Every time I go to a Wikipedia page and find that it says B.C.E. or C.E. instead of B.C. and A.D., I change the former to the latter.
I'm bored and I fully expect 10,000 "not your personal army" replies but it'd be nice if this could happen on a larger scale.
BCE and CE are the commonly accepted scientific terms. You need less Jesus.
They're not scientific terms, they were literally created by a group of triggered Jews, and they're still based on the birth of Jesus regardless of terminology. I'm not even very religious but I enjoy triggering atheists.
Seeing as a lot of people don't believe in the Christ referred to in BC, BCE makes more sense.
How does it make more or less sense when they are both based on the same birth?
Jesus was born 4 BCE. Do you know how retarded it sounds that Jesus was born 4 years before Christ?
Why not change B.C.E to BBC?
Even in a religious context, Common Era makes more sense than Anno Domini
Jesus wasn't born 1 CE, his actual birth year was around 5 BCE.
Then they are both incorrect, as they are both based on Jesus' birth. I ask again how B.C.E. makes any more sense.
nobody can even agree by how far off the 1 AD year is
jesus was entirely fictional
Which is irrelevant to this discussion m'edgelord.
We know when BCE is, by definition. We don't know with any certainty when Jesus was born, so using BC/AD is useless.
B.C.E. is the same thing as B.C. functionally. We know that they occur during exactly the same time span. If one is useless then both are.
Common Era is not based on Jesus' birth. It's based on a commonly used calendar system which originally tried to be based Jesus' birth but now is just common way of counting years. Saying that it's incorrect is like saying that second is incorrect because it's not exactly 3600th of a day.
Common Era makes more sense because it is simply the era of common use, it's all there in the name.
Anno Domini incorrectly asserts that Jesus was born 1 AD, Common Era merely indicates that 1 CE is the epoch commonly used.
It's generally agreed to be off by 4 to 6 years, hence "around 5"
OP is NOT a faggot on this one, Sup Forumsro's.
He is totally correct - if anyone on the Planet refers to the current year as "2017" they are using a numbering system based on when Jesus the Christ from Nazarene was believed to have been born by some Kangs and Popes and sheeeut way back when.
Doesn't matter if Jaysus was real, fake, gay, or not the Messiah. Doesn't matter if Jaysus is our Lord and Savior for real either (except that Allah Snackbars and Jews are pretty much fucked for all eternity...).
So any Buddist or Atheist, or Islamic Jihadi Shitskin that says "2017" is stroking christiandom's magical cock.
Good work, dumbshits.
Common Era cannot be useless because, by definition, we're already using it.
Even something entirely new, like the Unix Epoch, is defined by the number of seconds counted since 1st January 1970 CE
It is based on Jesus' birth. It is a differently-labelled version of the system that is based on Jesus' birth.
Common Era is the politically correct version of anno domini. Saying that is is correct by virtue of its name despite its function is akin to claiming that The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is actually a democratic people's republic.
Thank you for being sane.
Then the Dionysian system is even more useful because it's in wider use. Thanks.
Second is 3600th of an hour you dumbass
Dionysian uses Year 0 and uses negative numbers for pre-0 years.
Nobody uses Dionysian.
The B.C. A.D. calendar is generally referred to as the Dionysian calendar, regardless of other connotations that name may hold.
"Common Era" is taking something that already exists and renaming it simply for political correctness. There's no difference in years between CE and AD, or BCE vs BC. The CE dates even changes between Gregorian and Julian at the same time.
B.C. A.D. isn't a calendar, it's an epoch.
Gregorian is a calendar.
The difference is AD and BC assert a birth year which we know to be incorrect, while B/CE makes no such assertions and merely indicates a common epoch.
This isn't political correctness, this is honesty.
You sound like the kind of person who gets offended at "X-mas" even though X has represented a cross longer than Christianity has been a thing.
B.C. A.D. are a set of two epochs if you want to turn this into a semantic dick-measuring contest.
Bullshit. I call Bullshit on this.
"CE" is just putting lipstick on a Pig and calling her Rosie. Sure, like the real Rosie, you could fuck her, but you'd still be fucking a Pig.
