiddo.

But in truth, I didn't know I had to ask YOU if I am allowed to post or not, or even express my view. What are you? Some gospel-reading, choir-boy happy christian who got offended? Are you sad that your belief system brings out more questions that answers? No wonder christians are so devided....

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

If you don't care, why did you post?

Many who've posted here would dispute that.

First foul kiddo.

But in truth, I didn't know I had to ask YOU if I am allowed to post or not, or even express my view. What are you? Some gospel-reading, choir-boy happy christian who got offended? Are you sad that your belief system brings out more questions that answers? No wonder christians are so devided....

Do you have to make fallacies for no reason?

[Pritsapidoulas]

Chill out. Who cares. You can't confirm it or reject it. If his son still lived..... Wait.

Eh, I don't think he exist but I don't know, and I really don't care to know.

Exactly.

[Pritsapidoulas]

First foul kiddo.

But in truth, I didn't know I had to ask YOU if I am allowed to post or not, or even express my view. What are you? Some gospel-reading, choir-boy happy christian who got offended? Are you sad that your belief system brings out more questions that answers? No wonder christians are so devided....

Do you have to make fallacies for no reason?

No, but you saw his/her attitude. Anyway.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Do you have to make fallacies for no reason?

No, but you saw his/her attitude. Anyway.

I agree, it was a flawed line of thought.

But I mean, that doesn't make the person an offended Christian.

[Conscentia]

If you don't care, why did you post?

Many who've posted here would dispute that.

First foul kiddo.

But in truth, I didn't know I had to ask YOU if I am allowed to post or not, or even express my view. What are you? Some gospel-reading, choir-boy happy christian who got offended? Are you sad that your belief system brings out more questions that answers? No wonder christians are so devided....

If you didn't care you wouldn't care about expressing an opinion, hence the question.

I'm not a Christian. That's obvious from my signature.

[Conscentia]

No, but you saw his/her attitude. Anyway.

I agree, it was a flawed line of thought.
But I mean, that doesn't make the person an offended Christian.

What was a flawed line of thought?

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

I agree, it was a flawed line of thought.
But I mean, that doesn't make the person an offended Christian.

What was a flawed line of thought?

A person can claim they do not care and post, such as I who state that I care less in the end, heck I only participate because I like a good debate, and I am an atheist so I have relevance to the topic imo, just because I really don't care, doesn't mean I should not be posting in it.

[Shaggai]

Okay, so it could be interpreted that he did command them not to, but it seems more like a warning than an order to me. That's just me though.

One would think that even a suggestion from the being who created you would be taken seriously.

Well, sure, taking it seriously is a good idea. But disobeying a suggestion, or doing something in spite of a warning, wouldn't be a sin. Just stupidity.

[Conscentia]

What was a flawed line of thought?

A person can claim they do not care and post, such as I who state that I care less in the end, heck I only participate because I like a good debate, and I am an atheist so I have relevance to the topic imo, just because I really don't care, doesn't mean I should not be posting in it.

I never claimed they were not allowed. What's with the assumptions?
Generally people who don't care about a topic simply scroll past the thread.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

A person can claim they do not care and post, such as I who state that I care less in the end, heck I only participate because I like a good debate, and I am an atheist so I have relevance to the topic imo, just because I really don't care, doesn't mean I should not be posting in it.

I never claimed they were not allowed. What's with the assumptions?
Generally people who don't care about a topic simply scroll past the thread.

Yeah but your post said rather condescending to me.

[Conscentia]

Do you have to make fallacies for no reason?

No, but you saw his/her attitude. Anyway.

What attitude?
What is with these strange assumptions?

This is a debate forum. Questions are to be expected, and are not a sign of malicious attitude.

[Distruzio]

Ahhh.... time available to respond. Again, I'm sorry for my inactivity but christmas volume at work and christmas itself took up a lot of my time.

Because it's the one that makes me less of a dick. Without Christianity, I'd be intolerable.

Then there's something wrong with you If the only thing stopping you from being a horrible person is bronze-age mythology.
But, meh, If that's what it takes...
*shrugs*

I'll never claim otherwise, Dy.

Because it's the one that makes me less of a dick. Without Christianity, I'd be intolerable.

This is my blanket. There are many like it but this one is mine.

How do you know that?

I say this as an ex devout, on my knees morning, noon and night christian who believed that same thing.

Well, it was my education in the theology of Christianity and my agreement with that theology that changed me. Before, I considered myself a superior victim. If you and I didn't get along it was your fault - not mine. My romantic relationships suffered because I made demands instead of requests. The perversity in my mind (without the chosen limitations placed by Christian morality) would have seen me in jail - all women were sexual objects and fuck them if they rejected that (I liked violent porn because, in my mind, the women deserved it and I treated them thus; my bigotry included everyone; I lied; I cheated; I stole; and I believed the State was supreme). Religion, Christianity changed that. I realized that sin was the violation of relationship - that I had been violating relationship; that I was responsible for my failures.

I was intolerable. I couldn't even tolerate myself and I yet struggle to address the destruction such behavior had on others and myself.

Because it's the one that makes me less of a dick. Without Christianity, I'd be intolerable.

This is my blanket. There are many like it but this one is mine.

So... circular logic?

"I need Christianity because I'd be a dick without it and I'd be a dick without it because I need Christianity..."

Doesn't sound like you're being entirely truthful about this and are only trying to affirm your own beliefs by looking for convenient excuses.

What is it with you and accusing anyone with whom you disagree of lying, Mav?

But to address your actual question, you must be confused about what circular logic is and how to apply it because it most certainly does not here apply.

I've always believed. I simply used to be a misotheist. I hated God for not treating me like the special snowflake I was. Fuck him for giving me to a prostitute. Fuck him for making me shorter than average. Fuck him for daring to let me make something out of the mess of my life instead of doing that shit for me. I coulda been lazy but nooooo. He's the asshole.

Seriously. I was a misotheist. I hated that fucker and all his fuckery and used the exact same arguments repeated in this thread.



Oh I believe in both.... sometimes. I doubt. Quite a bit, actually. I'm simply not so enamored by my own self-righteousness as to proclaim that the atheist doesn't have a point with his question.

The fact is that I believe that the atheist, in his disbelief, has half of the Truth that Jesus is correct - the world is a shitty place sometimes and shit sucks all the time. I'd much rather a theological or christological discussion with an atheist than a Protestant because then there are no rose tinted glasses to deal with.

Okay, so you actually believe. But that still keeps my earlier question intact that I love so much: why this god? Why not Allah? Or Yahweh? Why is this safety blanket the true blanket?

This God is the only God that changed me. What does that statement imply to you? How could I make that claim unless I had considered, and tried, other faiths? And note that I've never once (not in any single conversation in my 6 years on nationstates) claimed an objective opinion that the Christian God is your truth as much as my own.

Hardly. Very much hardly. As in.... laughably hardly.

Mhm. Keep telling yourself that.

Meanwhile I'll wait for an actual counter-argument.

Oh I have on many many many many occasions.

Protestantism is NOT Christianity. Not theologically nor practically. Here, I'll quote the most important bit for you here:

Don't forget the order of events here: Jesus was born; Jesus died; Jesus resurrected; Jesus ascended; the Church was created; the Apostles evangelized; the Church was spread; the Church was persecuted; Rome was converted to the Way (Christianity didn't yet exist - the Way was its predecessor - its foundation); Constantine ordered the Church to establish a codified doctrine detailing the faith of the Way; Christianity was created; the Church addressed heresies; Christological and theological arguments established and solidified Christian thought on the nature of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and humanity; the Bible was organized and released in its final form; Rome and Constantinople excommunicated one another; Luther's heresy; new Protestant bible organized and released; King of England nationalizes the Church in England in political protest of Roman authority; etc etc etc.

All of this happened within (give or take) a thousand years. Jesus didn't hand the Apostles the Bible and tell them to spread his Word. The Apostles and Disciples didn't stand on corners and thump their bibles at passersby. The Bible didn't exist. The printing press was still 1400+ years away. Furthermore, literacy did not reach levels to which the average person could read the Bible that didn't exist until the 20th century in the Occident alone and still hasn't made significant headway into the rest of the world.

If the Bible existed WELL after Christianity existed, then how could your appeal to sola scriptura hold any value at all?

It doesn't.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Ahhh.... time available to respond. Again, I'm sorry for my inactivity but christmas volume at work and christmas itself took up a lot of my time.

Then there's something wrong with you If the only thing stopping you from being a horrible person is bronze-age mythology.
But, meh, If that's what it takes...
*shrugs*

I'll never claim otherwise, Dy.

How do you know that?

I say this as an ex devout, on my knees morning, noon and night christian who believed that same thing.

Well, it was my education in the theology of Christianity and my agreement with that theology that changed me. Before, I considered myself a superior victim. If you and I didn't get along it was your fault - not mine. My romantic relationships suffered because I made demands instead of requests. The perversity in my mind (without the chosen limitations placed by Christian morality) would have seen me in jail - all women were sexual objects and fuck them if they rejected that (I liked violent porn because, in my mind, the women deserved it and I treated them thus; my bigotry included everyone; I lied; I cheated; I stole; and I believed the State was supreme). Religion, Christianity changed that. I realized that sin was the violation of relationship - that I had been violating relationship; that I was responsible for my failures.

I was intolerable. I couldn't even tolerate myself and I yet struggle to address the destruction such behavior had on others and myself.

So... circular logic?

"I need Christianity because I'd be a dick without it and I'd be a dick without it because I need Christianity..."

Doesn't sound like you're being entirely truthful about this and are only trying to affirm your own beliefs by looking for convenient excuses.

What is it with you and accusing anyone with whom you disagree of lying, Mav?

But to address your actual question, you must be confused about what circular logic is and how to apply it because it most certainly does not here apply.

Okay, so you actually believe. But that still keeps my earlier question intact that I love so much: why this god? Why not Allah? Or Yahweh? Why is this safety blanket the true blanket?

This God is the only God that changed me. What does that statement imply to you? How could I make that claim unless I had considered, and tried, other faiths? And note that I've never once (not in any single conversation in my 6 years on nationstates) claimed an objective opinion that the Christian God is your truth as much as my own.

Mhm. Keep telling yourself that.

Meanwhile I'll wait for an actual counter-argument.

Oh I have on many many many many occasions.

Protestantism is NOT Christianity. Not theologically nor practically. Here, I'll quote the most important bit for you here:

Don't forget the order of events here: Jesus was born; Jesus died; Jesus resurrected; Jesus ascended; the Church was created; the Apostles evangelized; the Church was spread; the Church was persecuted; Rome was converted to the Way (Christianity didn't yet exist - the Way was its predecessor - its foundation); Constantine ordered the Church to establish a codified doctrine detailing the faith of the Way; Christianity was created; the Church addressed heresies; Christological and theological arguments established and solidified Christian thought on the nature of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and humanity; the Bible was organized and released in its final form; Rome and Constantinople excommunicated one another; Luther's heresy; new Protestant bible organized and released; King of England nationalizes the Church in England in political protest of Roman authority; etc etc etc.

All of this happened within (give or take) a thousand years. Jesus didn't hand the Apostles the Bible and tell them to spread his Word. The Apostles and Disciples didn't stand on corners and thump their bibles at passersby. The Bible didn't exist. The printing press was still 1400+ years away. Furthermore, literacy did not reach levels to which the average person could read the Bible that didn't exist until the 20th century in the Occident alone and still hasn't made significant headway into the rest of the world.

