Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A.D., B.C. - not P.C.
The American Thinker ^ | November 18th, 2004 | Selwyn Duke

Posted on 11/18/2004 10:39:06 AM PST by .cnI redruM

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-177 next last
To: nothernlights
Is that your main concern, that we correctly reflect the date of the birth of Christ.

What we've got is close enough for government work...

21 posted on 11/18/2004 10:59:58 AM PST by talleyman (So, how's that investigation coming along, Dan? Have you checked Sandy Berger's pants yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
People were absolutely fuming.

Let them. It is not wise to attack a city that possesses excellent writers.

22 posted on 11/18/2004 11:01:35 AM PST by RightWhale (Destroy the dark; restore the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: graycamel
My professors use "B.P.", meaning "before present".

Now, there's a useful scale. Changes every day. Where do these doofus losers come from anyway?

23 posted on 11/18/2004 11:03:00 AM PST by Publius6961 (The most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: talleyman

Maybe to help our Blue staters we could reset the clock just for them and call it BGB (before George Bush)


24 posted on 11/18/2004 11:04:01 AM PST by nothernlights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM
The author is correct - every system of dating has to have a reference position. It used to be common to use the reigns of sovereigns, which would make 1996 the "Fourth Year of The Reign of King William the Crapulent" in the United States. If you don't have a good King list, of course, you're out of luck, which is why our Sumerian chronology is still suspect.

The birth of Christ is, frankly, as good as any whether you're Christian or not. It has the advantage of long usage. The Muslims use the Hejira, which is just as arbitrary (and contains similar but smaller elements of uncertainty). But "B.C.E." and "C.E." are simply silly. Using a reference point while pretending to ignore the referent is an insult to anyone's intelligence.

Everything that is significant in the world began on 9 September 1998. Someday soon historians will be using BBtD and ABtD. Or else.

25 posted on 11/18/2004 11:04:24 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nothernlights; jejones
Sorry!! Too Bad !-- About your other point: a pope in the 900 adjusted the calendar and changed the years. Are you advocating we should change the current date to 2008 .Is that your main concern, that we correctly reflect the date of the birth of Christ.

(1) The Gregorian reform of the calendar took place in the year 1581 of the Julian calendar and the year 1582 of the current Gregorian system.

Not in the 900s. You're off by about 600 years.

(2) One of the reasons why the calendar was adjusted was precisely because of the concern that the inaccuracy of the Julian calendar was falsifying the dating system with regard to Christ's birth.

(3) The date of 4 BC for the actual birth of Christ is a guess by some scholars. It isn't an established fact and a case can be made for the year 1. It would be silly to alter our calendar every time scholars changed their mind about the real dating of the Nativity.

26 posted on 11/18/2004 11:05:35 AM PST by wideawake (God bless our brave soldiers and their Commander in Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM; All

Though I could really care less what terminology anyone else uses, I use bce and ce. Let me explain to you why. The term before "Christ" automatically acknowledges Jesus as the Messiah and son of G-d. Since I a Jew do not believe he was (is) it makes no sense for me to use the term BC. In respect of the Christian calender which bases its 2 era's on the life and death of Jesus I believe that by using the same timeline but not acknowledging Jesus as more than a Rabbi ie. BC, I am showing respect to your religion while not using terminology which defies mine. Let me know what you all think.
-Priceofreedom-


27 posted on 11/18/2004 11:06:02 AM PST by priceofreedom (On A Roadmap To Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

Sorry, I meant "8 September." But if I can get my own signup date wrong...


28 posted on 11/18/2004 11:07:01 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

Ditto. BCE and CE are obnoxious and wouldn't be done if they were taken from any non-Christian dating system. I'm taking a Chinese archaeology class and the American instructor uses CE/BCE. Interestingly, the Chinese don't use them. They use AD and BC when using Gregorian dates.


29 posted on 11/18/2004 11:12:58 AM PST by Varda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

I noticed this when I returned to college in the early 90s, for an advanced degree. I had to take more history, and kept seeing "BCE" and "CE," and couldn't figure out what it meant. When I finally figured out what it meant, I was incensed. But what could I do? If there's a way to stop this PC madness, I' love to know what it is. This essay is right on track, I couldn't agree more.


30 posted on 11/18/2004 11:15:09 AM PST by jim35 (I'll bet Dasshole is Deeply Saddened now!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

I always use BC and AD. If the professor insists on using CE and BCE, usually I put a description: Christian Era and Before Christian Era.


31 posted on 11/18/2004 11:20:01 AM PST by paudio (Four More Years..... Let's Use Them Wisely...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jejones

I thought the calender had been corrected for that a long time ago. Is that still how it is? I'd heard that also, many years ago, but I thought the last update to our calender system was corrected for this. Does anyone have the real scoop on that?


32 posted on 11/18/2004 11:20:08 AM PST by jim35 (I'll bet Dasshole is Deeply Saddened now!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM; msdrby; snippy_about_it; SAMWolf; Darksheare; Corin Stormhands; Valin

No BC or AD? Fine, how about we call the current year 228 US. New Years Day will from now on occur on July 4.

Oh, you don't like this? Suck lemons.


33 posted on 11/18/2004 11:20:11 AM PST by Professional Engineer (What happens when you get an Electrical Engineer wet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

It seems to me, if we really want to be totally PC and not offend anybody, there are only two solutions. One, we reference from the date the earth was condensed out of a blob of dust and gas ("BE" for Birth of Earth). I think that was about 4 billion years ago. Now pinpointing this exact date could pose a problem and there may be a bit more uncertainty than there is about the birth of Jesus. At the other extreme, we could use the aforementioned "Before Present" reference point. We all certainly know when the present is, there's no doubt about that. This is very useful to university academics because there are no longer any absolutes in the academy -- everything is relative anyway. Furthermore, academics insist on rewriting history anyway, so what's the point of having a fixed reference date if history is going to change? Just look at the Clinton library that opened today. Instead of "Impeachment," it focuses on "Persecution." That's rapid fire revisionism and strongly supports the use of BP over the use of BE. Since there's not point fighting the tide of liberalist fantasies, I suggest we pick on, be done with it and get on with our lives.


34 posted on 11/18/2004 11:20:27 AM PST by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: priceofreedom
Let me know what you all think.

Looked fine to me. Better than a few airplanes crashing into buildings to get your point across....

35 posted on 11/18/2004 11:21:06 AM PST by Cyber Liberty (© 2004, Ravin' Lunatic since 4/98)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

They can take the "Common Era" and stick it where the sun don't shine.


36 posted on 11/18/2004 11:21:44 AM PST by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

LOL! I'm going to practice that one!


37 posted on 11/18/2004 11:23:00 AM PST by Ladysmith (November 2, 2004: Taking America BACK!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

Yeah, the 'educated' archeologists have been using BCE and CE for awhile.
Trying to figure out what years they are speaking about is insane.


38 posted on 11/18/2004 11:23:01 AM PST by Darksheare (X)The belled one (X)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Thanks for the info, wideawake! It's exactly what I was looking for. God, I love Free Republic.


39 posted on 11/18/2004 11:23:25 AM PST by jim35 (I'll bet Dasshole is Deeply Saddened now!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty

Never really thought of it that way, I guess its a clear example of the shocking difference of the "religion of peace" and the rest of us.


40 posted on 11/18/2004 11:23:30 AM PST by priceofreedom (On A Roadmap To Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-177 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson