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.