If the Bible existed WELL after Christianity existed, then how could your appeal to sola scriptura hold any value at all?

It doesn't.

Sounds like you were just a rotten dick before hand, I'm glad that you changed though.

[Conscentia]

Well, it was my education in the theology of Christianity and my agreement with that theology that changed me. Before, I considered myself a superior victim. If you and I didn't get along it was your fault - not mine. My romantic relationships suffered because I made demands instead of requests. The perversity in my mind (without the chosen limitations placed by Christian morality) would have seen me in jail - all women were sexual objects and fuck them if they rejected that (I liked violent porn because, in my mind, the women deserved it and I treated them thus; my bigotry included everyone; I lied; I cheated; I stole; and I believed the State was supreme). Religion, Christianity changed that. I realized that sin was the violation of relationship - that I had been violating relationship; that I was responsible for my failures.

I was intolerable. I couldn't even tolerate myself and I yet struggle to address the destruction such behavior had on others and myself.

Christianity may have motivated the change but it is you who changed that. The capacity for change was already present.

[Distruzio]

I'll spoiler this to avoid building the Mighty Quote-Pyramid of Doom. Hope you don't mind...

Of course not/

So, what is it to me? Well, two things:

Firstly, I admit to feeling a bit odd around someone who's openly Christian. As you said, a comfort blanket is for children, so how do I deal with adults who need one?

You misunderstand. I'm saying that humanity is the child. But to answer your question, every single person on the planet possesses a comfort blanket. The object merely changes. Sometimes its a song (nostalgia), a person (a spouse), a place (your bed), etc etc. This is sociology, my friend. It isn't theology.

Worse, how can I trust the judgment of someone who believes, sometimes quite fervently, in what I, as a Scientist, considers fairy tales? To me, it's just the same as if I met an adult who claimed that Hogwarts was real and that Harry Potter had cast spells on him.

That would depend upon what you consider a valid observation truth. For Christianity, logic (as in the discipline) is the proof. We verify the existence of God in that manner. His existence isn't physically relevant (as in a guy in the sky). We elevate Jesus to godhood because he showed us the Way. His is God because even the Jews recognized the reality of God - as relationship. Only the bibliolotrous Protestants and atheists adhere to a perception of God as this almighty grandfather in the sky that speaks to folk. Christians see the true nature of God. Everything in the Bible (even the Old Testament) points to this when viewed through the lens the Church provides. God is real to us because we see Him as the ultimate meaning of life - relationship - and we use that ultimate truth in order to better ameliorate the mcdickery and mcjudgery that is so pervasive - even among Christians.

For those of us most fervent, we recognize that our fucking repulsive behavior condemns us yet we pray for forgiveness (whether we mean it or not) and deliverance. We know we won't merit a place in heaven. But our intercessory prayers are made nonetheless because our faith dictates that Jesus assumed His humanity so that every human being could experience the beauty of relationship with perfect love (with God) - not just the Christian. This is the burden the Christian accepts.

We're assholes. That doesn't mean the non-Christian needs to be exempt from whatever awaits us upon falling into the long sleep.

If you seek physical and observational evidence, then you're in for a surprise here - it doesn't exist.

Why? Because like emotions, thoughts, mentality, human rights, maths, and more, relationship with perfection cannot be seen. It must be deduced.

Secondly, I affects me directly - and not in a good way. For better or worse (much, much worse, if you ask me) you have the world's remaining superpower (for now, anyway) in which Christian fundamentalists wields a frightening amount of power.

Protestantism is NOT Christianity.

You have the drive to eliminate evolution from textbooks, the outright denial of the Big Bang, outlawing of abortion, and high ranking politicians claiming that global warming is a hoax as God has promised never to drown the world again.

Every nation and every faith has its lunatics.

Such things scares me senseless, to be honest. What if one of those lunatics got their hands on the big red button and decided that they had waited for the Judgment Day for too long?

Then shit would, as I've said, be shitty.

As for churches and the Bible, I can see your point. But I still don't get it.

You still have the problem of the faith being extremely fragmented. Once again, how are you going to convince me to join your religion when you, and your fellow Christians, cannot agree on what the religion actually is?

Christians do agree with the dogma of Christianity. Where we differ is doctrine. Protestants possess a different dogma - thus they are not Christians and do themselves great disservice in placing themselves in such a shadow. It's as if the Muslims were to claim to be religiously Jewish.

Fucking ridiculous.

Talking in general terms, mind you. I'm not suggesting that you personally would - or should - try to convert me or anyone else.

Of course not. How could I attempt to convert someone when I myself have doubts at times?

The point is that, to me, this makes Christianity look like it's all made up. If God was really up there somewhere, why is there so much debate?

Humility on His part is a good start.

Instead - and here we're back to the first point - you basically admit that you simply invent your own personal version of God in order to feel better about yourself and the world.

Could you show me where I've presented a rose tinted view of myself and the world? Because I haven't.

In a sense, it's actually closer to simple spirituality - the search for something greater-than-man that makes the world make sense. And this, to me, is utterly astounding. As a scientist, I much prefer to look at the world as it is, utterly cold and uncaring as it might be, than wrap myself in layers of lies.

At no point have I ever claimed Christianity can make sense of the world. I don't know of any Christian who has, either.

At some point we expect children to grow up and stop believing in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, and all their other imaginary friends. Why, then, do we not hold God to the same standards?

Christians do.

[Distruzio]

Well, it was my education in the theology of Christianity and my agreement with that theology that changed me. Before, I considered myself a superior victim. If you and I didn't get along it was your fault - not mine. My romantic relationships suffered because I made demands instead of requests. The perversity in my mind (without the chosen limitations placed by Christian morality) would have seen me in jail - all women were sexual objects and fuck them if they rejected that (I liked violent porn because, in my mind, the women deserved it and I treated them thus; my bigotry included everyone; I lied; I cheated; I stole; and I believed the State was supreme). Religion, Christianity changed that. I realized that sin was the violation of relationship - that I had been violating relationship; that I was responsible for my failures.

I was intolerable. I couldn't even tolerate myself and I yet struggle to address the destruction such behavior had on others and myself.

Christianity may have motivated the change but it is you who changed that. The capacity for change was already present.

Absolutely. But, much like Adam and Eve hiding in the Garden, God called to them and met them even though His omniscience and omnipotence made such an action unnecessary. He didn't find them. They had to accept His call and find Him.

[Distruzio]

Ahhh.... time available to respond. Again, I'm sorry for my inactivity but christmas volume at work and christmas itself took up a lot of my time.



I'll never claim otherwise, Dy.



Well, it was my education in the theology of Christianity and my agreement with that theology that changed me. Before, I considered myself a superior victim. If you and I didn't get along it was your fault - not mine. My romantic relationships suffered because I made demands instead of requests. The perversity in my mind (without the chosen limitations placed by Christian morality) would have seen me in jail - all women were sexual objects and fuck them if they rejected that (I liked violent porn because, in my mind, the women deserved it and I treated them thus; my bigotry included everyone; I lied; I cheated; I stole; and I believed the State was supreme). Religion, Christianity changed that. I realized that sin was the violation of relationship - that I had been violating relationship; that I was responsible for my failures.

I was intolerable. I couldn't even tolerate myself and I yet struggle to address the destruction such behavior had on others and myself.



What is it with you and accusing anyone with whom you disagree of lying, Mav?

But to address your actual question, you must be confused about what circular logic is and how to apply it because it most certainly does not here apply.



This God is the only God that changed me. What does that statement imply to you? How could I make that claim unless I had considered, and tried, other faiths? And note that I've never once (not in any single conversation in my 6 years on nationstates) claimed an objective opinion that the Christian God is your truth as much as my own.



Oh I have on many many many many occasions.

Protestantism is NOT Christianity. Not theologically nor practically. Here, I'll quote the most important bit for you here:

Don't forget the order of events here: Jesus was born; Jesus died; Jesus resurrected; Jesus ascended; the Church was created; the Apostles evangelized; the Church was spread; the Church was persecuted; Rome was converted to the Way (Christianity didn't yet exist - the Way was its predecessor - its foundation); Constantine ordered the Church to establish a codified doctrine detailing the faith of the Way; Christianity was created; the Church addressed heresies; Christological and theological arguments established and solidified Christian thought on the nature of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and humanity; the Bible was organized and released in its final form; Rome and Constantinople excommunicated one another; Luther's heresy; new Protestant bible organized and released; King of England nationalizes the Church in England in political protest of Roman authority; etc etc etc.

All of this happened within (give or take) a thousand years. Jesus didn't hand the Apostles the Bible and tell them to spread his Word. The Apostles and Disciples didn't stand on corners and thump their bibles at passersby. The Bible didn't exist. The printing press was still 1400+ years away. Furthermore, literacy did not reach levels to which the average person could read the Bible that didn't exist until the 20th century in the Occident alone and still hasn't made significant headway into the rest of the world.

If the Bible existed WELL after Christianity existed, then how could your appeal to sola scriptura hold any value at all?

It doesn't.

Sounds like you were just a rotten dick before hand, I'm glad that you changed though.

When I'm at my most depressed I'm not.

Life was so much easier when I was self-centered and you lot (anyone outside my mind) were tools rather than people.

[Ashmoria]

One would think that even a suggestion from the being who created you would be taken seriously.

I'd like to introduce you to all the teenagers in the world.

no kidding. what did adam and eve know of consequences, sin, death, suffering? nothing.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Sounds like you were just a rotten dick before hand, I'm glad that you changed though.

When I'm at my most depressed I'm not.

Life was so much easier when I was self-centered and you lot (anyone outside my mind) were tools rather than people.

Eh, you wouldn't wouldn't have wanted to get on my bad side then, the chaos would have fed the Gods of the Warp for a millennium.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

-snip-.

How are Protestants not Christians, is my own pressing question?

[Distruzio]

I'd like to introduce you to all the teenagers in the world.

no kidding. what did adam and eve know of consequences, sin, death, suffering? nothing.

Indeed. Which suggests that the Fall was inevitable. The Climb (or ascension of the divine ladder) seems to have been quite integral to the maturing of Humanity.

[Distruzio]

-snip-.

How are Protestants not Christians, is my own pressing question?

Oh I have on many many many many occasions.

Protestantism is NOT Christianity. Not theologically nor practically. Here, I'll quote the most important bit for you here:

Don't forget the order of events here: Jesus was born; Jesus died; Jesus resurrected; Jesus ascended; the Church was created; the Apostles evangelized; the Church was spread; the Church was persecuted; Rome was converted to the Way (Christianity didn't yet exist - the Way was its predecessor - its foundation); Constantine ordered the Church to establish a codified doctrine detailing the faith of the Way; Christianity was created; the Church addressed heresies; Christological and theological arguments established and solidified Christian thought on the nature of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and humanity; the Bible was organized and released in its final form; Rome and Constantinople excommunicated one another; Luther's heresy; new Protestant bible organized and released; King of England nationalizes the Church in England in political protest of Roman authority; etc etc etc.

All of this happened within (give or take) a thousand years. Jesus didn't hand the Apostles the Bible and tell them to spread his Word. The Apostles and Disciples didn't stand on corners and thump their bibles at passersby. The Bible didn't exist. The printing press was still 1400+ years away. Furthermore, literacy did not reach levels to which the average person could read the Bible that didn't exist until the 20th century in the Occident alone and still hasn't made significant headway into the rest of the world.

If the Bible existed WELL after Christianity existed, then how could your appeal to sola scriptura hold any value at all?

It doesn't.

[Distruzio]

-snip-.

How are Protestants not Christians, is my own pressing question?

Essentially, it comes to this response I made to a Protestant:

If you believe, as you say you do, that Jesus is fully God and fully Man, that Jesus ascended into heaven complete (body, mind and soul), and that Jesus is the head of the Church, then I have to wonder how you think that that Church is any less physical than He is? Further, Jesus himself said that upon Peter would he build His Church and that the gates of Hell would fail to stand against it. How can you doubt that Jesus would create a physical Church upon physical men with Himself as the head of it physically, spiritually, and mentally, and yet fail to maintain it? Moreover, if you believe that the Word is the infallible Word of God b/c it is protected by the Holy Spirit, also God, then how can you doubt when the very text of the Word states that the pillar and foundation of the Truth, also Jesus, is the Church, that it means any other Church than the only physical Church that existed at the time of the compilation of the Scriptures? Just what Church do you think the man was talking about when he proclaimed Himself the head, that He Himself would guard it against Hell, and that upon His chosen men would it be built? How could you deny that the Church he described was a real and physical thing - especially within the context of historical considerations surrounding the formulation of the scripture as I have described before?

By all accounts within the text of the scripture, by your own professed beliefs, it cannot be denied that the sola scripturist "bible alone" approach to Christianity is a borderline heretical approach that denies the position of Jesus as the head of the Church, denies the existence of Jesus as fully God and fully Man, denies the very words of Jesus Himself, and denies the words of the Bible itself. The Sola Scripturist, in claiming that the "bible alone" is all that is necessary for salvation, removes from authority the Holy Spirit and the Son - two of the triune nature of God Himself. The Sola Scripturist, in claiming that the "bible alone" is all that is necessary for salvation substitutes himself for the supreme pontiff, higher even, than God.

---

I now don't even consider it "borderline here[sy]."

It is absolute heresy. And absolutely distinct from actual Christianity.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

How are Protestants not Christians, is my own pressing question?

Oh I have on many many many many occasions.

Protestantism is NOT Christianity. Not theologically nor practically. Here, I'll quote the most important bit for you here:

Don't forget the order of events here: Jesus was born; Jesus died; Jesus resurrected; Jesus ascended; the Church was created; the Apostles evangelized; the Church was spread; the Church was persecuted; Rome was converted to the Way (Christianity didn't yet exist - the Way was its predecessor - its foundation); Constantine ordered the Church to establish a codified doctrine detailing the faith of the Way; Christianity was created; the Church addressed heresies; Christological and theological arguments established and solidified Christian thought on the nature of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and humanity; the Bible was organized and released in its final form; Rome and Constantinople excommunicated one another; Luther's heresy; new Protestant bible organized and released; King of England nationalizes the Church in England in political protest of Roman authority; etc etc etc.

All of this happened within (give or take) a thousand years. Jesus didn't hand the Apostles the Bible and tell them to spread his Word. The Apostles and Disciples didn't stand on corners and thump their bibles at passersby. The Bible didn't exist. The printing press was still 1400+ years away. Furthermore, literacy did not reach levels to which the average person could read the Bible that didn't exist until the 20th century in the Occident alone and still hasn't made significant headway into the rest of the world.

If the Bible existed WELL after Christianity existed, then how could your appeal to sola scriptura hold any value at all?

It doesn't.

I understand; however, Catholics and Protestants do have a lot of things in common. They just differ on what is it the bible teaches, not on what the main precept they both hold is: which is that a belief in Jesus Christ is necessary for salvation. If you ask a Protestant and a Catholic the same important questions in doctrine you will find similarities, it is in the inclusion of saints, the icons of the church, and the sola scriptura belief that they differ; however, this does not deter Protestants and Catholics from belonging to Christianity.

Protestants are no less Christian than Catholics in my opinion, but then again this comes from someone who has visited - and has learned from - both schools of thought.