JohnStrachan
New member
Splitting hairs are we?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
O
o_mlly
Guest
No, I simply took the time to read the bull:Splitting hairs are we?
Law 25.
The head of state or ruler must force all the heretics whom he has in custody, 8provided he does so without killing them or breaking their arms or legs, as actual robbers and murderers of souls and thieves of the sacraments of God and Christian faith, to confess their errors and accuse other heretics whom they know, and specify their motives, 9and those whom they have seduced, and those who have lodged them and defended them,as thieves and robbers of material goods are made to accuse their accomplices and confess the crimes they have committed.
Last edited:
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
To clarify, it was not hard at all. Then again I do not consider my past self to be representative of atheism, so I am just an example that does not mean such example is the norm. I know many agnostics that do not have such problem for one reason or another- mostly that they do not think about morality on deep level. Again, that is my subjective view on my subjective surroundings hence not an indicator of atheism/agnosticism at large.What OrbisNonSufficit does in his/her own mind isn’t my business. Also note they say wasn’t as hard, not wasn’t hard.
I simply know that morality was subject to compromises when there was nothing preventing just that. Conscience still existed in me, but it was not unchanging neither was it always correct. For example, lying was no problem for me unless it had terrible implications.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.