Heringer presents a powerful critique of the historicism and methodological naturalism that has dominated biblical scholarship since at least the late eighteenth century. . . . A concluding paragraph cannot do justice to the boldness of Heringer’s proposal. Heringer’s work will make an excellent companion piece for those studying the influence of major interpreters such as Troeltsch, Kähler, Frei, Wright, and others—interpreters who have shaped and critiqued the historical critical method. Let me simply conclude by noting that Heringer is absolutely right that much of the methodological historical naturalism on display in the history of biblical interpretation should not be uncritically embraced unless one is prepared for re-envisioning the shape of historic Christian orthodoxy. What this distinctly Christian historical method will look like in actual practice is an open question. I hope some scholars will take up Heringer’s challenge as we continue to wrestle with the challenge of uniting history and theology.