The numbering system for counting years is based - entirely - on when a group of dudes back in history believed that Jesus was born.
You accept that numbering system and use it in your everyday life, then you accept the nomenclature assigned to that system by its creators - hence B.C. and A.D.
You don't get to change history just because you're a whiny little faggot.
They indicate the "before" and "after" of a single epoch.
No, they indicate two separate epochs divided by what was supposed to be Jesus' birth.
The supposed birth event is, itself, the epoch.
I'm not offended by Xmas, because the story in the Bible indicates a birth that was not in December. I'm offended by retailers who want to get the Jesus dollars, but are trying to have their cake and eat it too, doing backflips to avoid as many Christian references as possible.
...
>muh christianity is under attack
>muh 14 words
I knew it.
>The difference is AD and BC assert a birth year which we know to be incorrect, while B/CE makes no such assertions and merely indicates a common epoch.
Complete sophistry as the common epoch it indicates just so happens to be the time since the birth of Christ aka A.D. BCE/CE is simply PC sleight of hand to keep using the christian calendar without having to admit that it is, in fact, the christian calendar.
No, it is not, it is an event that separates two epochs.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I just use BCE as it is considered more neutral.
An epoch is an event or date used as reference for timekeeping.
The incorrect birthdate of Christ Jesus is used as an epoch for the BC/AD system, just like 00:00 1st January 1970 is the epoch for Unix time
NYPA, christcuck.
you only used 13 words, and 10 of them were green or blue texted
of my degenerate board
Actually it's a Romanian calendar. We're using the Roman calendars. They made B.C and A.D, and many of them to all of them persecuted Christians.
b.c.e and c.e you meam before christian era and cristian era ?
Fukin' A, Sup Forumsrah.
Fuck these homo dudes who want to whitewash how much Christianity has shaped nearly every facet of human life.
I'm not even a believer (anymore) but these assholes who try to act like everything in human history is somehow "equally valid" make me sick.
If it wasn't for Christianity, we'd all still be biting the tips off of baby boys dicks, worshiping snakes and alligators, and killing game with stone tipped spears.
Oh wait, the Jews still do the first thing, and nearly every culture other than White Europeans would be doing the latter if it wasn't for White Christian Europeans and our pesky little "inventions" like the Calendar, Computation and Annotation of Time, and other things, like Steam Engines, and sheeeut...
Yes, they persecuted Christians except for that time when they decided to base their entire timekeeping system on his alleged birth date.
NYPA
Explain to me how it is neutral. If it is neutral there must be three sides with B.C.E. in the middle. Otherwise it is in opposition to B.C.
No, an epoch is an era that is separated from other eras by a significant event or significant events.
Fuck jesus
>an epoch is an era
Listen to yourself, you idiot.
An epoch is not an era.
Was a hard guess. But look at today. Everyone is using it. No one is saying it's year 3,000,002,017. Do you really think calculating geonology is easy?
You faggots will argue about anything...
OP's original point was that BCE and CE are lame attempts at political correctness, which are laughable since they still use the exact same numbers ("2017") that was determined by Christians, who tried to sort out when Christ was born. That numbering system you either take in its entirety, or you throw it away and come up with some other number based on some other event, or STFU and just call it BC and AD...
Fucking homo manlet rehashing of history needs to stop.
This tbh fam
OP here. Thank you.
Yes it is.
prntscr.com
You have to go back
You're welcome, but I think we're fighting a losing battle. The Manlet Class of Homo's wants nothing more than to make the Hairy-Armpit-Feminist happy, and attacking anything Christian, because mumzie made her go to Catholic School (when all she really wanted to do is be Emo when she wasn't sucking cock under the bleachers), and now she has a perma-hard-on for anything Christian...
Homo Manlets need to slap the red hair dye off the Emo Feminist, make her suck cock in the year 2017 AD...
But that won't happen, will it?
Easy fix.
Take the earliest record of things that can be tied to a known year (I believe that's the Zuo Zhan, the earliest events in said document occurring in 722BCE) and make that the first year of Recorded History - RH1.
