In some ways I'm not far from that young communist.
Yes, I suppose everything is theological. At least any way that
seeks the *arxh/* is theological. And everything is historical.
And political. And economic. Etc. The historian, the
theologian, the literary scholar do not deal with different
Bibles, but they deal in different ways with the same stuff --
and yet these "ways" are also not clearly distinct. I know of no
discipline where "being careful" (or any method) will guarantee
uncovery of the thing itself. As far as I can tell, the
difference between the "bad" historian (or whatever) and the good
one is that the former won't admit her biases.