Musar for Sanhedrin 179:9
רבא סבר לה כרב המנונא ומתרץ לה כרב המנונא המתנבא לעקור דבר מן התורה בין בעבודת כוכבים בין בשאר מצות חייב מר כדאית ליה ומר כדאית ליה לקיים מקצת ולבטל מקצת בשאר מצות ר"ש פוטר והוא הדין לרבנן ובעבודת כוכבים אפילו אומר היום עיבדוה ולמחר בטלוה חייב מר כדאית ליה ומר כדאית ליה
and reconciles this with him; Raba holds with R. Hamnuna, and explains it according to his views. 'Abaye, agrees with R. Hisda, and reconciles it with him.' [Thus:] If one prophesies so as to uproot a law of the Torah, all agree that he is strangled; partially to confirm and partially to annul it, — R. Simeon exempts him, and the Rabbis likewise.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Simeon is mentioned for this reason; According to him, the death from which he is exempt is obviously strangulation. Consequently the first clause, teaching that he is liable, must mean to strangulation, and R. Simeon not being mentioned there, that is the general opinion. Had the second clause simply stated that he is exempt, it would imply from stoning or strangulation, according to either the Rabbis or R. Simeon, and hence the liability of the first clause would be the same. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> But as for idolatry, even if he said, 'Serve it to-day and destroy it to-morrow', he is liable — each according to his views.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., In the opinion of the Rabbis, to stoning; of R. Simeon, to strangulation. ');"><sup>16</sup></span>