I just did.
I’m not going to get into a theological debate with you, unless you want to pursue it in private. But here’s the point:
It was “evil” to fail to keep the Sabbath holy by not following the rules. It was also “evil” to fail to help your animal (as an example) and thus, not only allow unnecessary suffering, but also fail to exercise good stewardship and possibly become unable to provide for one’s family.
Jesus said “get real.” That’s what I’m saying.
You don’t choose between the lesser of two evils just to do it. You do it, and it’s justified, when doing so stops a greater evil. IOW, “choosing the lesser of two evils” is actually not articulating what is happening here. One is “choosing evil.” One is choosing to stop a greater evil by doing a lesser one.
You are certainly welcome. You might have guessed I dig that kind of thing.
It was “evil” to fail to keep the Sabbath holy by not following the rules. It was also “evil” to fail to help your animal (as an example) and thus, not only allow unnecessary suffering, but also fail to exercise good stewardship and possibly become unable to provide for one’s family.
Your position assumes the Pharisaical view to be correct in some part, but that aside, I do not see how preserving the life of one's ox compares to endorsing the murder of babies, adultery, and homosexuality.
"Get real", indeed.
One is “choosing evil.” One is choosing to stop a greater evil by doing a lesser one.
Agreed. One is choosing evil, the other is doing evil. Evil is evil, and one should choose to participate else-wise. Especially when involving the murder of babies.