« Neanderthals: Thoughtful, Well Trained and Perhaps Unable to Speak
Main
Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar Online »
January 10, 2006
What Do Theologians Study?
And Why is Richard Dawkins Less Able to Study it Than a Theologian?
I'm often confused about what theologians study. For sure, they study other theologians and sometimes they study the works of biblical scholars, specifically biblical theologians and they often study sociologists and psychologists. One of my teachers, John Cobb, even studies mathematicians and physicists and he is interested in Buddhist theology as well as Christian theology. Other theologians also study the hard sciences and/or other religions. They all seem to study philosophers. But what exactly do they study in their capacity as theologians.
Notice that I distinguished between theologians and biblical theologians. On the one hand, Biblical theologians like Gerhard von Rad with regard to the Hebrew Bible and Rudolf Bultmann with regard to the Christian New Testament, sought to tease out of their respective literatures what those literatures say about God or gods. They may have gone a little beyond that from time to time but that was the focus of at least a major portion of their work. At their best, contemporary biblical theologians attempt the same thing. This kind of work can be done with any text or oral tradition that speaks of or implies the existence of god or gods (not to over look goddesses).
On the other hand, theology as a self-contained discipline studies . . . ? Well, perhaps they think they are studying God. The Wikipedia defines theology: "Theology is reasoned discourse concerning God." I take this to be a perfectly good definition but what reasoned discourse can one have on this subject. Unless one limits the discussion to what others say or have said or what various non-theological disciplines might contribute to this "reasoned discourse" there is absolutely nothing that anyone can meaningfully say. Some might want to point to personal experience but the discipline best suited to study that is psychology or, in some cases, sociology.
So I find it strange that anyone would claim that Richard Dawkins is a bad theologian. He does make theological claims. His theological claims tend to be informed more by his discipline, biology, and less by the large and self-perpetuating religious traditions and literature. Who is to say that biology is not a good base from which to launch a "reasoned discourse" on God? (Some religious theologians have sure tried to inform biology.) It may indeed be the case that Dawkins incorrectly interprets what various religious theologians or their sources have said. And it is fair to criticize him for such errors. But as someone who seeks to provide "reasoned discourse concerning God," he is no worse and in my mind somewhat better than many others, regardless of how learned in theology they may be.
The reason I bring up Dawkins is that his UK TV series, The Root of all Evil , which I have not seen, has been criticized, by people I otherwise admire, as bad theology.
Posted by Duane Smith at January 10, 2006 9:42 PM | Read more on Religion |
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telecomtally.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1530
Comments
Having seen both programmes I would say his theology is sound. That said , he does come over as a fundamentalist atheist!
Posted by: alan at January 18, 2006 10:07 AM
Sorry, comments are closed for this post.
Send me an email if it is important.