>BCE
>>18698491Hot take; it's silly to refer to Jesus when talking about things like Ancient Native American settlements and migration patterns and what Chinese Warlord Zing Zong was doing to Chinese Warlord Ching Chong 700 years ago. Using a secularized epoch makes sense when discussing history outside of a western context
>>18698495If it's "secularized" then how come year 0 is still the birth of Christ? Saying BCE/CE is just pathetically burying your head in the sand, trying not to mention Christ while still implicitly acknowledging Him.
>>18698499*year 1
>>18698499Because Christians would endlessly seethe and riot if any other epoch was adopted, so a compromise was made and year 0 became the start of the "common era"
>>18698502Come on now
>>18698495Agreedfpbp>>18698499Because we use the Gregorian Calendar and in its context, it's simpler that way as a sort of chronological lingua francaJust about everyone agrees whether you like it or not that the death of Christ was one of the most significant moments in history. BCE and CE is a way of removing some of the religious connotation while maintaining the standardized time formulaBut I digress. How would you do it?
>>18698491So what year are we living in now? If we dont make that distinction?
>>18698505Come on now what? Are you implying as a Christian that you wouldn't seethe and shit yourself if some other epoch were formally adopted instead?
>>18698499>If it's "secularized" then how come year 0 is still the birth of Christ?It's not. Dionysius Exiguus literally got Jesus' birth year wrong and based it on his own assumptions, historians place Jesus' birth closer to around 7 BCE, meaning the BC/AD system is pretty much based on nothing anyways
>>18698509I would definitely respect it a lot more than this retarded half-measure you people keep trying to push. Continuing to use the Gregorian calendar while pulling this linguistic psyop of erasing Christ from it is pathetic, contemptible and insidious. I'd much rather have you tell me I'm living X years since the scientific method was invented or some shit like that, than have you tell me I'm living 2026 years since the "common era" started, while refusing to tell me what makes this the "common era" and why it started when it did.
>>18698520>the only people who don't like basing their calendars on Jesus are muh hekkin Atheist boogeymen
>>18698523Did I say that?
Jesus wasn't actually born on 1 AD so it's not based on Jesus's birth anyways. Who gives a shit about what people call it?
>>18698499It’s because the Jews hate Christ.>>18698495Counterpoint: Christ is King. Therefore, His life is objectively the best basis for any chronological scale. It’s literally the center of the history of the world.
>>18698531>Counterpoint: Christ is King. Therefore, His life is objectively the best basis for any chronological scale. It’s literally the center of the history of the world.But Jesus wasn't born on 1 AD lmao
Why are christians so incredibly buttblasted about scholars and academics using BCE/CE? It's still the same timeline. Jews live in the year 5781? That's fine!Changing AD for CE? Burn down every university. Deus Vult.
>>18698491It is cringe on two levels.One cringe for censoring Christianity and two cringes for "common era" which makes no sense, there is no common era. Lol.
>>18698531Jews don't use BCE either though, they have their own respective calendar system based on when they believe Genesis happened (current year being 5787)
Before Christ Era Christ Era
>christkek crying about censorship Bro..
>>18698544>Before Christ Existed
>>18698511>>18698528>>18698534>erm akshually we now know jesus was born 7 years beforeWay to miss the fucking point completely. It was accepted for centuries upon centuries that he was born in 1 AD. That's WHY the fucking calendar starts at 1 AD, because we thought that was when he was born. Some fucking trivia about him being born 7 years earlier does not change this or have any bearing on the main discussion at hand, unless your position is that we should change the calendar so that the current year is 2033 AD.
>>18698520>I'd much rather have you tell me I'm living X years since the scientific method was invented or some shit like thatwe could base it on the big bang but we don't actually know when it happened to within a year, so we'd have to generalize by taking the current year of the Byzantine calendar (since that has the earliest known epoch) and adding 14 billion to it
>>18698552>Way to miss the fucking point completely.Incredible irony anon, since the basis of your argument for why BCE/CE is a retarded system for a secular calendar is because that's when Jesus was born, but that's not when he was born, so your entire argument falls apart. You moving the goalpost to the epoch being a colloquialism doesn't work, because that's literally the entire basis of the BCE/CE system anyways
>>18698491>BCE/CECringe because it still uses the same traditional birth of jesus to deisgnate the common era>BC/AD Also cringe because it's a horrible mash of english and latinFunny enough I met a couple of boomers at church who thought that AD stood for After Death
Why the fuck does AD mean "In the year of the lord"? Isn't every year before AD also "the year of the lord"? CE unironically makes more sense than this shit
>>18698567After Domini
>>18698569Jesus is our lord. Yahweh is a psychopathic demiurge.
