This article is a response to Josh Reeves's recent book Against Methodology in Science and Religion: Recent Debates on Rationality and Theology that welcomes Reeves's proposal for an anti‐essentialist future for the field of science‐and‐religion, particularly because it has the potential to move the field beyond current, well‐worn methods: the dominance of Christian theology and doctrine, the importance of credibility strategies, and the dependence upon philosophical discourses. Reeves’ proposal has the potential to open the science‐and‐religion field to other topics, problems, (...) and methods, such as studying lived science‐and‐religion. One way of doing this is to study popular culture and its artifacts such as literature, which portrays a co‐mingling of religion and science at the level of day‐to‐day experiences and practices of characters. For at the level of lived experience, religion and science are not well‐defined disciplines neatly compartmentalized into separate academic departments. (shrink)