Christology is the field of study within Christian theology which is primarily concerned with the ontology and person of Jesus as recorded in the canonical Gospels and the epistles of the New Testament.[2][3][4] Primary considerations include the ontology and person of Jesus in conjunction with his relationship with that of God the Father. Christology is concerned with the details of Jesus’ ministry, his acts and teachings, to arrive at a clearer understanding of who he is in his person, and his role in salvation.[5] The views of Paul the Apostle provided a major component of the Christology of the Apostolic Age. Paul’s central themes included the notion of the pre-existence of Christ and the worship of Christ as Kyrios (Greek: Lord).[6]
The pre-existence of Christ became a central theme of Christology. Proponents of Christ’s deity argue the Old Testament has many cases of Christophany:
“The pre-existence of Christ is further substantiated by the many recorded Christophanies in the Bible.”[7]Christophany” is often considered a more accurate term than the term “theophany” due to the belief that all the visible manifestations of God are in fact the preincarnate Christ. Many argue that the appearances of “the Angel of the Lord” in the Old Testament were the preincarnate Christ. “Many understand the angel of the Lord as a true theophany. From the time of Justin on, the figure has been regarded as the preincarnate Logos.”[8]

Following the Apostolic Age, the early church engaged in fierce and often politicized debate on many interrelated issues. Christology became a major focus of these debates, and every one of the first seven ecumenical councils addressed Christological issues. The second through fourth of these councils are generally entitled “Christological councils”, with the latter three mainly elucidating what was taught in them and condemning incorrect interpretations.[9] The Council of Chalcedon in 451 issued a formulation of the being of Christ – that of two natures, one human and one divine, “united with neither confusion nor division”.[9] Chalcedonian Christianity – Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and many Protestant Christians – continue to advocate this doctrine of the hypostatic union.[9] Due to politically-charged differences in the 4th century, schisms developed, and the first denominations (from the Latin, “to take a new name”) formed.

Jesus Christ

Jesus Christ

In the 13th century, Saint Thomas Aquinas provided the first systematic Christology that consistently resolved a number of the existing issues.[10] In his Christology from above, Aquinas also championed the principle of perfection of Christ’s human attributes.[11][12][13] The Middle Ages also witnessed the emergence of the “tender image of Jesus” as a friend and a living source of love and comfort, rather than just the Kyrios image.[14] Catholic theologian Karl Rahnersees the purpose of modern Christology as to formulate the Christian belief that “God became man and that God-made-man is the individual Jesus Christ” in a manner that this statement can be understood consistently, without the confusions of past debates and mythologies.[15][16]

Terms and concepts

Over the centuries, a number of terms and concepts have been developed within the framework of Christology to address the seemingly simple questions: “who was Jesus and what did he do?” A good deal of theological debate has ensued and significant schisms within Christian denominations took place in the process of providing answers to these questions. After the Middle Ages, systematic approaches to Christology were developed.

The term “Christology from above” refers to approaches that begin with the divinity and pre-existence of Christ as the Logos (the Word), as expressed in the prologue to the Gospel of John.[17] These approaches interpret the works of Christ in terms of his divinity. Christology from above was emphasized in the ancient Church, beginning with Ignatius of Antioch in the second century.[18][19] The term “Christology from below”, on the other hand, refers to approaches that begin with the human aspects and the ministry of Jesus (including the miracles, parables, etc.) and move towards his divinity and the mystery of incarnation.[18][19]

The concept of “Cosmic Christology”, first elaborated by Saint Paul, focuses on how the arrival of Jesus as the Son of God forever changed the nature of the cosmos.[6][20] The terms “functional”, “ontological” and “soteriological” have been used to refer to the perspectives that analyze the “works”, the “being” and the “salvific” standpoints of Christology.[21] Some essential sub-topics within the field of Christology include the incarnation, the resurrection, and salvation.

Other relevant topics of faith are: Christian messianic prophecies of the Old Testament, Annunciation, the regal Genealogy and Transfiguration, Miracles (Lord of the creation), the Last Supper and institution of the Eucharist, the Passion and Crucifixion (INRI) , the doubting Thomas (Five Holy Wounds), the Harrowing of Hell, the Ascension and the Pentecost, the Kingship and Kingdom of God, the Rapture (Communion of Saints) and the Great Tribulation, the Second Coming of Christ and Last Judgement, the rising from the dead of all men.

