The Dagda

Some fool said this in another thread, and I got to wondering if it's fair to say, that there is bias in theological scholarship, much more than in say scholarship from classical times with no relation to the Bible and even before. Before you nut me in the face and stamp on my head, let me just say this is an honest enquiry not an inquisition, I have no reason to be biased either way, nor do I care that much what people decide.

Is it fair to say that bias is an ever present danger to honest theologians, or is it fair to even say theologians are often biased and thus dishonest, presumably more likely if you are a fundamentalist Muslim, or Catholic scholar/priest.

In that case is there a bit of a mire in historical interpretations, and do they really discuss archaeological evidence with a professional detachment. Or even is there a bias on the other side that is more pernicious than that on the side of the faithful?

Yes or no are theologians pure or have less fidelity to faith than to "truth".

show_no_mercy

Can a theologian remain a theologian if their scholarly conclusions contradict their beliefs?

The Dagda

Of course, I suspect many theologians have had falls from faith, and may atheists have found faith in their work. However one might suggest that those working in the Vatican keep their faith or lack of it to themselves. But there are some people who are no doubt truly just agnostic and don't care about faith also.

dettus

Theology is a joke. Me, I'm an expert in 1980's comic books and 1990's vido games. I guess I'm scholarly too.

The Dagda

I'm an expert on Lord of the Rings also. I tend to agree there is a certain similarity between the study of fantasy that draws wholesale from European religion and religion. So can only unbiased people like me or x discuss religion in a manner that will reveal anything but someone's own prejudices?

Toto

Who are these "atheist or agnostic theologians?"

Please note that this forum is not about theology, but Biblical criticism and history. To accuse someone who claims to be a historian or Biblical critic of doing "theology" is to implicitly accuse them of bias (or possibly just wooly thinking.)

The Dagda

There are plenty of agnostic theologians, studying theology doesn't mean you are a theist, but let's just call it religious studies. Academics studying religion, or whatever.

Toto

There could theoretically be an agnostic theologian, but most academics who study religion are sociologists or historians or anthropologists, and many of those may be atheists.

The Dagda

Funny you should say that I happen to know an agnostic theologian who is a post doctorate. If your hung up on the term theologian, just consider it a scholar of religion.

gentleexit

A better example might be to compare Homer and the bible. Both were treated with reverence in their day. Supplied their respective cultures with their metaphors and cliches, lessons for life. Today only one is "alive" - has laymen pouring over it for pointers. This backdrop adds a lot of heat to study: whether from those who want to strip the bible of its aura or from those who want to preserve it, whether amateur or "professional". Few approach that book as "just a text". Take this forum: you see many fora out there for "Homer criticism"?