Talk:Odium theologicum

[Untitled]
Just some notes on the article. Strangely, most of the current article talks about science rather than religion. The scientific material should go, or at least be relegated to a minor sub-heading. It is on the whole fairly poor, and should add the following:

1. History, etymology, and background 2. Examples 3. Revisions of history - prominently, the revaluation of the Gnostics after discovery of the actual texts. 4. Cross-cultural examples - India, middle-east, etc. Comparison of styles of religious criticism in various contexts, and discussion of whether religious controversies in India, say, deserve to be labelled under the same heading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.241.165 (talk) 23:20, 20 October 2011 (UTC)