An incomplete quote can be completely accurate and at the same time completely false when read in context.
Some words even in Holy writings require a footnote explanation to be understood. Many open RF threads devolve on that very point, the meaning of words - taken one way it is truth, another it is false.
Putting phrases in quotes can even change the meaning.
I realize this creates a burden on the open RF threads - just like the crevo threads - forever needing to define terms, reveal context, etc. But the town square is not a "spin free" zone.
“But the town square is not a ‘spin free’ zone.”
Sadly, because pertinent information is forbidden from the Religion Forum, the Religion Forum is often closer to a “truth free” zone.
"An incomplete quote can be completely accurate and at the same time completely false when read in context."
My example wasn't specifically about quotes, partial or whole, but about data. If a book says that someone lost his faith in his birth religion by the age of 20, it is a certifiable falsehood to say that he held the religion until his death decades later.
But regarding false quotations, there is actually at least one [non-Catholic] poster here who has manufactured quotes of whole cloth. In other words, the poster has put in quotation marks specific words, and then attributed them to persons or organizations who never actually said them, in whole or part. We're not talking about incomplete quotes made to deceive. We're talking about non-existent stuff.
But from what I've seen, that is squarely within forum rules.
Oh well.
sitetest