Protestant Apologist Admits Forensic Justification was Unknown Until the 14th/15th Century

In an interview on Hank Hanegraaff's conversion to Eastern Orthodoxy, Rob Bowman discussed whether one holding to EO (and RC) soteriology instead of the classical Protestant formulation means one is not a true Christian, Bowman said the following:

First of all, it leads to what I think ought to be for most of us [Protestants] a rather unsettling conclusion, which is that there were no Christians prior to the Protestant Reformation. Because, you will not be able to find, except perhaps a statement here or there out of context, you will not be able to find any Christian theologians, teachers, writers, in the first 14/15 centuries of Christianity clearly articulating what we would call "justification by faith alone," or as some people would like to call it, "forensic justification." The idea that justification is, at its core, is a legal act in which God pardons sinners of all their sins, past, present, and future, solely on the basis of Christ's atoning work, created simply by faith . . .(44:32 mark, "Episode 46: Hank Hanegraaff Converts to Eastern Orthodoxy")

Bowman is correct about forensic justification being absent (unless one wishes to wrest texts out of their context as William Webster and others are known to do), so one has to give credit where credit is due to Bowman on that point. Sadly for Bowman,  forensic justification is not biblical. For a fuller discussion, see, for e.g.:

An Examination and Critique of the Theological Presuppositions Underlying Reformed Theology

Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness

Refuting Douglas Wilson on Water Baptism and Salvation

Baptism, Salvation, and the New Testament: John 3:1-7

Full Refutation of the Protestant Interpretation of John 19:30

The same applies for Sola Scriptura. On this, see:

Not By Scripture Alone: A Latter-day Saint Refutation of Sola Scriptura