Christology Explained: Who Is Jesus According to Rausch
This paper examines Thomas P. Rausch's foundational questions in Christology — the theological study of who Jesus is. It outlines Rausch's definition of Christology, compares critical and pre-critical methodological approaches, and reflects on the challenges of studying Jesus across historical, cultural, and theological frameworks. The paper highlights tensions between historical-critical scholarship and faith-based inquiry, noting that the most effective Christology integrates both. It also acknowledges the diversity of Christian traditions — Eastern Orthodox, Protestant, and Roman Catholic — and argues that Christology provides a productive space for discourse that honors both historical evidence and the lived experience of faith communities.
- Introduction to Christology: Rausch's definition and methodological foundations of Christology
- Critical vs. Pre-Critical Christology: Comparing historical-critical and faith-based approaches
- Challenges and Insights in Studying Jesus of Nazareth: Personal reflection on the complexity of multi-disciplinary study
- Conclusion: Christology as an integrative and dynamic field
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Clearly defines key terms (Christology, critical vs. pre-critical) before engaging with them analytically, giving the reader a reliable conceptual foundation.
- Balances textual engagement with Rausch's work with personal reflection, which makes the third section feel honest and grounded rather than merely descriptive.
- Acknowledges methodological tensions — secular historical scholarship versus faith-based theology — without dismissing either, showing intellectual nuance appropriate to the subject.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates source-anchored argumentation: each major claim is tied directly to Rausch's text through paraphrase or direct quotation with page references. This technique shows that analysis is being built on the assigned reading rather than on unsupported assertion, which is a core undergraduate skill in theology and religious studies.
Structure breakdown
The paper is organized as three question-and-answer sections corresponding to a reading-response assignment. The first section defines Christology and introduces methodological considerations. The second contrasts critical and pre-critical approaches, evaluating strengths and weaknesses of each. The third section offers a personal reflection on the complexity and richness of studying Jesus from multiple disciplinary angles. A brief references section closes the paper.
Introduction to Christology
According to Rausch, Christology is the in-depth study of the question "Who is Jesus?" There are many different approaches to Christology, including an analysis of the different names and titles used for him, and the ways Jesus has been depicted across different cultures — such as the uniquely Eastern Orthodox conception of Christ as the Logos. Christology can also address the theological and metaphysical questions related to the nature and role of Jesus. The dichotomy between Jesus as a human being and Jesus as the incarnate Son of God is likewise addressed under the rubric of Christology.
According to Rausch, "popular Christianity today tends to focus on the divinity of Jesus, often at the cost of his humanity" (p. 2). He argues that Christology should be developed "from below," meaning that Christologists need to look to scripture and historiography rather than becoming distracted by the diversity with which different cultures and creeds have depicted or conceptualized Jesus (Rausch, p. 4). However, there are methodological problems with an approach that relies solely on historical documentation, given the limited reliability of New Testament sources. Those sources were written from a Christian perspective and were therefore not intended to be unbiased or objective.
Critical vs. Pre-Critical Christology
A critical approach to Christology is one grounded in historical scholarship and somewhat divorced from faith. Rausch refers to the "historical-critical approach" to describe the elevation of historical fact over idealization and mythology (p. 5). While such an approach would ideally illuminate the historical personage of Jesus of Nazareth, Rausch identifies several drawbacks. These include the inability of historical methods to address the resurrection and other spiritual matters, as well as the tendency for historical-critical methods to carry an inherent bias toward secular worldviews.
Christology must also function as a theological study, which is why engaging with pre-critical Christology helps provide a more complete and meaningful analysis of Jesus. A pre-critical Christology differs markedly from the critical approach, particularly in its tendency to set aside historical methods out of concern that they may undermine the essential role of faith within the Christian narrative. Importantly, a pre-critical Christology did not draw on multiple sources and methods — including scripture, historical artifact, and the evolving phenomenon of faith within Christian communities. The most effective Christology, Rausch suggests, weaves together both theology and history. Both faith and historical fact are integral to a well-rounded critical Christology.
Conclusion
Christology, as presented by Rausch, is not a single fixed methodology but a dynamic field that invites inquiry from multiple directions. The tension between historical-critical and pre-critical approaches reflects a broader challenge in religious studies: how to honor both the demands of scholarly rigor and the integrity of lived faith. The most productive Christology integrates both, drawing on scripture, historical evidence, and the ongoing experience of Christian communities across traditions.
References
Rausch, Thomas P. Who Is Jesus: An Introduction to Christology. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2007.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.