Now you resort to your shell game. You do this all the time. Whenever I point out you’re wrong, you use an example that doesn’t even come close to proving your point.
You originally made this claim: “Before that Christianity was a tad more vigorous and disposing of heretics was done up front with fire and the sword!”
Now you use this as an example:
“Vlad, how quickly you forgot Priscillian, the first of many, who was executed in 385.”
So, you’re claiming Christianity executed Priscillian? Not Christians, not the Empire, but “Christianity”? You’re wrong as usual. Also, one guy (and his companions), no matter who killed him/them or why, doesn’t prove your claim. You also ignore the bishops in Trèves who opposed his execution by the empire and how both Christian and pagan critics of it at the time said the imperial officials were after his wealth. Yeah, in other words, it doesn’t remotely prove your claim.
“There were many others who followed ~ Gnostics seem to have been hit pretty hard.”
No, not really.
“True enough execution for heresy didn’t end until some time in the 1800s, but that period just after legalization seems rather hectic.”
You seem to have no idea of what you’re talking about.
Found those 17th century Russian Vikings yet?
Next time take a look at something besides a single word that pegs your interest and see what the idea was.
Or, try these words on: "bear", "toad", "watermelon", "ecclesiastical"