Talk:Pious fraud

Untitled
I've heard "pious fraud" also take on the meaning of simply lying, in argumentation theory. It's a name given to a fallacy. Perhaps that should be discussed here, since the context may not always be religious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.8.133.212 (talk) 05:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Noble lie
On 5 April 2009 an IP editor removed Noble lie from the "See also" section with the edit summary, "Associating Pious Fraud with Noble Lie goes against Wikipedia's ideal of neutrality." This I do not understand. Both concepts involve using deception in service of a perceived higher good. How is the association non-neutral? Which is supposed to be worse? I am restoring the link with an edit summary pointing here in case others think this is an actual controversy. --Wfaxon (talk) 09:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Wfaxon acted correctly.--Wetman (talk) 08:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Source for definition
I tried finding a quick source saying what pious fraud is, I failed to find a textbook or peer-reviewed source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.187.99.79 (talk) 00:37, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Addition
How would people feel if I added a section  containing called something like "Suggested examples of possible fraud within religious texts" I would start with an article on how the author of the book of Matthew altered or misrepresented old testament prophecies and altered the narrative of the stories of christ to make it appear that prophecy had been fulfilled. I would use the story of christ riding two animals on palm Sunday and state how this is a corruption/misunderstanding of Zecchariah. This will be my first ever edit, so any advice or tips will be gratefully accepted 23Enigma (talk) 08:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Yup, WP:CITE mainstream full professors to that extent. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:16, 29 September 2021 (UTC)