>not using Seleucid countngmi
>>18698491On one had bce is made by libtard historiansOn the other hand bc glorifies yeshua and yhwhBce it is
After reset
>>18698495He said in English
>>18698499>year 0What year 0, retard?
>>18698556Nta but you're genuinely retarded. Did you not read a word he wrote? It's still the year that he was thought to have been born and traditionally held to have been born, meaning it's still the symbolic birth year of Christ REGARDLESS of whether it is the actual birth year of Christ, meaning 1 BC and 1 BCE both STILL refer to Christ. That's why BCE to avoid association with Christ is meaningless, because it's still centered on Christ. What else happened on 1 BCE to make it the Common Era if not the birth of Christ?
>>18698574Welcome back Marcion.>>18698491yeah i dont like it either. Its too long. CE is fine, but BCE doesnt roll off the tongue as easily as BC.
Funny thing is you'd expect christians would be most in favor of bce/ce considering that we know jesus wasn't born in 1 ce
>>18698908We should all adopt archeology's most obnoxious datin practice: BP. WW2 (80 year BP)
>>18698908Honestly I have to agree. CE is fine, but BCE doesn’t flow as well. In fact I like CE/BC better than AD/BC
>>18698907see>>18698556> You moving the goalpost to the epoch being a colloquialism doesn't work, because that's literally the entire basis of the BCE/CE system anywayshope this helps!
>>18698491I just stop reading/watching/listening to whatever it wasNothing good comes from people who use bceBecause it is legit jewish.
>>18698988>Because it is legit jewish.The Jews don't use BCE, they have their own calendar, retard.
>>18698907>What else happened on 1 CE to make it the Common Era if not the birth of ChristNothing really. A roman monk incorrectly calculated it to be the year of the birth of jesus and now it's too late to shift every single date forward by 4+ years
>>18698987>>18698994BC/AD and BCE/CE are both based on the birth of Christ, regardless of whether that date is accurate or not, meaning BCE/CE is just as Christ centered as BC/AD and as such, is completely pointless.
>BBCE
>>18699068If you're a christian, does the actual year of the incarnation of your god not matter to you? If you worship jesus it's at least 2030 ad, it's just not practical to rewrite all the dates to fit that
>>18698491before clown era, clown era. we are at the cusp of a new tomorrow - the return to monke
>>18699077I don't give a shit about Christianity or when Christ actually died; the date is still based on Christ regardless. The calendar being centered around Christ doesn't bother me anymore than the days being named after pagan gods. I regard BCE/CE as retarded and pointless because it's still centered on Christ.
>>18699068>regardless of whether that date is accurate or notChrike cope.
Should be BA and AA
>>18699136or BH/AH (the H being Homer)
>>18698491Honestly, I mix and mash AD, CE, BC and BCE all the time. I really don't give a shit.
>>18698543Disingenuous lol
Where in the year of Lord, 80 AT
>>18698499>year 0 is still the birth of ChristBrainlet monks didn't even get it right. According to Matthew the nativity story happened during the reign of King Herod the Great and Jesus' family fled to Egypt after his birth in order to escape Herod's kill order. They stayed there until Herod's death somewhere between 4 and 1 BC.Some people think the star of Bethlehem was Halley's comet, which would put his birth even earlier at 12 BC.
>>18699192?
>not using ab urbe conditabarbari
The new Epoch should be based on the founding of the USA and years should be counted on the superior duodecimal system instead of the archaic decimal system. Thus the current year is 18A ("A" in duodecimal denounces what would otherwise be divisible by 10)
>>18699136damn, that's a good one
just use avc like a civilised person
i think BCE is funny because of how much it makes christians seethe so i like it. i think its funnier to make christians angry than it is to make atheists angry personally.
>>18698491It doesn't make any sense, because BCE (Before Common Era) is also common to everyone, so there is no Before in BCE. Just stick to BC and AD, as they actually signify something; namely, before Christ and after Christ (the Year of Our Lord).
>>18700650Christ isn't my lord.
>>18700672I hope your lord is righteous.
>>18700643Why do christians make you seethe?
>>18700927For someone whose entire personality is "I read this book and think being gay is wrong," your reading comprehension sure sucks balls.
