Why do people unironically use these terms when it’s just a poor attempt at secularizing dates. Both follow the same dates as BC and AD, which at the time, were made around when historians believed Christ was born.So even by saying “Before Common Era” it still is based around the year, (once again the date that historians at the time believed was Christ’s birth.)
>>6919238Ok, so other than being a faggot, what other reason is there to using it.
>>6919236They refuse to admit that saying "In the year of our Lord 2019" has a nice ring to it and maybe cant pronounce Anno Domini
It is an attempt at secularizing dates. What's wrong with that?
>>6919245Ok, that sounds more reasonable of an explanation. I’ve started to see academic papers with people using BCE and CE, and its starting to bother me that the students are being autistic about a fucking date.
>>6919255How can it be secular if year zero is the year (reiterating again, at the time) Christ’s birth, the terms change at that time as well.You can never secularize a date like that unless you rework what year zero would be.
>>69192361 CE is based around the year that Teotihuacan culture began
>>6919274>having a date system revolve around a dead culture and dead empire,
>>6919236it's literally because of the jews.Jewish scholars didn't like the fact that AD meant "Our Lord" because it implied Jesus was Lord and not some random Jew that got pwned by the letter "T".
>>6919285The Teotihuacan actually transformed into what we know as modern Iceland. This just isn't that much of a well documented fact
>>6919245>Anno DominiSounds like a gay BDSM porno, desu senpai.
>>6919236Its symptomatic of the culture we live in. It can't be Christian but it can't aspire to becoming something else entirely. Look at all this woke shit that's transparently a bastardization of an incomplete salvage of Christian morality. I'm a pretty reactionary Roman Catholic so you can imagine all the shit I see in the contemporary west today that triggers me. However, the most saddening thing is that the culture can't be an interesting kind of heathen. At least the USSR embraced a high culture of their own that's way more captivating and inspiring than the manufactured shit coming out of the culture factories of 21st century America, and they had a real vision for the future that's more than just "soul-destroying neoliberalism but less racist".
>>6919267>You can never secularize a date like thatBut that's what CE/BCE does, anon. Continually pointing out that it refers back to Christ doesn't change that. Would you prefer it better if scholars insisted on an entirely different dating system?
Because tying what year it is to a religion that maybe 1/5 of the planet follows is kind of silly in a broad context. Obviously nobody wants to redo what year it is, so changing it to "common era" is a secular compromise.
>>6919255Because you don't have the right to hijack culture and religion for your own retarded cult.
>>6919477this confuses the christfag
It is entirely senseless since the 'Common Era' is literally the era of Christ and the entire calendar system came from a Pope. If people want entirely secular they need to do the Holocene Era calendar or some equivalent.So it's like 11937 HE or some shit like that.
>>6919489>hijack culture and religionGo back.
>>6919515Sorry it's actually like 11719 HE or some shit.
>>6919515since we can't pinpoint a good year zero for when the Holocene era began (no one decided to write down "hey we have agriculture now!") that means the Holocene calendar is just a meme based off the Christian one. you say it's 11937 HE but it's actually 12019 HE, meaning 10000 + 2019. So if all we're doing is just adding 10000 to the Christian year why not just keep using the Christian calendar?
>>6919527I'm not supporting a switch to the Holocene calendar I'm just saying if they want to be totally secular they would need to go down this route. They've narrowed the beginning of the Holocene down pretty well in modern times.It's pretty much 11719 HE.
>>6919527>>6919534But they should just start it at 12000 some year, like 01/01/2020 becomes 01/01/12000 in the Holocene calendar, if they really want it to catch on, but it never will obviously.You could get super autistic into the months and days of course and demand a calendar based around accurate astronomical occurrences (for example the year begins with the Spring Equinox), and months and days just being numbered instead of having names after cultures/gods of individual peoples.
>>6919534>It's pretty much 11719 HE.where are you getting this date from?
>>6919558https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_era#AccuracyThey've analayzed ice core samples and such and arrived at a consensus back in 2013. I mean it's not accurate to the year but it's fairly accurate.
>>6919558Coincidentally it's pretty neat as the WRE basically disintegrated/fell around 10000 HE with that system.
Better question: Why do people still unironically use pepe memes?
>>6919236Because they are told to.Those who tell them to, do it because they are hellbent on destroying western heritage.
>>6919236>never change anything, never step on my precious beliefsMan up and grow a pair
>>6919666>hellbent on destroying western heritage.Yes, Satan. Thou will be done.
>>6919236Use A.U.C for everything, its what I do
>>6919285>having a date system revolve around a dead jew on a stick
I whole wholeheartedly support HE.
YESBASED FROG POST
>>6919515>the entire calendar system came from a Pope>literally just the julian calendar with a minor fix that makes the julian calendar be 13 days behind"gregorian" calendar is such a retarded fucking meme
It's like feminists saying womyn
>>6919243Christfags deserve to be made uncomfortable and to live in fear of being persecuted as their god has commanded them to seek persecution and to the make the whole world sick of life itself
>>6920050Why are antiChristians always so fucking cringy? You actively make me want to be a hardline Christian and I used to think religion was retarded af
>>6920068>You actively make me want to be a hardline ChristianLol you are a sheep just automatically making life altering decisions based on shit other people say. Religion is truly for you.
>>6920078I said you make me want to, not that I actually fucking would you buffoon. Just fucking stop talking or interacting with people entirely if you want to actively harm Christianity and its growth.You do nothing but warm people to it. You’re embarrassing.
>>6920082>You do nothing but warm people to it.It is a good that sheep people like that become harmless religious people instead of fascists or commies. I'll continue dissing christianity and imaginary sky man.
