Sola Fide is directly contradicted by James 2, where a long passage is dedicated to this; nowhere in Paul is Sola Fide taught, even though there are some passages that indicate the lack of salvific quality of circumcision, works for reward, or works for social recognition. Given the emphasis the scripture puts on love, the greatest virtue, an independent mind will arrive at some form of works cooperating with grace theology, and not with Sola Fide. The very fact that the Portestants need to "painstakingly detail" their invention points to it not naturally arising from the scripture.
Sola Scriptura is not even remotely scriptural. Christ left no scripture of His own, his instruction to the Apostles was to teach and baptize, as if they were Him. The Christian scripture lacks for most part the prophetic tone; much of it is written for private consumption. The quotes form the scripture that you would cite in support of this superstition are where we have no argument: that the scripture is inspired, useful to teach and to settle disputes, takes precedence over unwritten word, etc. There is no scipture that would say that the scripture alone is sufficient for the discovery of all the truth necessary for salvation. There is no scripture that would support the perspicuity of the scripture, but there are passages warning against just such assumption.
No, the independent mind will see that our works are not sufficient to earn our salvation. They will see that it was Christ's love for us that saves. I don't think there's any way they would come up with the several categories of works, each useful to interpret its own passages, that your hierarchy has devised. Sola Fide and POTS are both scriptural and work together. I don't think the independent reader arrives at the quid pro quo mentality.
The very fact that the Protestants need to "painstakingly detail" their invention points to it not naturally arising from the scripture.
We only need to "detail" the explanation to those who have already opted against the obvious. The independent reader would not be in that group.
Christ left no scripture of His own, his instruction to the Apostles was to teach and baptize, as if they were Him.
This statement speaks for itself and highlights a great difference in mindset.
The Christian scripture lacks for most part the prophetic tone; much of it is written for private consumption.
I would agree that would be the only way to arrive at many Catholic conclusions. However, such a view also sets up a class system among believers and guarantees that the "workers are few". I believe the scriptures are meant to be inclusionary instead of exclusionary.
There is no scipture that would say that the scripture alone is sufficient for the discovery of all the truth necessary for salvation.
What truth(s) are lacking in scripture for salvation? This would make scripture a mere accessory to the uninspired words of men.
There is no scripture that would support the perspicuity of the scripture, but there are passages warning against just such assumption.
There is plenty of scripture, but perhaps none that you would accept. :
Deut 30:11-14 : 11 Now what I am commanding you today is not too difficult for you or beyond your reach. 12 It is not up in heaven, so that you have to ask, "Who will ascend into heaven to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" 13 Nor is it beyond the sea, so that you have to ask, "Who will cross the sea to get it and proclaim it to us so we may obey it?" 14 No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.
From this are we to conclude that "some" of God's commandments are perspicuous, yet others are completely indecipherable, except to the men who claim they are the only ones who know the "real" truth?
2 Cor 1:13-14 : 13 For we do not write you anything you cannot read or understand. And I hope that, 14 as you have understood us in part, you will come to understand fully that you can boast of us just as we will boast of you in the day of the Lord Jesus.
Your view also contradicts 2 Tim. 3, since it would not be the scripture which was profitable, but only the on-high interpretation of it by the hierarchy. The scripture by itself would be virtually useless.