The term “monastic Christology” has been used to describe spiritual approaches developed by Anselm of Canterbury, Peter Abelard and Bernard of Clairvaux. The Franciscan piety of the 12th and 13th centuries led to “popular Christology”. Systematic approaches by theologians, such as Thomas Aquinas, are called “scholastic Christology”.[22]


Early Christians found themselves confronted with a set of new concepts and ideas relating to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, as well the notions of salvation and redemption, and had to use a new set of terms, images, and ideas in order to deal with them.[23] The existing terms and structures which were available to them were often insufficient to express these religious concepts, and taken together, these new forms of discourse led to the beginnings of Christology as an attempt to understand, explain, and discuss their understanding of the nature of Christ.[23]

Furthermore, as early Christians (following the Great Commission) had to explain their concepts to a new audience which had at times been influenced by Greek philosophy, they had to present arguments that at times resonated with, and at times confronted, the beliefs of that audience. A key example is the Apostle Paul’s Areopagus sermon that appears in Acts 17:16–34. Here, the apostle attempted to convey the underlying concepts about Christ to a Greek audience, and the sermon illustrates some key elements of future Christological discourses that were first brought forward by Paul.[23][24][25]

The title Kyrios for Jesus is central to the development of New Testament Christology, for the early Christians placed it at the center of their understanding, and from that center attempted to understand the other issues related to the Christian mysteries.[26] The question of the deity of Christ in the New Testament is inherently related to the Kyrios title of Jesus used in the early Christian writings and its implications for the absolute lordship of Jesus. In early Christian belief, the concept of Kyrios included the pre-existence of Christ, for they believed if Christ is one with God, he must have been united with God from the very beginning.[26][27]

In everyday Aramaic, Mari was a very respectful form of polite address, which means more than just “Teacher” and was somewhat similar to Rabbi. In Greek, this has at times been translated as Kyrios. While the term Mari expressed the relationship between Jesus and his disciples during his life, the Greek Kyrios came to represent his lordship over the world.[28]

Apostolic Age

And he asked them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” — Matthew 16:15-16, ESV

No writings were left by Jesus, and the study of the various Christologies of the Apostolic Age is based on early Christian documents.[2] The Gospels provide episodes from the life of Jesus and some of his works, but the authors of the New Testament show little interest in an absolute chronology of Jesus or in synchronizing the episodes of his life,[29] and as in John 21:25, the Gospels do not claim to be an exhaustive list of his works.[2]

Christologies that can be gleaned from the three Synoptic Gospels generally emphasize the humanity of Jesus, his sayings, his parables, and his miracles. The Gospel of Johnprovides a different perspective that focuses on his divinity.[5] The first 14 verses of the Gospel of John are devoted to the divinity of Jesus as the Logos, usually translated as “Word”, along with his pre-existence, and they emphasize the cosmic significance of Christ, e.g. John 1:3: “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” In the context of these verses, the Word made flesh is identical with the Word who was in the beginning with God, being exegetically equated with Jesus.[5]

A foremost contribution to the Christology of the Apostolic Age is that of Paul. The central Christology of Paul conveys the notion of Christ’s pre-existence[30] and the identification of Christ as Kyrios.[6] The Pauline epistles use Kyrios to identify Jesus almost 230 times, and express the theme that the true mark of a Christian is the confession of Jesus as the true Lord.[31] Paul viewed the superiority of the Christian revelation over all other divine manifestations as a consequence of the fact that Christ is the Son of God.[5] Nevertheless, the view that it was apostle Paul who introduced the idea that Jesus was divine and thus distorted the actual Jesus has been rejected by some historians. Richard Bauckham argues that Paul was not so influential that he could have invented the central doctrine of Christianity. Before his active missionary work, there were already groups of Christians across the region. For example, a large group already existed in Rome even before Paul visited the place. The earliest centre of Christianity was the twelve apostles in Jerusalem. Paul himself consulted and sought guidance from the Christian leaders in Jerusalem (Galatians 2:1-2; Acts 9:26-28, 15:2). “What was common to the whole Christian movement derived from Jerusalem, not from Paul, and Paul himself derived the central message he preached from the Jerusalem apostles.[32] These scholars argue that if Jesus himself did not claim and show himself to be truly divine (i.e. on the Creator side of the Creator–creature divide), the earliest Christian leaders who were devout ancient monotheistic Jews would not have come to a widespread agreement that he was truly divine, but would have regarded Jesus as merely a teacher or a prophet instead.[33]

