Question about BC/AD for you Christians

Dakota rube · Aug 12, 2009

I can't wait for the day when B.C.E. and C.E. is changed to B.P.C. and A.P.C.

I'm not sure, though, when the start date of Political Correctness will be declared.

Piobaire · Aug 12, 2009

Originally Posted by Teger

jesus is bad

I think he's irrelevant, but the point is, his birth is the 0,0 for the time line. All the PC folk have done is change two phrases, not the origin point. If Haysoos is bad, change the entire ******* calendar and have done with it.

Big Pun · Aug 12, 2009

Wow I knew something fuuma didn't.

Fuuma · Aug 12, 2009

Originally Posted by Big Punisher

Wow I knew something fuuma didn't.

Yeah, more like a fantastic brain failure as I'm pretty sure I made a Domini canes joke about Dominican monks this month (don't ask).

Master-Classter · Aug 12, 2009

So weird,,, I was just thinking about this very problem.

My question is, what was the "year" when jesus was born (ie "0&quot

but relative to whatever counting system was currently in place. Was there one?
I assume that there must have been some sort of significant event that formed the basis for counting in the Roman world or earlier, anyone know what the "count" was at when jesus was born?

dah328 · Aug 12, 2009

Originally Posted by Master-Classter

So weird,,, I was just thinking about this very problem.

My question is, what was the "year" when jesus was born (ie "0") but relative to whatever counting system was currently in place. Was there one?
I assume that there must have been some sort of significant event that formed the basis for counting in the Roman world or earlier, anyone know what the "count" was at when jesus was born?
I don't know if it was the only one, but certainly a common one was the accession of emperors leading to dates such as "the third year of the reign of Caesar Augustus," etc.

bradbury · Aug 12, 2009

they would also keep dates by using the guys who won the olympic race, the main event, at marathon. like they would say, it was fifty days after hercules won the race. each winner would be like a new year.

Mark from Plano · Aug 12, 2009

Originally Posted by Master-Classter

So weird,,, I was just thinking about this very problem.

My question is, what was the "year" when jesus was born (ie "0") but relative to whatever counting system was currently in place. Was there one?
I assume that there must have been some sort of significant event that formed the basis for counting in the Roman world or earlier, anyone know what the "count" was at when jesus was born?

1. There was no year zero. The number zero as a counting unit was not used in the western world until the Arabic numeric system was adopted in about the 11th century.

2. In the Roman world dates were measured based on the year of a particular Emperor's reign. For example, the 3rd year of the reign of Emperor Tiberius. The Jews had their own dating system which proposed to have begun at creation I believe (it is still used). Each country used its own system of dates which historians today have to try to match up using common events. The system we're talking about is the closest thing to a world-wide system of measuring dates that has ever been devised.

JLibourel · Aug 12, 2009

The conventional dating system used by the Romans was "Ab Urbe Condita" (from the foundation of the city"--by Romulus). This is supposed to have occurred in 753 B.C.

The Jews frequently used "years of Abraham," which commenced in 2017 B.C., and this system was often used by early Christian chroniclers.

The monk who tried to determine the exact year of the birth of Christ (hence our "B.C./A.D") system was Dionysius Exiguus. He lived in the sixth century. He hailed from the Black Sea area but spent much of his career at Rome. He also devised a system for calculating the dates of Easter.

unjung · Aug 12, 2009

Woah... Jesus was real? So it wasn't my dad eating the milk and cookies?

John152 · Aug 12, 2009

Originally Posted by unjung

Woah... Jesus was real? So it wasn't my dad eating the milk and cookies?

It's fairly certain that Jesus the person existed and the events that occurred are for the most part accurate, but whether he was the son of God is a point of contention.

tagutcow · Aug 12, 2009

Originally Posted by John152

It's fairly certain that Jesus the person existed and the events that occurred are for the most part accurate, but whether he was the son of God is a point of contention.

Geez, I mentioned that it's pretty much an academic consensus that Jesus was historical on aother message board, and a woman ("religious studies" major, natch) went into a rage, claiming that there were only two or three experts in the field who believed so.

unjung · Aug 12, 2009

Originally Posted by tagutcow

Geez, I mentioned that it's pretty much an academic consensus that Jesus was historical on aother message board, and a woman ("religious studies" major, natch) went into a rage, claiming that there were only two or three experts in the field who believed so.

I actually have no idea. I just like being a shithead.

Mark from Plano · Aug 12, 2009

Originally Posted by unjung

Woah... Jesus was real? So it wasn't my dad eating the milk and cookies?

Not really much question that Jesus was a real person. This is from the Roman historian Tacitus (no friend of the Christians) writing about 60 years after Jesus death. In this passage he calls him Christus, the Latin version of the greek word Christ, but it is clear that it is the same person. This passage also gives a description of the Neroan persecution of Roman Christians in the early 60's AD.

Originally Posted by Tacitus

But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired

Douglas · Aug 12, 2009

Originally Posted by Piobaire

I think he's irrelevant, but the point is, his birth is the 0,0 for the time line. All the PC folk have done is change two phrases, not the origin point. If Haysoos is bad, change the entire ******* calendar and have done with it.

To me the funniest part is that you still have the "BC" in there in "BCE" just so nobody gets confused. It's like they wanted to change it, but not so much that it might totally screw everyone up.

Me, I keep things simple. We are in year 1, OE.

Question about BC/AD for you Christians

Stylish Dinosaur

Not left of center?

Distinguished Member

Franchouillard Modasse

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Well-Known Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Stylish Dinosaur

Stupid ass member

FEATURED PRODUCTS

Similar threads

Featured Sponsor

Definitely full canvas only

Half canvas is fine

Really don't care

Depends on fabric

Depends on price

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: