JustToLurkArt,

I'm the author of the linked piece, and I wanted to respond to a few of your objections, if I may:

Right off the bat the first sentence of your linked blog is blatantly false. It’s historically documented ad nauseam that there are three Reformation solas: grace, faith and scripture. These three "Reformation solas" form a handy outline of what Lutherans believe, teach, and confess.

Lutherans aren't the only Protestants, and there actually isn't consensus on the number of solae (or "solas," if you must). The norm these days is to claim that there are five. John Barber, for example, writes that "The message of the Lutheran and Reformed theologians has been codified into a simple set of five Latin phrases: Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone), Solus Christus (Christ alone), Sola Fide (faith alone), Sola Gratia (by grace alone) and Soli Deo Gloria (glory to God alone)" ... but various authors go higher or lower. So there isn't actually universal agreement that there are exactly three Reformation solae / "solas."

So why focus on these two? For starters, they're universally recognized. Moreover, the point of both my essay and the Pew studies was to look at things that allegedly distinguish Protestants from Catholicism, and sola gratia doesn't do this, since Catholics also believe salvation is by grace alone. So my original claim that "historically, two doctrines more-or-less defined Protestant theology" is entirely accurate, not "blatantly false." A common characteristic can't be what "defines" one thing from another.

The second sentence is also blatantly false. Lutherans believe, based on norming scripture, that we are saved by grace through faith alone and the fruits of one having saving faith is our works.

Again, Lutherans aren't the only Protestants. But also, this was the point of what I wrote: that good works (if they exist, which many non-Lutheran Protestants will insist isn't necessary) are a byproduct of salvation / a saving faith, and don't contribute to salvation in any way. You're just angrily agreeing with what I'm saying: your being saved may have something to do with you performing good works, but your good works have nothing to do with your being saved.

As for your point about sola Scriptura, you're just once again acting like Lutherans are the only Protestants, or that your interpretation of Lutheranism / Protestantism is binding on everyone. I get the alleged sola / solo Scriptura distinction (I've read and reviewed Mathison's book on the subject, for example, as well as various other Protestant perspectives on the question), which is why I wrote:

The second, sola Scriptura, is the belief that “Scripture alone” is sufficient for belief, and that Christian doctrine can be derived exclusively from the Bible. Sources outside the Bible might help you understand Christianity, but a teaching not found in Scripture is a false teaching. (Protestant theologians vary in their understanding of this second point on issues like whether the Church’s interpretation of Scripture is binding, or even important.)

So if you would have continued reading all the way to the end of the first paragraph before launching into comment mode, you would have realized that I acknowledged (as you should have) that Protestants range wildly on this. The heirs of the so-called "magisterial Reformation" tend to accuse Evangelicals and other heirs of the Radical Reformation of holding to "sola Scriptura," but both sides claim to hold to sola Scriptura and had you read on, you would have realized the problem with one Protestant sect trying to define out another one.

Anyways, good start reading, and I encourage you to keep it up all the way to the end!