Whatever a Christian's view on gay marriage, alcohol etc all will agree that the ten commandments are pretty basic.
Quote mining is quoting an opponent accurately, but deliberately out of context so that people will take it that they meant what they didn't mean to say. For example someone (person A) may write "I know it looks like the evolution of the eye is absolutely impossible but it is very easy to see how it happened" and someone else may quote them as saying "the evolution of the eye is absolutely impossible". Person C would read what Person B had quoted and infer that Person A thought that the evolution of the eye was impossible - a completely wrong conclusion.
Has Person B, even though he was strictly accurate, "born false witness" against Person A?
2007-02-09 00:32:23 · 9 answers · asked by anthonypaullloyd 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
For example the following, completely accurate (I just used cut and paste) quote make Answers in Genesis look like they agree that the evolution of feathers was a simple:
"it was a simple matter to change scales into feathers merely by the addition of a chemical"
I don't want to "bear false witness" so I'll make the disclaimer that they did NOT mean what it looks like they mean!
2007-02-09 00:47:49 · update #1
Of course. Fundamentalists have no qualms about altering the truth to fit their agendas.
2007-02-09 17:59:40 · answer #1 · answered by novangelis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think quote mining is a black and white issue. It depends on your intent and how you use it.
For your example it definitely is wrong and misleading and, unfortunately, it is done that way by some people on the creationist side.
If your intent is to show that the person you are quoting has the same misgivings about a stance, say, slow long term evolution, then I don't think it is wrong to quote them even though they may still believe in evolution and get aggravated because you are using their misgivings to argue against evolution.
If you are using them as an expert witness to establish a conclusion based on evidence and not trying to be misleading then I don't think it is wrong.
There is a lot of debate among evolutionists that are trying to revise the evolutionary theory based on the evidence, particuarly "punctuated equilibrium" .
This evidence lines up with an old earth creationist viewpoint or more exacting "tinkering God theory". To use their conclusions of the evidence, based on quotation, and say, I believe that God created new forms, instead of, new forms evolved very rapidly leaving little to no evidence behind, shouldn't be a problem for anyone except atheists.
If a young earth creationist was to comment on how hard it was to defend their viewpoint I don't think it would be out of line for an evolutionist to use that against them.
2007-02-09 01:38:03 · answer #2 · answered by akoloutheo2 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes - and I have seen this happen a lot. Unfortunately a vast majority of it on Christian websites.
You are bearing false witness because you are twisting the statement against that person. I.e. lying. And then you are misleading someone else. So you are bearing false witness to two different people! Just think what would happen if you intentionally mislead someone - and they ended up with false information. Even on God. In Christianity this would be a big no no.
2007-02-09 00:49:01 · answer #3 · answered by noncrazed 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Strictly speaking, it is not bearing false witness in that the prohibition of bearing false witness is limited strictly to court cases.
It is, however, a form of Lashon Hara, literally evil tongue. In American law, for one to be guilty of slander, one needs to spread untruths about another....and in court, as soon as the claims are shown to be true, the charge is thrown out.
Biblical 'slander' is different. It is telling the truth, but in a way that damages. Therefore, to quote someone out of context so as to change the meaning can be a violation of this biblical law.
2007-02-09 01:36:05 · answer #4 · answered by mzJakes 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would have to agree that it should be bearing false witness. Your example was quite extreme as well, as it's rare for someone to just quote somebody out of context. They usually place this out of context quote into their own context, thereby guaranteeing that person C will get the wrong idea about person A's views.
2007-02-09 00:47:59 · answer #5 · answered by The Truth 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When anything is said or written with the intention of misrepresenting someone alse that is bearing false witness.
It is not the words but the motive that matters
2007-02-09 04:03:09 · answer #6 · answered by alan h 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think so. I have never even thought about manipulating what someone has typed to change the meaning. That's so deceitful!! Has that happened to you?
2007-02-09 00:48:28 · answer #7 · answered by Iamnotarobot (former believer) 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not at all. One never knows where one stands with false types.
2016-05-24 00:41:32 · answer #8 · answered by Rose 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jehovahs Witnesses are expert quote miners. But if you go back and read it for yourself, they completely distorted it.
2007-02-09 00:51:53 · answer #9 · answered by Tanya Pants 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