Unconventional Religion

[genkaus]

I mean the "inflicting suffering on others" part, which you added out of necessity

Thus proving that suffering is an integral element of your religion.

The entire Bible, as written by Christians, has a 50% chance of being intentionally written in contradiction to your one verse.
What are your motives for taking that chance?

Is it just one verse? I seem to recall many other verses preaching against money and for sacrificing your belongings.

Was the public aware of this manipulation?

Unlikely.

Like poverty?

Like loss of money. Which doesn't necessarily lead to poverty.

To lose something without getting it back is a sacrifice.

Wrong. Sacrifice requires losing something valuable to you. Losing something that you don't value is not a sacrifice.

The Church actually agrees with Aristotle's teaching on virtue. It goes on to say in the Cathechism:
"It is prudence that immediately guides the judgement of conscience. The prudent man determines and directs his conduct in accordance with this judgement. With the help of this virtue we apply moral principles to particular cases without error and overcome doubts about the good to achieve and the evil to avoid." (CCC 1806)
The Catholic Church, being a Christian church, derives its doctrine from the Bible.
"The prudent give thought to their steps." Proverbs 14:15
"The wisdom of the prudent is to give thought to their ways, but the folly of fools is deception." Proverbs 14:8
"The prudent see danger and take refuge, but the simple keep going and pay the penalty." Proverbs 22:3

Fantastic. Two errors in one argument.

The Church may have hijacked Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics but it replaced their metaphysical basis, thus corrupting those principles in the process. An example of that would be what used to be translated as prudence within Nicomachean Ethics (Phronesis) is now referred to as practical wisdom, thus indicating that the Church's interpretation of prudence is different from Aristotle's.

Secondly, the point of this discussion is not what the Church hijacke form Greek Philosophers later on and how they were able to "derive" it from the bible, its about what your Jesus supposedly taught. And given his and his disciples' eagerness to "martyr" themselves, prudence was not advocated in practice, even if it tentatively was preached.

Knowing someone doesn't automatically make them worthy of you sacrificing anything for them.

Which is why I said "my relationship" with them - not just "my acquaintance" with them.

Both people have the means to save a life.
One uses them. The other doesn't.

And neither action makes either party more or less moral than the other.