The Pauline epistles also advanced the “cosmic Christology” later developed in the fourth gospel,[34] elaborating the cosmic implications of Jesus’ existence as the Son of God, as in Corinthians 5:17: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.” Also, in Colossians 1:15: “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.”[6][20]

Post-Apostolic controversies

Main articles: First Council of Nicaea, First Council of Ephesus, and Council of Chalcedon

Following the Apostolic Age, from the second century onwards, a number of controversies developed about how the human and divine are related within the person of Jesus.[35][36] As of the second century, a number of different and opposing approaches developed among various groups. For example, Arianism did not endorse divinity, Ebionism argued Jesus was an ordinary mortal, while Gnosticism held docetic views which argued Christ was a spiritual being who only appeared to have a physical body.[37][38] The resulting tensions led to schisms within the church in the second and third centuries, and ecumenical councils were convened in the fourth and fifth centuries to deal with the issues. Eventually, by the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon in 451, the Hypostatic union was decreed—the proposition that Christ has one human nature [physis] and one divine nature [physis], united with neither confusion nor division—making this part of the creed of orthodox Christianity.[35][36] Although some of the debates may seem to various modern students to be over a theological iota, they took place in controversial political circumstances, reflecting the relations of temporal powers and divine authority, and certainly resulted in schisms, among others that which separated the Church of the East from the Church of the Roman Empire.[39][40]

In 325, the First Council of Nicaea defined the persons of the Godhead and their relationship with one another, decisions which were ratified at the First Council of Constantinople in 381. The language used was that the one God exists in three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit); in particular, it was affirmed that the Son was homoousios (of the same being) as the Father. The Nicene Creed declared the full divinity and full humanity of Jesus.[41][42][43]

In 431, the First Council of Ephesus was initially called to address the views of Nestorius on Mariology, but the problems soon extended to Christology, and schisms followed. The 431 council was called because in defense of his loyal priest Anastasius, Nestorius had denied the Theotokos title for Mary and later contradicted Proclus during a sermon in Constantinople. Pope Celestine I (who was already upset with Nestorius due to other matters) wrote about this to Cyril of Alexandria, who orchestrated the council. During the council, Nestorius defended his position by arguing there must be two persons of Christ, one human, the other divine, and Mary had given birth only to a human, hence could not be called the Theotokos, i.e. “the one who gives birth to God”. The debate about the single or dual nature of Christ ensued in Ephesus.[44][45][46][47]

In 431, the Council of Ephesus debated miaphysitism (two natures united as one after the hypostatic union) verses dyophysitism (coexisting natures after the hypostatic union) versus monophysitism (only one nature) versus Nestorianism (two hypostases). From the Christological viewpoint, the council adopted Mia Physis (But being made one κατὰ φύσιν) – Council of Ephesus, Epistle of Cyril to Nestorius, i.e. One Nature of the Word of God Incarnate (μία φύσις τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου σεσαρκωμένη mía phýsis toû theoû lógou sesarkōménē). In 451, the Council of Chalcedon affirmed dyophysitism. The Oriental Orthodox rejected this and subsequent councils and continued to consider themselves as miaphysite according to the faith put forth at the Councils of Nicaea and Ephesus.[48][49] The council also confirmed the Theotokos title and excommunicated Nestorius.[50][51]

