natural science & theological science

“Both theology and the natural sciences are to be seen as a posteriori activities, which are a response to ‘the given’. In the case of the natural sciences, ‘the given’ is the world of nature; in the case of theology, ‘the given’ is God’s self-revelation in Christ” (Torrance ).

I like this quote and agree with it. I can see, however, that it can be problematic for many people. The problem is this: the ‘given’ of the world is obvious to all. It really cannot be contended. But the ‘given’ of theology being God’s self-revelation in Christ is not a given for everybody. Torrance even continues to admit that one of the problems he had with the German theologian Pannenberg was that, even though he believed theology was a science, he believed that revelation was a “publicly accessible event” “conveyed in history which is accessible to any who care to observe it”. I agree with Torrance’s assessment of Pannenberg because God’s self-revelation in Christ is obviously not a publicly accessible event. Many don’t even believe that Jesus the man is a historical event, never mind the Christ being God’s self-revelation.

I’m still studying Torrance to see if he resolves this problem because I think it is a serious one. The natural sciences are recognized universally, and the world of nature is a given accessible to everyone. The science of theology, especially God’s self-revelation in Christ, is not universally recognized and is not accessible to everyone. My question, which I hope Torrance satisfies, has to do with the quality and veracity of theological science versus natural science.