As I understand it Troeltsch laid down the principles that Duhemian and Spinozistic theories chose to reject or modify. These were principles like methodological doubt – any conclusion is subject to revision with increasing degrees of relative probability of accuracy; the ‘principle of analogy’ – that historical knowledge relies on the assumption that the laws of nature do not change; and that no historical event is divorced or isolated from the sequence of historical cause and effect. Modern-day historical biblical criticism benefits from the insights offered by these perspectives, but few consciously choose to identify themselves as coming from within these camps.

You may be interested to read on this issue “Is Critical Biblical Theology Possible?” in The Hebrew Bible and Its Interpreters, ed. William Henry Propp, Baruch Halpern, and David Freedman (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990), p. 2.