bacht

Religion and Theology are studies that include and rely on the existence of supernaturalism. Sociology and psychology are based on empirical data and analysis. Philosophy does occasionally venture into metaphysics but usually they stay within a naturalistic frame.

You could argue that religion used to fill the role now played by social science, offering plausible but untestable hypotheses about human nature and behaviour. I don't believe that we've learned all there is to know about the human brain but we know a lot more than ancient priests and scribes.

kcdad

That's right... only seminaries or religious offer the ThD today, the PhD has replaced the ThD in all major secular universities. They are the same degree.

"bullshit"? Hebrew Bible/Old Testament; New Testament and Early Christian Studies; History of Christianity; Theology; Ethics; Comparative Religion; Religion and Society; and Religion, Gender, Culture.

Which of these areas of study is bullshit and illegitimate and which are legitimate fields of study?

Tentative... hmmm. I think if ones begins arguing a conclusion, it is no longer tentative.


John Hanson. He was the first president of The United States.

See, I have a little more mature understanding of History and the process by which History is normalized than you do. For some thing to become History, it doesn't have to be factual. (Like George Washington being the first President of The United States, or being a devote Christian or chopping down cherry trees or anything else Mason Weems wrote about him.)
"Creating a moral tale to emphasize a character trait was a commonly used literary device in 18th century biographies."

spamandham

If you wish to simply engage in straw men and mischaracterizations, we're done. I'm not wasting my time on such silliness. If you'd like to return to the discussion at hand and be civilized, I'll still be here.

kcdad

nicely done. I like the way you dodged the actual post...

Quote:
How can you know what I do or don't understand in regards to theology/theology programs?
"bullshit"? Hebrew Bible/Old Testament; New Testament and Early Christian Studies; History of Christianity; Theology; Ethics; Comparative Religion; Religion and Society; and Religion, Gender, Culture.

Which of these areas of study is bullshit and illegitimate and which are legitimate fields of study?

Quote:
I think you are confusing a conclusion with "doubt". In regards to the past, there is always doubt. The same is often true even in regard to the present. That doesn't prevent me from drawing tentative conclusions though.
Tentative... hmmm. I think if ones begins arguing a conclusion, it is no longer tentative.


Quote:
Right. The best conclusion from the evidence, is that George Washington was a real historical person - the first President of the US. But if that were not the case I would go wherever the evidence led.
John Hanson. He was the first president of The United States.

Quote:
You just admitted you would not. Is that the same level of objectivity you bring to the Jesus table?
See, I have a little more mature understanding of History and the process by which History is normalized than you do. For some thing to become History, it doesn't have to be factual. (Like George Washington being the first President of The United States, or being a devote Christian or chopping down cherry trees or anything else Mason Weems wrote about him.)
"Creating a moral tale to emphasize a character trait was a commonly used literary device in 18th century biographies."

kcdad

here is just one set of areas of possible study for a Doctorate of Theology...

Hebrew Bible/Old Testament; New Testament and Early Christian Studies; History of Christianity; Theology; Ethics; Comparative Religion; Religion and Society; and Religion, Gender, Culture.

Both Philosophy and Sociology (not to mention Anthropology which some do consider a separate field from Sociology) have areas dedicated to the study of Religion. Psychology doesn't have a specific field as such, but devotes much effort into the understanding of religious beliefs and their effects t=on the mind.

I wonder how many PhD dissertations I could find on Religious themes in Sociology and or Philosophy?

spamandham

...and John Frum is based on historical persons, and Jesus was historical.

I take it you're bored. That's fine, you're not the only one who uses this forum for entertainment purposes.

bacht

Yes, and anthropologists don't assume that the tribal gods or totems actually exist, rather they study how their belief system and rituals impact their lives in naturalistic terms.

kcdad

http://www.marshallhall.org/hanson.html

"John Hanson, American Patriot and First President of the United States
(1715-1783)"

kcdad

and how those beliefs and practices originated in natural social evolution

ABSOLUTELY

bacht

So why can't we look at Christian origins in naturalistic terms, as responses by Jews and then gentiles to their social environment? Belief in supernaturalism was basically universal in ancient times but that doesn't mean that miracles really happened (for one thing there were few useful scientific explanations yet for all kinds of phenomena including human behaviour)