That makes this year RH2739, unless an earlier record can be confirmed.
kek
Um, duhhh! That would literally fuck up every science fiction movie that takes place in the "future"... like Star Trek happens in the year 2364, so, like we'd be looking around and there would be no Starship Enterprise flying around the galaxy, and that would really make watching it on my mom's BluRay really lame.
So lets not do that.
Every time I go to the bathroom in someone's house I flip the toilet paper roll so the hanging part is closer to the wall.
Some times when I go through a drive though I ask what THEY want.
I once went to a birthday party for my niece and while they were all playing simon says I stopped them and told them they don't actually have to do what simon says.
I'm glad to have met a kindred spirit in time wasting OP
You do realize that history isn't a scientific field right?
Saying b.c.e. and c.e. aren't scientific terms is like saying a pony isn't a type of ice cream.
1. Jesus wasn't real
2. If he were you have no idea when he was born
Yeshua ben Yosef was probably a real person, although the teachings attributed to him are probably a conflation of a lot of Jewish mystics active at the time. And of course the magical stuff is pure fiction.
It's B.C. and A.D. if anyone deviates from this attack them.
You're using BC as a base for comparison, which is useless, as Jeebus is about as real as Dianetics. You need to use BCE as a base for comparison.
Sorry to hear you're an addict...
No dubs
No trips
Not true
I dunno man, BC/AD had some pretty good songs I wouldn't call them useless
BCE was chosen as the standard because we don't know when the fuck Jesus was alive and for how long. The only records that have actual dates just mention him. His birth date and lifespan vary, making a dating system based on some arab jew's life incredibly messy.
BC and AD introduce a degree of inaccuracy when it comes to dates, between one year and however many years you believe Jesus lived, depending on how you use the BC/AD system. It's a flawed date system, so it was abandoned. It has nothing to do with "muh triggered niggers are mad about christians" and everything to do with "the dates don't line up, and it's making history annoying to write about."
Yeah, when thinking about this I like to refer to a bit by Louis C.K.
He says that no matter what religion you follow, the Christians have won. And he then goes on to say "if you don't believe me, let me ask you a question. What year is it?"
Regardless of the politically correct garbage replacements, the calendar year commonly used by the entire world is a reference to the birth of the main deity of the Christian religion. BCE and CE being used to dismiss the religious association with the calendar year is kind of like writing "NOT the Bible" on the front of the Bible to dismiss its religious connotation
>Fuck these homo dudes who want to whitewash how much Christianity has shaped nearly every facet of human life.
Yes, like the crusades, the backstabbing of the Templars, the inquisition, the witch hunts, the Crusades, et al.
Some shaping maybe we don't need, Bottom For Jeebus...
Definitely valid. Christianity was sort of a means to an end in my view as well
Christianity didn't win. Christianity lost. The Vatican won by hoarding all the collected wisdom and learning on the planet over a period of 1200 years while destroying all public record of its existence so that they could rewrite everything themselves. And anyone who thinks the Vatican had anything to do with Christianity needs to reread the Sermon on the Mount -- and all the apocrypha the Vatican scrubbed from the Bible.
I don't think we're fighting a losing battle. Contrary to what (((they))) will tell you, atheism is dying. It saw a surge in numbers in the second half of the 20th century as a result of post World Wars pessimism and nihilism but it caused its own demise due to low birth rates. That's why Europe is not having babies at replacement rate, because almost half of the population in some European countries is atheistic. It's what the Quebecois refer to as "revenge of the cradle." Religious people will always have more babies.
Now, you don't have do be religious to not be a PC cuck, and in fact I'm not terribly religious, but there is a strong correlation between atheism and cuckoldry.
...
I was responding to someone who was arguing on a scientific basis.
BCE-CE is the first documented occurrence of SJWs getting what they want.
We still use months that were named after old kings and rulers.
We still use the names of old gods for the planets.
We still keep track of years based on the birth of a religious figure.
Nothing has changed, but weak people with too much time and not enough intelligence decided to change the name because it makes things more palatable to the ignorant and easily enraged masses. Blind leading the blind and whatnot