This is due to the fact that some scientists turn out to be religious and some religious leaders also are scientists. This paper provides critical comments regarding three different questions that comprise of controversy between science and theology.
The first exercise concerns Copernicus theory, postulated by a great scientist called Copernicus. Copernicus was a University trained Catholic priest dedicated to astronomy (Russell 59). Ancient scientists, theologians and philosophers strived to explain how the world operates and how it came into existence. Copernicus was not an exceptional. He endeavored to explain planets and the sun are interrelated. According to the astronomical method developed by Copernicus, the sun is positioned at the center of the universe with the Earth and other planets revolving around it in circular paths modified by epicycles and at uniform speeds. The model postulated by Copernicus deviated from an earlier model, the Ptolemaic system that had prevailed in western countries for centuries that placed the earth at the center of the universe (Russell 92).
Although the Copernicus theory could predict accurately the relative distance of the planets from the sun it could not produce more accurate predictions of planetary positions. It appeared not to agree with common sense and also contradict the bible. Basing, on theological, physical and astronomical perspectives some thinkers like Tycho Brahe, objected the idea by Copernicus of the earth moving. Probably that might have been the reason why theologians rejected Copernicus theory, even though Copernicus had dedicated his book to the Pope (Russell 79).
Seen as a smart move, Copernicus book’s publisher, Oisander, added a preface that seemed to shield Copernicus from any wrong doing .The publisher stated in the preface that the theory of the earth’s motion was put forward as theory and not as a conclusion suggesting it was the absolute truth. The approach