You have hobbit horses? 
That is so cool!
Posted on 11/10/2005 4:37:28 AM PST by SJackson
You have hobbit horses?
That is so cool!
Grrrrrrrrrrr!
I had heard that the 'giants' of Bible lore are being equated to dinosaur bone-fossils.
Not much different than say the Chinese who are known to record time via the different dynasties. Different peoples record time differently. BCE and CE is a more universal way of recording time... like using the metric system for measurements instead of Biblical cubits.
Perhaps the anti BCE CE people would have prefered Jewish (or Israeli) scientists to use something like 13 Adar 2500 (making a number and date up) it is the correct way to mention the date, who to say the Jewish calendar is the wrong way to notate.
Just so I understand, Dr. Lerner, an observant Jewish journalist living in Israel publishes a paper written at Bar-Ilan University, that’s in Israel not New Jersey, and because it reads BC/BCE he’s a Socialist/Communist/Liberal BS artist trying to erase Jesus from Israeli and American culture?
If that’s the argument, there’s a lot of crap flying, but it’s not emanating from Dr. Lerner.
I guess, I don't know the month but it was likely 2871.
A lot of articles are posted on FR from Jewish World Review. Above the title they read
Jewish World Review Nov. 10, 2005 / 8 Mar-Cheshvan, 5766
Guess I've been anti-Jewish all these years by omitting the Hebrew date when posting.
Nope. The years are identical. CE and BCE were simply used to replace BC and AD because they were too Christian-centric. No other reason than that.
This isn't 2005 AD and 2009 CE.
Which, of course, is why they all use the Christ as 0-year marker in their calendaring system as opposed to the Jewish calendar, the Mayan calander, the Japanese calender, the Muslim calendar, etc.
Try again. They just didn't like being stared in the face with a constant reminder of Christ every time they wrote down a date, so they took the same calender, the same 0-year mark, and removed the offensive wording.
Which is actually silly when you think about it. Since Christ was an historical and archaeological figure why be annoyed because he's used as the 0 mark for a calendar. Unless, of course you don't like Christianity as a religion.
It's sort of like renaming the periodic table of elements into something less chemical because it might offend electrical engineers.
Except for the fact that they use it, then pretend it really isn't based on their dating system.
Kind of like me citing an article you wrote and denying you were the author. But, hey, you should be honored that I cited your article.
Sorry, but you're just wrong on this. Look it up. It is not 2009 C.E. It is 2005 C.E.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era
>>>Which is actually silly when you think about it. Since Christ was an historical and archaeological figure why be annoyed because he's used as the 0 mark for a calendar. Unless, of course you don't like Christianity as a religion.
Jesus was an historical and archaeological figure. He is not accepted as the Christ by Jews, so BC is a problem. Anno Domini, Year of our Lord, is a problem for 2/3 of the world for whom Jesus is not Lord.
Crap is a good description. It's a politically correct replacement for B.C. and A.D..
BC = Christian Era
BCE = Before the Christian Era
CE = Christian Era
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
That would be so cool! LOL!
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.