In the Pure Land school of Buddhism, especially in Japan, there is an idea which sounds very similar to Protestant soteriology, especially *Sola Fide*, which is basically the idea that one can be "saved" only and entirely by putting one's trust in the saving power of the work of Amitabha Buddha. This is the practice of *shinju nembutsu*, or "*nembutsu* only", was taught by Honen in the 12th century and especially by his disciple Shinran. Now, there are obviously myriad fundamental differences between Buddhism and Christianity. However, I am wondering if any Protestant scholars have commented on the difference between the understanding of faith encapsulated by *Sola Fide* and the understanding of "*nembutsu* only" in Pure Land Buddhism. *Note: I am not asking about differences between Buddhism generally and *Sola Fide*. Also, I am most interested to hear from sources that have actively studied the teachings of Honen and Shinran; if this is your first time hearing about Pure Land Buddhism, please do not answer unless you first studying it thoroughly or cite sources which have already done that work for you.* A brief review to see why I'm interested: **Sola Fide** is the Protestant idea that faith alone is necessary for salvation. Our good works contribute nothing to our justification. It is intimately tied to the idea of *Sola Gratia*, which is that salvation is accomplished solely by the grace of God. **Shinju Nembutsu** is based on a statement in the *Sutra of Infinite Life* wherein the Amitabha Buddha makes a series of vows before becoming enlightened. The eighteenth of these vows is > If, when I attain Buddhahood, sentient beings in the lands of the ten quarters who sincerely and joyfully entrust themselves to me, desire to be born in my land, and call my Name, even ten times, should not be born there, may I not attain perfect Enlightenment. Excluded, however, are those who commit the five gravest offences and abuse the right Dharma. Since Amitabha did attain enlightenment, the followers of Honen and Shinran taught that this statement must true that all who sincerely trust in Amitabha will be born into his land (where they would later be able to attain enlightenment). The more radical idea of "*nembutsu* only" is related to the Buddhist concept of Dharmic decline, which basically means (for Shinran), that in the present age it is not possible to attain enlightenment by good works, and thus the only hope for mankind in the present age is the work of Amitabha. Hence, one must only say "*namu amita butsu *" (I trust in Amitabha) with true faith, and one will be saved. As a further parallel with Protestant soteriology, Shinran also apparently taught that this faith is a gift from Amitabha to the believer, and not something which arises from within the believer himself.

Two of the Five Solas are: - Sola Gratia: Salvation by Grace Alone - Sola Fide: Justification by Faith Alone If salvation is by "grace alone", how can "faith alone" be added as well? Only one of these two should be chosen in order to use the term "alone". From scripture grace and faith work together, e.g.: > ... we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand ... *(Romans 5:2, ESV)* > > For by grace you have been saved through faith. *(Ephesians 2:8, ESV)* Suppose someone builds a bridge over a chasm to rescue a group of hikers from a great disaster, and announces to all hikers that the bridge has been built. Arriving on the safe side, someone tells the hikers: "You arrived here *only* through the goodwill of the bridgebuilder", and "You arrived here *only* because you actually crossed the bridge". How logical is that? Clearly, the two must work together (and not together, although separately alone)?

Evangelicals believe that salvation is by grace alone through faith, that Christ's death and resurrection alone is the basis of their Salvation. Is this comparable to the Catholic concept of salvation?

I have many catholic friends, and lately I have been engaging them as to whether or not they believe that salvation is by grace alone. My one catholic friend, (who would label themselves as an "Ecumenical charismatic Catholic" ) agrees with me completely that salvation is by grace alone. On the other hand, another catholic friend says that salvation is by following the ten commandments, and when asked what happens when we mess up, they responded, "That's what confession is for." So my question is, is Catholicism really this broad, or is one of my catholic friends not really catholic? Also, what does Catholicism actually say? Salvation by grace alone, or by works?

At the council of Trent, the Catholic Church made several statements which seemingly reject the idea of Sola Gratia - Salvation by Grace alone. Examples include > If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not > increased before God through good works, *but that those works are > merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained*, but not the > cause of its increase, let him be anathema. And > If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and > justified, because he assuredly believed himself absolved and > justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes > himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and > justification are effected; let him be anathema More recently however, the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity released the "Joint Declaration of the Doctrine of Justification" which seems to reverse this by saying that Lutherans and Catholics share "a common understanding of our justification by God's grace through faith in Christ." Does this represent an official doctrinal position by the Catholic Church and does it represent a change in Doctrine?

Historically, the five *Solae* have been a divider between Catholic and Protestant theologies. Yet, I can't help but notice that most denominations do not believe in the "alone" taken in its fullest sense. For example, The Methodist church does not believe in *sola scriptura,* but instead *[prima scriptura](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_scriptura).* Are there other Protestant denominations which reject some or all of the *solae?*

Protestants often consider the Roman Catholic church to have significantly distorted the gospel. Were there Christians prior to the Reformation who had essentially the same understanding of the doctrines of salvation (particularly _sola gratia_) as the later Reformers did? I'm interested in people between Augustine (approx. 400 AD) and Luther (1517 AD).