Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

DCHindley wrote: ↑Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:08 am Christian culture already dominates my life far more than I'd like it to.

The culture here is a mix of environmentalism, socialism, feminism, San Francisco worship, and a Nietzschean will to power.

DCHindley wrote: ↑Sat Oct 07, 2017 10:08 amThey want to tell me what to think and not think, who to like or hate, what to do or not do.

They do that here too.

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:33 pm http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ssons.html

I did not realize that BCE/CE were introduced to avoid offending anyone as the Daily Mail article says. I always understood they were introduced to make more sense to as many people who use our dating system as possible.

I'd be interested in identifying and checking any "primary sources" that could shed light on the background to the introduction of the BCE/CE system.

neilgodfrey wrote: ↑Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:03 pm
...I always understood they were introduced to make more sense to as many people who use our dating system as possible.

I'd be interested in identifying and checking any "primary sources" that could shed light on the background to the introduction of the BCE/CE system.

>>

BCE/CE is becoming an industry standard among historians

"..Anno aerae nostrae vulgaris - a phrase broadly consistent with ‘common era’ - appears in an astronomical table devised by the German mathematician and astronomer Johannes Kepler in 1615."

http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... 580#p75580

On the thread topic, I used to do a lot of Wikipedia editing and I used the scholarly abbreviations BCE/CE in what I wrote, then cadres of christians would come along and edit them out. There was a rule on Wiki that allowed it. If an article used BC/AD they alone should be used in the article. I wrote a number of articles using BCE/CE yet the cadres edited them, but as they were in the wrong, they got corrected. This features a we're-a-christian-country argument and those who use it are deadly serious: this is an encroachment on their religion. I could imagine a mini-monkey trial on the subject of moving to BCE/CE.

One way of looking at it would be to interpret the evidently deeply offended religious "conservatives" as an indication that the BC/AD label did indeed serve an ideological agenda and therefore should indeed be banished.

Which one would be the first year of the common era?

iskander wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:04 am Which one would be the first year of the common era?

2017 years ago—for compatability purposes. (Referring to the common era means you don't get incongruities such as Jesus Christ being born 4 before Christ being born 4 before Christ.)

spin wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:36 am

iskander wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:04 am Which one would be the first year of the common era?

2017 years ago—for compatability purposes. (Referring to the common era means you don't get incongruities such as Jesus Christ being born 4 before Christ being born 4 before Christ.)

The year 2017 counting from year 1. The year 1 separates two eras : one era BC and another AD. Is CE and BCE the same as AD and BC?

iskander wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:51 am

spin wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:36 am

iskander wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2017 2:04 am Which one would be the first year of the common era?

2017 years ago—for compatability purposes. (Referring to the common era means you don't get incongruities such as Jesus Christ being born 4 before Christ being born 4 before Christ.)

The year 2017 counting from year 1. The year 1 separates two eras : one era BC and another AD. Is CE and BCE the same as AD and BC?

My previous response dealt with all of this. Year one (2017 years ago) starts the common era: it doesn't separate the eras. The Year before year 1 of the common era was year one before the common era. As I noted earlier, according to tradition Jesus was born in 4BCE. Jesus Christ wasn't born 4 before Christ was born 4 before Christ.

What do CE and BCE mean?