>>6919236Jesus Christ makes them seethe>The term "Common Era" became more widely used in the mid-19th century by Jewish academics. In the later 20th century, the use of CE and BCE was popularized in academic and scientific publications, and more generally by authors and publishers wishing to emphasize secularism or sensitivity to non-Christians, by not explicitly referencing Jesus as "Christ" and Dominus ("Lord") through use of the abbreviation[c] "AD".>As early as 1825, the abbreviation VE (for Vulgar Era) was in use among Jews to denote years in the Western calendar.>Common Era notation has also been in use for Hebrew lessons for "more than a century". Some Jewish academics were already using the CE and BCE abbreviations by the mid-19th century, such as in 1856, when Rabbi and historian Morris Jacob Raphall used the abbreviation in his book Post-Biblical History of The Jews.[g]>Adena K. Berkowitz, when arguing at the Supreme Court opted to use BCE and CE because "Given the multicultural society that we live in, the traditional Jewish designations – B.C.E. and C.E. – cast a wider net of inclusion" 
>>6919236CE was actually coined by a Christian believe it or not. Jewish scholars popularized it though because writing Christ's name in a reference date made them buttblasted.>>6920050Holy cringe>>6920068He's been watching too many varg videos and hanging out on /pol/. Happens to a lot of underages, unfortunately.
>>6920101>there are people out there that aren't christian, how dare they?
Jews are also behind the change to BCE/CE on Wikipedia. The talk pages are filled with Jewish names seething at how bigoted BC/AD is
>>6920109Remember when Varg did a 180 on cuckoldry and suddenly started claiming it was le eipque based when pagan Vikings raped and enslaved Christian British women? And that the women secretly wanted it and went willingly because their men were unwashed Christian fanatic beta freaks and the pagan Vikings were all gigaChads?
>>6920123I actually agree with them and I’m not Jewish - Herbert Winkelbergstein
>>6920124No, I have only watched 1 varg video when /pol/tards were trying to meme him, and it was idiotic. Never had a desire to go back after learning who he is and seeing how cringy and out of touch his viewers become. I have no doubt you're telling the truth.
>>6920114The date is based on the time passed since Christ's supposed birth. Every time you even write the year (2019), that's how many years since Christ's birth. I don't know why it upsets you to just write it since that's what it's based on. I'm atheist and it doesn't bother me to write either way.
>>6919357Christian morality? Those slavers? Theyre the worse people ever.
>>6920114How inclusive are other calendars?
>>6920183Yeah we get it, daddy left and you watch varg. You can stop now.
BCE and CE are actually a fantastic metaphor for the modern "social justice" movements. The thing that was the problem in the first place(muh jeebus) is still there, but the appearance has been changed so we'll call it a great victory.
>>6920204Whay religion is best known for corruption pedastry and perpetual war? Jewosh owned Christgolems
>>6919236Tbf it makes sense to use it if you're like a Jap or Chinese who doesnt give a shit about "the year of OUR LORD" and only wants to use a commonly accepted standard
>>6919236Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Jesus born in the year 4 BC? If Jesus was born in the year 4 BC.... then does that mean all of the BC/AD dates are 4 years off?>The Christian scholar was visible shaken.
>>6919267if year zero is the year Christ’s birthI agree with you, but you should know that there is no “year zero”. The year 1 AD came immediately after the year 1 BC. I don’t think the concept of zero was popular when the system was made.
>Ferdinand was shot in 1914 CE you say?>I think you mean -1755734400 Unix Time
>>6919236I use Before Muhammad(PBUH) and After Muhammad(PBUH). BM and AM
>>6919236>Ab urbe condita
>>6919236>reminder that the christard “BC/AD” isn’t even accurate to its own messiah and is off by a few years>still sperging out that people aren’t taking their retardation seriouslyYou can’t make this shit up
>>6919236By saying before Christ and year of our Lord you are forced into implying Jesus is Christ and your lord, which non-Christians cannot do. That's the difference. It doesn't matter that the epoch is the same, the epoch could be literally anything, it makes no difference and nobody is trying to deny Christianity's influence on history.
1. Christ wasn't born in 1 CE.2. Latin is a fuck-ugly language that needs do disappear from academia ASAP.3. Most historians are not Catholic.4. BC and AD look too different to have similar meanings unlike BCE and CE, AM and PM, etc.5. You can read them as Christian Era. Hell, I've heard rabbis do that.
>>6919245No person who has English as his mother language will ever be able to pronounce Anno Domini.
>>6919469>Would you prefer it better if scholars insisted on an entirely different dating system?Yes?
>>6921465Imagine being this retarded and plebby. Just fathom it.
>>6922023I’m not even that guy and your post sounds like massively butthurt christard cope
>>6922248back to /pol/
CE stands for Christian Era, BCE stands for Before Christian Era. Problem solved
This thread is shit, post calendrical ideas>decimal time>ab urbe condite>year's since Chin Shi Huangdi's death>year's since Muhammed's revelation>year's since Julius Caesar's birth>year's since columbus' voyage began>year's since KY Extinction event
>>6922358/pol/ is gay and so are you for bringing it up
>>6919469Yes. Using Christ's birth as the epoch year while pretending it's secular somehow is a bad joke. We're living in the year 230.
>>6920101This. Jews started with this BCE/CE bullshit.
>>6919267>the year 0>implying you know anything about these calendarsReally nigger?
>>6919236Because fully secularising dates would be a retarded waste of time but they don’t want to be explicitly using religious terminology I don’t think either mattersEven if you’re not religious Jesus was one of the most important people that ever lived so there’s nothing wrong with using his supposed birth year as the year 1 is fine (although we don’t actually know for sure when he was born, not that it really matters)
>Not using your own birth year as the 0th yearsCucks.