Galileo's downfall was simpler than theological debate: ideas such as his threatened Vatican power. Whilst of course he was proven right in his presumption - the Bible after all was written by people with no scientific knowledge to speak of - at the time it would have been seen as an attack on Church authority that had stifled learning for centuries.
The Church at the time liked their geocentric model despite being invented by a Classical Greek philosopher whose religion was of a veritable soap-opera of fractious gods and (oh dear, female) goddesses. It fitted both the simple arrogance of Man putting himself forward as God's pinnacle of creation and the mystical notion of perfectly circular orbits.
There's none of that nonsense in Genesis. Its unknown author at least realised he didn't know everything though he was probably only drawing on much older beliefs. It's more logical than other creation beliefs, even though its chronology is no more than metaphorical.
The science or religion debate is rather meaningless because you can believe in God and seek to understand the Universe. Science attempts to understand How and When and Where; not Why. It leaves the Why to the philosopher and the theologist.
Where it fails is in Creationism, an intellectually and theologically cowardly but cynically manipulative movement of minds as closed as the 15C Vatican's, which demeans science, Nature, the Bible, God and its own followers alike.
Whilst Lemaitre devised the theory, he didn't invent the name. It is credited to the British astronomer Fred Hoyle, ironically as he ridiculed the new idea as he was an ardent campaigner for the Steady State Theory of a never-starting, never-ending Universe. The phrase itself came from a BBC Radio continuity announcer who publicised a forthcoming programme on the matter by saying something like "... a sort of big bang."
I had no idea but this gnarly metric associated with General Relativity is mind-blowing:
Thanks for making me look!
Ohhh!!!...cool...I love that show!!
He was also an astronomer and professor of physics.
Science and religion usually can't co-existing because they often contradict.
e.g. plants growing before the Sun
Sun revolving around the Earth
illness caused by demons and curses
Don`t have to be a dogmatic anything to understand and accept the theory. I was at Grammar School aged about 12 when the master opened up the debate without any ob
Yes, I did know. The Science/Religion conflict is a relatively recent phenomenon and a product of the atheist movement.
You need to study the issue. The dispute was not over the science, but that Galileo had pronounced that the Bible may only be taken literally on matters of theology; his error was to presume that the Bible may not ever be taken literally on matters pertaining to the physical universe.
I do now! Thank you!