The 451 Council of Chalcedon was highly influential and marked a key turning point in the Christological debates that broke apart the church of the Eastern Roman Empire in the fifth century.[52] It is the last council which many Anglicans and most Protestants consider ecumenical.[53] It fully promulgated the Western dyophisite understanding put forth by Pope Leo I of Rome of the hypostatic union, stating the human and divine natures of Christ coexist after the union, yet each is distinct and complete. Most importantly, it unquestionably established the primacy of Rome in the East over those who accepted the Council of Chalcedon. This was reaffirmed in 519 when those Eastern Chalcedonians accepted the Formula of Hormisdas anathematizing all of their own Eastern Chalcedonian hierarchy who died out of communion with Rome from 482-519. Although, the Chalcedonian Creed did not put an end to all Christological debate, it did clarify the terms used and became a point of reference for many future Christologies. Most of the major branches of Western Christianity – Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Anglicanism, Lutheranism, and Reformed – subscribe to the Chalcedonian Christological formulation, while many branches of Eastern Christianity – Syrian Orthodoxy, Assyrian Church, Coptic Orthodoxy, Ethiopian Orthodoxy, and Armenian Apostolicism – reject it.[53][54][55]


Person of Christ

Main articles: Person of Christ and Prosopon

The term Person of Christ refers to the prosopic (and hypostatic) union of the human and divine natures of Jesus Christ as they coexist within one person (prosopon) and one hypostasis.[56] There are no direct discussions in the New Testament regarding the dual nature of the Person of Christ as both divine and human.[56] Hence, since the early days of Christianity, theologians have debated various approaches to the understanding of these natures, at times resulting in schisms.[56]

Historically in the Alexandrian school of thought (fashioned on the Gospel of John), Jesus Christ is the eternal Logos who already possesses unity with the Father before the act of Incarnation.[57] In contrast, the Antiochian school views Christ as a single, unified human person apart from his relationship to the divine.[57]

Some controversial notions of “two persons” (prosopic duality) caused heated debates among Christian theologians during the 5th century, resulting in official condemnation of such theological views. The Fourth Ecumenical Council, held in Chalcedon in 451, reaffirmed the notion of “One Person” of Jesus Christ, and formulated the famous Chalcedonian Definition with its “monoprosopic” (mono-prosopic: having one person) clauses, explicitly denying the validity of “dyoprosopic” (dyo-prosopic: having two persons) views.

John Calvin maintained there was no human element in the Person of Christ which could be separated from the Person of The Word.[58] Calvin also emphasized the importance of the “Work of Christ” in any attempt at understanding the Person of Christ and cautioned against ignoring the Works of Jesus during his ministry.[59]

The study of the Person of Christ continued into the 20th century, with modern theologians such as Karl Rahner and Hans von Balthasar. Rahner pointed out the coincidence between the Person of Christ and the Word of God, referring to Mark 8:38 and Luke 9:26 which state whoever is ashamed of the words of Jesus is ashamed of the Lord himself.[60] Balthasar argued the union of the human and divine natures of Christ was achieved not by the “absorption” of human attributes, but by their “assumption”. Thus, in his view, the divine nature of Christ was not affected by the human attributes and remained forever divine.[61]

Historical christological doctrines are

  • Arianism
  • Nestorianism
  • Monophysitism
  • Miaphysitism
  • Docetism
  • Adoptionism
  • Monarchianism

Arianism is condemned by the First Council of Nicaea (325), Nestorianism by the Council of Ephesus (431) and Monophysitism by the Council of Chalcedon (451).

Nativity and the Holy Name

See also: Nativity of Jesus and Holy Name of Jesus

The Nativity of Jesus impacted the Christological issues about his Person from the earliest days of Christianity. Luke’s Christology centers on the dialectics of the dual natures of the earthly and heavenly manifestations of existence of the Christ, while Matthew’s Christology focuses on the mission of Jesus and his role as the savior.[62][63] The salvific emphasis of Matthew 1:21 later impacted the theological issues and the devotions to Holy Name of Jesus.[64][65][66]

Matthew 1:23 provides a key to the “Emmanuel Christology” of Matthew. Beginning with 1:23, Matthew shows a clear interest in identifying Jesus as “God with us” and in later developing the Emmanuel characterization of Jesus at key points throughout the rest of his Gospel.[67] The name Emmanuel does not appear elsewhere in the New Testament, but Matthew builds on it in Matthew 28:20 (“I am with you always, even unto the end of the world”) to indicate Jesus will be with the faithful to the end of the age.[67][68] According to Ulrich Luz, the Emmanuel motif brackets the entire Gospel of Matthew between 1:23 and 28:20, appearing explicitly and implicitly in several other passages.[69]

