Check out the quote on this question: What is the Biblical basis for an Old Earth? and the comments.

What should we do when trying to not paraphrase the bible, but actually doing your own translation of the bible? Is it legitimate to use the quote feature for quotes with no external source?

  • Kind of like this question? Block quotes (at this time) are all we have. Hopefully, we'll get a biblegateway one-box or other ways to style straight biblical quotes. Until then, we're stuck with blockquotes.
    – Richard
    Commented Sep 16, 2011 at 19:08
  • @richard There's also the backtick I'm not sure what this is supposed to signify though I sometimes use it for code inline on StackOverflow.
    – Peter Turner Mod
    Commented Sep 16, 2011 at 19:29
  • Sure, there is the code sample (five spaces) or inline code (the tick marks), but those aren't quite as useful here as they are on other sites like Stack Overflow or dba.se. We really need a way to specify that a quote is a strict bible quote rather than an interpretation. So far, no dice.
    – Richard
    Commented Sep 16, 2011 at 19:47

1 Answer 1


Its more appropriate to use brackets to denote a word change in a quotation. Typically these are reserved to make the quote more clear or to fit in with the sentence it is used in.

However, I think that in this case a bracket would have been more appropriate than the italics used by the OP. It would be much better if he had found a translation that uses that language.

  • I like the idea of blockquote AND backtic for quotes inside quotes
    – warren
    Commented Sep 21, 2011 at 16:34

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .