The academic study of religion and the theological study of religion: a. are basically the same because in order to study a religion you have to be a person of faith.
b. are distinct in that theology assumes that scholar and audience belong to a particular faith, while the academic study of religion may be pursued regardless of the author or audience's faith commitments.
c. are basically the same because both disciplines require the learning of multiple languages and socialization into historical-critical methods.
d. are completely different from one another because while the theologian must be a believer in the tradition they study, the academic historical-critical scholar must be an atheist.

D). are completely different from one another because while the theologian must be a believer in the tradition they study, the academic historical-critical scholar must be an atheist.

Explanation:

The key difference that exists between the theological study and academic study of religion is that theology lays emphasis on studying the nature of God or other supernatural forces and faith associated to it while academic study focuses upon critically examining a specific religious belief or behavior from an outlander's perspective.

Thus, the theologian is necessarily a believer as he/she aims to understand how the character of transcendental forces(implying they believe it) while 'the academic historical-critical scholar must be an atheist' as then only he would be able to do critical study without any bias. Thus, option D is the correct answer.

i’m   sure probably just geuss and see which one you can get right, i’m pretty sure it is the combination of goods and services