Crucifixion and resurrection

Main articles: Crucifixion of Jesus and Resurrection of Jesus

The accounts of the crucifixion and subsequent resurrection of Jesus provides a rich background for Christological analysis, from the canonical Gospels to the Pauline Epistles.[70]

A central element in the Christology presented in the Acts of the Apostles is the affirmation of the belief that the death of Jesus by crucifixion happened “with the foreknowledge of God, according to a definite plan”.[71] In this view, as in Acts 2:23, the cross is not viewed as a scandal, for the crucifixion of Jesus “at the hands of the lawless” is viewed as the fulfilment of the plan of God.[71][72]

Paul’s Christology has a specific focus on the death and resurrection of Jesus. For Paul, the crucifixion of Jesus is directly related to his resurrection and the term “the cross of Christ” used in Galatians 6:12 may be viewed as his abbreviation of the message of the gospels.[73] For Paul, the crucifixion of Jesus was not an isolated event in history, but a cosmic event with significant eschatological consequences, as in Cor 2:8.[73] In the Pauline view, Jesus, obedient to the point of death (Phil 2:8), died “at the right time” (Rom 4:25) based on the plan of God.[73] For Paul, the “power of the cross” is not separable from the resurrection of Jesus.[73]

Threefold office

The threefold office (Latin munus triplex) of Jesus Christ is a Christian doctrine based upon the teachings of the Old Testament. It was described by Eusebius and more fully developed by John Calvin. It states that Jesus Christ performed three functions (or “offices”) in his earthly ministry – those of prophet (Deuteronomy 18:14–22), priest (Psalm 110:1-4), and king (Psalm 2). In the Old Testament, the appointment of someone to any of these three positions could be indicated by anointing him or her by pouring oil over the head. Thus, the term messiah, meaning “anointed one”, is associated with the concept of the threefold office. While the office of king is that most frequently associated with the Messiah, the role of Jesus as priest is also prominent in the New Testament, being most fully explained in chapters 7 to 10 of the Book of Hebrews.


Main articles: Mariology and Roman Catholic Mariology

Some Christians, notably Roman Catholics, view Mariology as a key component of Christology.[74] In this view, not only is Mariology a logical and necessary consequence of Christology, but without it, Christology is incomplete, since the figure of Mary contributes to a fuller understanding of who Christ is and what he did.[75]

Protestants have criticized Mariology because many of its assertions lack any biblical foundation.[76] Strong Protestant reaction against Roman Catholic Marian devotion and teaching has been a significant issue for ecumenical dialogue.[77]

Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) expressed this sentiment about Roman Catholic Mariology when in two separate occasions he stated, “The appearance of a truly Marian awareness serves as the touchstone indicating whether or not the Christological substance is fully present”[78] and “It is necessary to go back to Mary, if we want to return to the truth about Jesus Christ.”[79]


