>BCE>CEDoes Jesus trigger you this badly?
it's fucking hilarious. absolute seethe, baked into academia. do they pretend there's another historic milestone that occurred at 0AD that kicks off the calendar? I don't care enough to ask
>>18482982>Does Jesus trigger you this badly?yes i don't like jews and their jewish no circumcision flavor religion
>>18482982A-ha, my narrative that I pick from mainstream religion must be so audacious people are flabberghasted. Yeah...
>>18482982If Jesus doesn't come back in 4 more years then you faggots will have to stop seething about this.
>>18482982basing our entire chronology of histroy off one guy, who has scant evidence of existence, is just lame and stupidwe should base the year system off of something like the declaration of independence that happened, it is clearly dated and marks a real epoch in human history the borth of a nation /w
>>18483584Jesus is the most influential man ever even if you believe in him or not (which is a bit retarded as Jesus existence is agreed upon by all schoolers) so the chronology of history isn't that crazy >we should base the year system off of something like the declaration of independenceJust fucking lol
>>18483596you will see
>>18483584Good luck getting everyone to agree on a new system. Jesus not existing is a point in favor of keeping things as they are because then we're not naming the year system after a random schizo cult leader who got lucky. We're naming it after a mythical deity, the same way we name other things after mythical characters, like several of the days of the week, a few atomic elements, the planets, etc.
>>18483002academics need shot
>>18483008how do you know what circumcision tastes like, rabbi?
>>18482982I would respect it if it used a completely different start date to completely differentiate it from the Gregorian calendar. Something like the birth of Augustus or some shit. The way it is now, it’s just a name swap for pussies
I'm not a Christard, I find their religion ridiculous superstition, but it's still historically significant and pretending it's not is just the height of farce that falls apart as soon as you ask what's so special about the year 0 CE.
>>18483908>year 0 CE
>>18483008/thread
>>18482982Honestly, I can even see why before *Christ* and anno *Domini* might engender seething, but the thing is that just renaming them without actually changing the zero doesn't do shit.If anything, calling the coming of Jesus the start of the *common* era implies that you acknowledge the universal church.It's just mindboggling how stupid this nomenclature is.
Still waiting for christcucks to tell me what happened on Jan 1, 1 CE.
