>watch video blog about historical event>youtuber cuckold uses "common era" and "before common era"
Plenty of academics do too. Whichever form you use is optional
>reading academic book>author says something that doesn't fit with my personal headcanon of events
>>17426135You know Jesus was actually born in 4 BC, the christian monk who created the AD system got the date wrong but by the time anyone figured it out it was already too entrenched.
>when someone says something I disagree with or does something I disapprove of
>>17426275What does "common era" even mean, troonboi?
>>17426232Not to mention there are multiple Christian calendars like the Coptic, Julian, Gregorian etc.
>>17426312NTA but to me it basically means the begining of when the western world (and later the rest of the modern world) adopted and standardized a common epoch. Jesus and the Church may have been the means for getting this standardization started but do you honestly think people in Mongolia are thinking about Jesus whenever they celebrate New Years?
>>17426603>NTA but to me it basically means the begining of when the western world (and later the rest of the modern world) adopted and standardized a common epoch.What event exactly happened in 1 CE that triggered this epoch?
One thing I find annoying is that AD comes before the year while BC comes after. CE and BCE are more consistent as both go after the year
>>17426666Fuck off Satan.
>>17426135Jesus wasn't even born in 1BC though it was a couple years before most likely. We need to rein to the ancient Roman calendar, dating years after the foundation of the city. We remember Romulus...
>>17426664I dunno anon I too have trouble reading posts
>>17426674What differentiates the CE era from the BCE era? What changed?
>>17426679I'm amazed that I literally namedropped Jesus in my original post and you still can't read. Must be some low IQ turd world thing
>>17426683Who the fuck is talking about Jesus? I'm asking YOU what differentiates the BCE era from the CE era.
>>17426686There was no standard epoch before 1 CE. That's literally what makes it CE/BCE. The epochs we used generally centered around specific leaders or dynasties. Once the Church took over Rome and set the epoch to Jesus' time then everyone finally settled on a common epoch. This was of course after the Roman Empire finally fixed the Calendar to utilize a duodecimal month system instead of decimal but sadly we still have ugly 7 day weeks instead of 8 day weeks
>>17426694Fuck you faggot, both the BC/AD and BCE/CE systems are completely unjustifiable from a Western perspective and they do nothing more than alienate the West from it's pagan heritage. And the BCE/CE change does nothing but further cement the christcuck time keeping system under a false veneer of "neutrality". If the West had balls it would do away with such a system in its entirety and leave christcuckery behind in the past where it fucking belongs.
>>17426702The funny thing is the epoch is just what year we use as a reference when counting years from. Before BC/AD there was no "Pagan Epoch" because the reference years were, again, just based around the reigns of leaders and/or their respective dynasties and was different for different people, which is why having a common, standardized epoch was such a significant advancement in western society to begin with. What actually started the epoch doesn't actually matter all that much. And besides, our calendars and days of the week are still very much "pagan" in nature. I hope you're having a good Moon-Day by the way.
>>17426708>What actually started the epoch doesn't actually matter all that muchYou're furthering the standardization of christcuckery. You're nothing more than an useful idiot. Go fuck yourself.
>>17426722But what if I use CE/BCE instead?
>>17426723See:>>17426702
>>17426726Okay what systen should I use? It's year 250 of the American Empire?
>>17426702Look, I don’t like Christianity either but Paganism isn’t coming back. Even if it were possible, it probably wouldn’t be a good idea. Some weird sects would inevitably form and we’d be back here again
>>17426729Hey, that sounds pretty damn good.>>17426739>Look, I don’t like Christianity either but Paganism isn’t coming back.Fuck off.
>>17426729NTA but I remember reading about an old sci-fi novel (A Deepness in the Sky) that refers to far-future civilizations that use an epoch starting from 1970 as year 1, as that is the first year of Unix time as every positive integer is one second since 1970, and this was significant because Unix was the first modern operating system and every single modern computer is built around this anyways. In this scheme the current year would be 55. Just take the current year and subtract 1970 from it.
New date isJanuary 13th 250 G.A.E.
>>17426666Things don't always have to go according to autism, but your concern is duly noted. That's why we don't have metric time or stuff like that, even though they tried it.
>>17426135>>watch video blog about historical eventngmi
least mind = broken christian
>>17426135>waah mommy he's not paying dues to a religion he doesn't believe in! make him do it!
>>17426135Dan Carlin started doing this too
>>17426232>>17426672You're still arguing from the point of Christ.
>>17426232Nope. That’s based off a single and potentially erroneous dating of Herod’s death by Josephus. The Occam’s razor approach says that with the other potential death date- late 2BC-1BC, the census of Augustus during his 25th year, 750 an urbe condita was Christ’s time of birth. this would make him turn 1 during 25 Dec 1BC (sol invictus being this date’s origin is a myth). Therefore, since a zero year didn’t exist, his age during the majority of the year corresponds exactly to the AD calendar. Jesus would have turned 33 on 25 Dec 32 AD and been in fact 33 when he was crucified 3 Apr 33 AD.
>>17426232>Jesus was actually born in 4 BCthere is no primary source evidence of this
>>17429193There is no primary source evidence for the guy existing at all. They started writing hundreds of years later.
>>17429628All of the earliest copies of the Gospels are dated within one century after Jesus' resurrection.
>>17427540OP is a faggot, but as an atheist, I tend to use BC/AD because it’s what I grew up with and it’s a way to show some respect to the blokes who made the Gregorian calendar.
>>17426135can you really blame the world for disliking christcucks, can you really?
>>17426686nothing, it's an arbitrary time wrongly assumed to be jesus' birth year 600 years later. it's just that much of the world was already using it and there was no point in changing it except to remove the outright religious connotations.
>>17429642this is what passes for trolling on /his/ these days.
>>17429193troll pretends he doesn't know that herod the great died in that year and by one version of the fairy tale he was alive when jesus was born.
>>17426702It's always a kike seething over Christianity
>>17426135I come back to /his/ once every few weeks and astoundingly, every time, there's someone bitching about CE/BCE.