  1.  Who do you say that I am? Essays on Christology by Jack Dean Kingsbury, Mark Allan Powell, David R. Bauer 1999 ISBN0-664-25752-6 p. xvi
  2.  Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus by Gerald O’Collins 2009 ISBN0-19-955787-X pp. 1–3
  3.  Compare: Ramm, Bernard L. (February 1993). “Christology at the Center”. An Evangelical Christology: Ecumenic and Historic. Regent College Publishing (published 1993). p. 15. ISBN9781573830089. Retrieved 2016-05-09Christology is the reflective and systematic study of the person and work of Jesus Christ.
  4.  Michael F. Bird; Dr. Craig A. Evans; Simon Gathercole (25 March 2014). “Endnotes – Chapter 1”. How God Became Jesus: The Real Origins of Belief in Jesus’ Divine Nature – A Response to Bart Ehrman. Zondervan. p. 134, n. 5. ISBN978-0-310-51961-4. New Testament scholars often speak about “Christology,” which is the study of the career, person, nature, and identity of Jesus Christ. There are, of course, many different ways of doing Christology. Some scholars study Christology by focusing on the major titles applied to Jesus in the New Testament, such as “Son of Man,” “Son of God,” “Messiah,” “Lord,” “Prince,” “Word,” and the like. Others take a more functional approach and look at how Jesus acts or is said to act in the New Testament as the basis for configuring beliefs about him. It is possible to explore Jesus as a historical figure (i.e., Christology from below), or to examine theological claims made about Jesus (i.e., Christology from above). Many scholars prefer a socio-religious method by comparing beliefs about Jesus with beliefs in other religions to identify shared sources and similar ideas. Theologians often take a more philosophical approach and look at Jesus’ “ontology” or “being” and debate how best to describe his divine and human natures.
  5.  Catholic encyclopedia: Christology
  6.  Christ in Christian Tradition: From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon by Aloys Grillmeier, John Bowden 1975 ISBN0-664-22301-X pp. 15–19 [1]
  7.  Theology for Today by Elmer L. Towns 2008 ISBN0-15-516138-5 p. 173
  8.  “Angel of the Lord” by T. E. McComiskey in The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2001 ISBN0-8010-2075-1 p. 62
  9.  Davis, SJ, Leo Donald (1990), The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787): Their History and Theology (Theology and Life Series 21), Collegeville, MN: Michael Glazier/Liturgical Press, p. 342, ISBN978-0-8146-5616-7
  10.  Gilson, Etienne (1994), The Christian Philosophy of Saint Thomas Aquinas, Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, p. 502, ISBN978-0-268-00801-7
  11.  Christology: Biblical And Historical by Mini S. Johnson, 2005 ISBN81-8324-007-0 pp. 76–79 [2]
  12.  Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus by Gerald O’Collins 2009 ISBN0-19-955787-X pp. 208–12 [3]
  13.  Aquinas as authority by Paul van Geest, Harm J. M. J. Goris pp. 25–35 [4]
  14.  Christology: Key Readings in Christian Thought by Jeff Astley, David Brown, Ann Loades 2009 ISBN0-664-23269-8 p. 106
  15.  Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi by Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN0-86012-006-6 pp. 755–67
  16.  Compare: Grillmeier, Alois (1975). “Jesus Christ: III. Christology”. In Rahner, Karl. Encyclopedia of Theology: A Concise Sacramentum Mundi (reprint ed.). A&C Black. p. 755. ISBN9780860120063. Retrieved 2016-05-09The most urgent task of a contemporary Christology is to formulate the Church’s dogma – ‘God became man and that God-made-man is the individual Jesus Christ’ – in such a way that the true meaning of these statements can be understood, and all trace of a mythology impossible to accept nowadays is excluded.
  17.  John 1:1–14
  18.  Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus by Gerald O’Collins 2009 ISBN0-19-955787-X pp. 16–17
  19.  Jesus God and Man by Wolfhart Pannenberg 1968 ISBN0-664-24468-8 p. 33
  20.  The Witness of Jesus, Paul and John: An Exploration in Biblical Theology by Larry R. Helyer 2008 ISBN0-8308-2888-5 p. 282
