BC and AD

Eerin

Member
Feb 15, 2018
12
19
38
FL
✟16,062.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I am sure this has been around a while but,
I have just recently noticed in a lot of dictionaries online they replace BC and AD with BCE(before current events) and CE (current events)....I didn't realize it had escalated that quickly to remove Christ from the mind of this world....scary. Lord have mercy.
 

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I believe that the initials stand for Before Common Era and Common Era, but I am with you on this being just another bit of Politically Correct thinking run amok and evidence of a hostility to religion.

In addition, it doesnt entirely makes sense, since these initials replace BC and AD but keep the counting system that is based upon the birth date of Jesus Christ!
 
Upvote 0

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
I am sure this has been around a while but,
I have just recently noticed in a lot of dictionaries online they replace BC and AD with BCE(before current events) and CE (current events)....I didn't realize it had escalated that quickly to remove Christ from the mind of this world....scary. Lord have mercy.

Not everyone on earth is a Christian. In fact, 86% are not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eerin
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,455
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,775.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I believe that the initials stand for Before Common Era and Common Era, but I am with you on this being just another bit of Politically Correct thinking run amok and evidence of a hostility to religion.

In addition, it doesnt entirely makes sense, since these initials replace BC and AD but keep the counting system that is based upon the birth date of Jesus Christ!
That is indeed an irony, isn't it?
 
Upvote 0

Theodoric

Active Member
Feb 21, 2018
257
234
71
Tennessee
✟18,794.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Not everyone on earth is a Christian. In fact, 86% are not.

True enough, but Albion makes a good point in that we seem to be stuck with the dating convention that traces back (although incorrectly, as I'm sure someone will be quick to point out) to the birth of Christ.

Don't you know that some atheist, somewhere, is crafting a calendar based on the birth of Darwin? And hoping and waiting.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Not everyone on earth is a Christian. In fact, 86% are not
The 86% figure is a joke, but anyway...

I notice that few of these people are opposed to using most of the rest of what Western, i.e. Christian, Civilization has brought them.

They use, for example, our systems of weights and measures, trade in US dollars, and so on.

And most of those who might be that offended by it would, if given the opportunity, use an Islamic or other system, not some contrived counting system that is STILL recognized by them to be the creation of Westerners and Christians.
 
Upvote 0

Chesterton

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding
Site Supporter
May 24, 2008
23,847
20,232
Flatland
✟868,581.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
I believe that the initials stand for Before Common Era and Common Era, but I am with you on this being just another bit of Politically Correct thinking run amok and evidence of a hostility to religion.

In addition, it doesnt entirely makes sense, since these initials replace BC and AD but keep the counting system that is based upon the birth date of Jesus Christ!
It wasn't very smart to use the "C". When I see that I automatically think Before Christian Era and Christian Era. ;)
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The 86% figure is a joke, but anyway...

If Catholics are included, and probably should be seeing they call him Lord and identify with the life, death and resurrection of messiah.... then 31.5% if the earth's population is Christian.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DW_in_AR

Active Member
Mar 23, 2016
30
22
US
✟26,367.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
In addition, it doesnt entirely makes sense, since these initials replace BC and AD but keep the counting system that is based upon the birth date of Jesus Christ!
Well, based upon an estimate of the birth date of Jesus Christ, an estimate most believe is wrong. But we need an epoch, and this one is well-established.
 
Upvote 0

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
True enough, but Albion makes a good point in that we seem to be stuck with the dating convention that traces back (although incorrectly, as I'm sure someone will be quick to point out) to the birth of Christ.

Don't you know that some atheist, somewhere, is crafting a calendar based on the birth of Darwin? And hoping and waiting.

The BC/AD system wasn't even used by CHRISTIANS for the first 5 centuries after his death.
 
Upvote 0

Steve Petersen

Senior Veteran
May 11, 2005
16,077
3,390
✟162,912.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Libertarian
The 86% figure is a joke, but anyway...

I notice that few of these people are opposed to using most of the rest of what Western, i.e. Christian, Civilization has brought them.

They use, for example, our systems of weights and measures, trade in US dollars, and so on.

And most of those who might be that offended by it would, if given the opportunity, use an Islamic or other system, not some contrived counting system that is STILL recognized by them to be the creation of Westerners and Christians.

Checked the numbers. You are correct. 66% are not Christian.
 
Upvote 0

Theodoric

Active Member
Feb 21, 2018
257
234
71
Tennessee
✟18,794.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The BC/AD system wasn't even used by CHRISTIANS for the first 5 centuries after his death.

Well, right, they would have used what the Romans were using. That isn't what I meant to say, I meant only that the dating system is based upon something that the proponents of this change would love to see done away with.
 
Upvote 0

MoneyGuy

Newbie
May 27, 2007
905
604
✟48,923.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I am sure this has been around a while but,
I have just recently noticed in a lot of dictionaries online they replace BC and AD with BCE(before current events) and CE (current events)....I didn't realize it had escalated that quickly to remove Christ from the mind of this world....scary. Lord have mercy.
It's inevitable.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Well, based upon an estimate of the birth date of Jesus Christ, an estimate most believe is wrong. But we need an epoch, and this one is well-established.
It's still based on what was presumed to be the birth date for Christ. And, in fact, it's only off by several years if it is indeed wrong. The point, however, is that if change is warranted by the desire to be more diverse or inclusive or something like that, to retain this starting point that everyone recognizes for what it is does seem odd (not that I'm recommending another one instead ;)).
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
https://www.westarinstitute.org/resources/the-fourth-r/dionysius-exiguus/

Dionysius Exigius (aka Dennis the Short), a monk from Russia who died about 544, was asked by Pope John I to set out the dates for Easter from the years 527 to 626. It seems that the Pope was keen to produce some order in the celebration of Easter. Dionysius decided to begin with what he considered to be the year of Jesus' birth. He chose the year in which Rome had been founded and determined, from the evidence known to him, that Jesus had been born 753 years later. He did have an error in that because one emperor changed his name during his reign, Dionysius counted him twice.

He was almost certainly acquainted with a suggestion by Hippolytus (170–236) that the date of Jesus' birth was December 25, but the trouble was that Hippolytus had not backed up this claim with sound arguments. Dionysius, however, had just the argument: His contemporaries claimed that God created the earth on March 25. It was inconceivable that the son of God could have been in any way imperfect. Therefore Jesus must have been conceived on March 25. This meant that he must have been born nine months later—December 25. Dionysius also concluded that, as a perfect being, Jesus could not have lived an incomplete life so he must have died on March 25 as well!

December 25 was an auspicious choice. In 274, in Rome, the Emperor Aurelian declared December 25 a civic holiday in celebration of the birth of Mithras, the sun god. By 336, in that same city, Christians countered by celebrating the birth of Jesus, the son of God, on December 25. Christians in Antioch in 375 celebrated the birth of Jesus on January 6. Christians in Alexandria did not begin to celebrate Christmas at all until 430. So until Dionysius came along there was confusion over dates, and debates raged, even over the usefulness of celebrating the birth of Jesus at all. What had been universally important for all Christians—the pre-eminent event—was the celebration of Easter.

When, in 527, he formalized the date of Jesus' birth, Dionysius put Christmas on the map. Jesus was born, he declared, on December 25 in the Roman year 753. Dionysius then suspended time for a few days, declaring January 1, 754—New Year's day in Rome—as the first year in a new era of world history.

With a stroke of ingenuity Dionysius had managed to shift the attention of the church from Easter to Christmas. From this point in time it seemed only logical to celebrate the birth of Jesus before his death. If Jesus' death by crucifixion had made possible salvation for all people everywhere, so the argument went, then his birth was the sign that God was identifying with human kind by taking human form.

But Dionysius made a mistake in his calculations. Perhaps he had never read the gospel account of the birth of Jesus. In Matthew Jesus is said to have been born while Herod was still King (2:1). That would translate into 4 BC (or even earlier) according to the calculations of Dionysius. As a consequence, for Christians the year 2000 is not two thousand years after the birth of Jesus, but more like 2004.

That was not his only mistake. Dionysius followed the convention of his times and, as the Roman calendar moved from the year 753 to 754, he called the latter "year one" of the New World order—anno domini, the year of our Lord. The concept of naught (zero) didn't come into Europe from Arabia and India until about two hundred years later. As a result, centuries end with naught and begin with the digit one. So for us the year 2000 was the end of one millennium but it was not the beginning of the next: that occurred in 2001.

Later, when Pope Gregory tidied up the calendar on 24 February 1582, the calendar lost eleven days. To synchronise the calendar of Dionysius with the movement of the sun, October 4 became October 15, and to avoid having to make further adjustments a leap year was introduced. Pope Gregory must also have known of the mistakes made by Dionysius but all he did was to confirm them, perhaps hoping that no one would notice.

There is one other problem. Bishop Ussher (1581–1656) worked out the precise year of creation as 4004 BC (he knew about Dionysisus getting the date of Jesus birth wrong). But he also advanced the view that the earth had a total life span of six thousand years. In order to come up with this conclusion he based his calculations on all the generations mentioned in the Bible.

In reality we do not know when Jesus was born—neither the year, the month, nor the day. The chronology of our western calendar is based on mythology masquerading as theology. We do well to treat it all with the humour it deserves.

If the shepherds were with their flocks in the fields by night, it must have been lambing season. At all other times the shepherds would keep their sheep within a stone corral and lay their bedrolls across the entrance. They were with the sheep in the field since in a crowded corral there was a very real possibility that the newborn lambs might be trampled. Lambing season in Palestine occurred around Passover which would make it early springtime.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
In reality we do not know when Jesus was born—neither the year, the month, nor the day. The chronology of our western calendar is based on mythology masquerading as theology. We do well to treat it all with the humour it deserves.
Much of what you reported is true, but this isn't. While there is considerable discussion about the day of the year, every historian of the era that I have ever encountered, plus astronomers and others, put the year of Christ's birth at several years prior to the date we use (probably somewhere between 2BC and 8BC)--and they do that for various reasons supported by historical and scientific data.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Radagast
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
80
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,295.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
Much of what you reported is true, but this isn't. While there is considerable discussion about the day of the year, every historian of the era that I have ever encountered, plus astronomers and others, put the year of Christ's birth at several years prior to the date we use (probably somewhere between 2BC and 8BC)--and they do that for various reasons supported by historical and scientific data.

I agree with what you have said here but none of that contradicts anything that I said.
 
Upvote 0