  21.  Christology from within and ahead by Mark L. Y. Chan 2001 ISBN90-04-11844-6 pp. 59–62 [5]
  22.  Christology: Biblical And Historical by Mini S. Johnson, 2005 ISBN81-8324-007-0 pp. 74–76 [6]
  23.  Christianity: an introduction by Alister E. McGrath 2006 ISBN978-1-4051-0901-7. pp. 137–41
  24.  Creation and redemption: a study in Pauline theology by John G. Gibbs 1971 Brill Publishers pp. 151–53
  25.  Mercer Commentary on the New Testament by Watson E. Mills 2003 ISBN0-86554-864-1 pp. 1109–10
  26.  Christology: Biblical And Historical by Mini S. Johnson, 2005 ISBN81-8324-007-0 pp. 229–35 [7]
  27.  The Christology of the New Testament by Oscar Cullmann 1959 ISBN0-664-24351-7 pp. 234–37 [8]
  28.  The Christology of the New Testament by Oscar Cullmann 1959 ISBN0-664-24351-7 p. 202 [9]
  29.  Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi by Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN0-86012-006-6 p. 731
  30.  Witherington, Ben (20 September 2009). “Christology – Paul’s christology”. In Gerald F. Hawthorne. Dictionary of Paul and His Letters: A Compendium of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship. Ralph P. Martin; Daniel G. Reid. InterVarsity Press. p. 106. ISBN978-0-8308-7491-0. [Christ’s Divinity] We have already seen that Paul, in appropriating the language of the christological hymns, subscribed to the christological notion that Christ existed prior to taking on human flesh. Paul spoke of Jesus both as the wisdom of God, his agent in creation (1 Cor 1:24, 30; 8:6; Col 1:15–17; see Bruce, 195), and as the one who accompanied Israel as the “rock” in the wilderness (1 Cor 10:4). In view of the role Christ plays in 1 Corinthians 10:4, Paul is not founding the story of Christ on the archetypal story of Israel, but rather on the story of divine Wisdom, which helped Israel in the wilderness.
  31.  Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus by Gerald O’Collins 2009 ISBN0-19-955787-X p. 142
  32.  R. Bauckham, Jesus: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 110-111.
  33.  Loke, Andrew Ter Ern (2017). The Origin of Divine Christology169. Cambridge University Press. p. 5. ISBN978-1-108-19142-5. [Per Christology] ‘Explosion Theories’ (one might also call this ‘the Big-Bang theory of Christology’!). This proposes that highest Christology was the view of the primitive Palestinian Christian community. […] As Bauckham (2008a, x) memorably puts it, ‘The earliest Christology was already the highest Christology.’ Many proponents of this group of theories have been labelled together as ‘the New Religionsgeschichtliche Schule’ (Hurtado 2003, 11), and they include such eminent scholars as Richard Bauckham, Larry Hurtado, N. T. Wright and the late Martin Hengel.
  34.  Enslin, Morton S. (1975). “John and Jesus”. ZNW. De Gruyter. 66 (1–2): 1–18. doi:10.1515/zntw.1975.66.1-2.1. ISSN1613-009X. [Per the Gospel of John] No longer is John [the Baptizer] an independent preacher. He is but a voice, or, to change the figure, a finger pointing to Jesus. The baptism story is not told, although it is referred to (John 1:32f). But the baptism of Jesus is deprived of any significance for Jesus – not surprising since the latter has just been introduced as the preexistent Christ, who had been the effective agent responsible for the world’s creation. (Enslin, p. 4)
  35.  Editors, Erwin Fahlbusch (1999), The encyclopedia of Christianity, Leiden, Netherland: Brill, p. 463, ISBN0-8028-2413-7
  36.  Rausch, Thomas P. (2003), Who is Jesus? : an introduction to Christology, Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, p. 149, ISBN0-8146-5078-3
  37.  Ehrman, Bart D. (1993), The Orthodox corruption of scripture: the effect of early Christological controversies on the text of the New Testament, New York: Oxford University Press, ISBN978-0-19-510279-6
  38.  McGrath, Alister E. (2007), Christian theology : an introduction, Malden, Mass.: Blackwell, p. 282, ISBN1-4051-5360-1
  39.  Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd series, Vol. XIV p. 207, translated edition by H.R. Percival.
  40.  The Seven Ecumenical Councils of the Undivided Church, trans H. R. Percival, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd Series, ed. P. Schaff and H. Wace, (repr. Grand Rapids MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1955), XIV, pp. 192–42
  41.  Jonathan Kirsch, God Against the Gods: The History of the War Between Monotheism and Polytheism (2004)
  42.  Charles Freeman, The Closing of the Western Mind: The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason (2002)
  43.  Edward Gibbons, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire(1776–88), 21
  44.  The creed: the apostolic faith in contemporary theology by Berard L. Marthaler 2007 ISBN0-89622-537-2 p. 114 [10]
  45.  Mary and the Saints by James P. Campbell 2005 0829417257 pp. 17–20
  46.  Essential theological terms by Justo L. González 2005 ISBN0-664-22810-0 p. 120 [11]
  47.  Doctrine and practice in the early church by Stuart George Hall 1992 ISBN0-8028-0629-5 pp. 211–18 [12]
  48.  Systematic Theology by Lewis Sperry Chafer 1993 ISBN0-8254-2340-6 pp. 382–84 [13]
  49.  The Blackwell Companion to Eastern Christianity by Ken Parry 2009 ISBN1-4443-3361-5 p. 88 [14]
  50.  Fundamentals of Catholicism: God, Trinity, Creation, Christ, Mary by Kenneth Baker 1983 ISBN0-89870-019-1 pp. 228–31 [15]
  51.  Mary, Mother of God by Carl E. Braaten and Robert W. Jenson 2004 ISBN0802822665 p. 84
  52.  The acts of the Council of Chalcedon by Council of Chalcedon, Richard Price, Michael Gaddis 2006 ISBN0-85323-039-0 pp. 1–5 [16]
  53.  An Episcopal dictionary of the church by Donald S. Armentrout, Robert Boak Slocum 2005 ISBN0-89869-211-3 p. 81 [17]
  54.  An introductory dictionary of theology and religious studies by Orlando O. Espín, James B. Nickoloff 2007 ISBN0-8146-5856-3p. 217
  55.  Sourcebook of the world’s religions by Joel Diederik Beversluis 2000 ISBN1-57731-121-3 pp. 21–22 [18]
  56.  Introducing Christian Doctrine by Millard J. Erickson, L. Arnold Hustad 2001 ISBN p. 234
  57.  Karl Barth’s christology by Charles T. Waldrop 1985 ISBN90-279-3109-7 pp. 19–23
  58.  Calvin’s Christology by Stephen Edmondson 2004 ISBN0-521-54154-9 p. 217
  59.  Calvin’s First Catechism by I. John Hesselink 1997 ISBN0-664-22725-2 p. 217
  60.  Encyclopedia of theology: a concise Sacramentum mundi by Karl Rahner 2004 ISBN0-86012-006-6 p. 1822
  61.  The eschatology of Hans Urs von Balthasar by Nicholas J. Healy 2005 ISBN0-19-927836-9 pp. 22–23
  62.  Theology of the New Testament by Georg Strecker 2000 ISBN0-664-22336-2 pp. 401–03
  63.  Matthew by Grant R. Osborne 2010 ISBN0-310-32370-3 lxxix
  64.  Matthew 1-13 by Manlio Simonetti 2001 ISBN0-8308-1486-8 p. 17
  65.  Matthew 1-2/ Luke 1-2 by Louise Perrotta 2004 ISBN0-8294-1541-6 p. 19
  66.  All the Doctrines of the Bible by Herbert Lockyer 1988 ISBN0-310-28051-6 p. 159
  67.  Matthew’s Emmanuel by David D. Kupp 1997 ISBN0-521-57007-7 pp. 220–24
  68.  Who do you say that I am?: essays on Christology by Jack Dean Kingsbury, Mark Allan Powell, David R. Bauer 1999 ISBN0-664-25752-6 p. 17
  69.  The theology of the Gospel of Matthew by Ulrich Luz 1995 ISBN0-521-43576-5 p. 31
  70.  Who do you say that I am? Essays on Christology by Jack Dean Kingsbury, Mark Allan Powell, David R. Bauer 1999 ISBN0-664-25752-6 p. 106
  71.  New Testament christology by Frank J. Matera 1999 ISBN0-664-25694-5 p. 67
  72.  The speeches in Acts: their content, context, and concerns by Marion L. Soards 1994 ISBN0-664-25221-4 p. 34
  73.  Christology by Hans Schwarz 1998 ISBN0-8028-4463-4pp 132–34
  74.  “Mariology Is Christology”, in Vittorio Messori, The Mary Hypothesis, Rome: 2005. [19]
  75.  Paul Haffner, 2004 The mystery of Mary Gracewing Press ISBN0-85244-650-0 p. 17
  76.  Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 736.
  77.  Erwin Fahlbusch et al., “Mariology,” The Encyclopedia of Christianity (Grand Rapids, MI; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill, 1999–2003), 409.
  78.  Communio, 1996, Volume 23, p. 175
  79.  Raymond Burke, 2008 Mariology: A Guide for Priests, Deacons, seminarians, and Consecrated PersonsISBN1-57918-355-7 p. xxi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia