B.C.E. or B.C.

[IPet2_9]

The "c" in modern text books means "common" not "christian."

Not if we say it is. If we say it's Christ's era, then as far as we're concerned, that's what it is.

[Reynolds357]

Not if we say it is. If we say it's Christ's era, then as far as we're concerned, that's what it is.

What you just said does not make one bit of sense. The text books say "common." No matter what you say, the word "common" still appears in the text books that our children are taught from.

[Reynolds357]

Reynolds, I assure you you're not the only person bothered by BCE/CE (there's also BP- before present). As an ancient history student at uni, I deal with these dates almost daily. I can see why it's been put forward; because not everyone is Christian. Fine, but the problem is BCE/CE are still dated from the same time as BC/AD- i.e. the birth of Christ. So at the end of the day, it doesn't achieve much!

It does achieve much more than you think. When B.C. and A.D. were used, the C. demanded explanation. However, BCE and CE do not demand explanation. It is simply not being taught what divided our dating system. It is simply being taught that at this point in time we began the common era. There is no explanation being given of what caused the division in our dating system. I talked with several high school kids the other day and asked them what divided B.C.E. and C.E. None of them knew it was "CHRIST." When the term B.C. is used, it demands explanation. Christ can not be left out. You can not teach "Before Christ" without at least teaching some explanation of who Chirst is.

[mouse]

Oh I'm aware of the superficial reason for changing it to BCE. My saying it 'doesn't achieve much' was subtle jab at the futility of using BCE.

[Jeremiah333]

I find it very irritating as well. I look forward to the day that we're all using the letters ASC (After Second Coming).

A big Amen to that!!

[Dani H]

The irony behind all this is that the numbers are still the same. It's still 2008, any way you slice it. And Columbus sailed the ocean blue in ... you know.

(1492 for those of you who fell asleep in history class again).

So the Common Era, to this day, hinges on the (supposed) year of the birth of Jesus Christ.


Stupid people want to remove Jesus and can't even think anything through. Typical.



It'll be intesting to know if the calendar is eventually going to be changed, and what they're going to hinge it all on, after all it's set and done.

Although I hope ASC will be reality by then.

[turtledove]

This new terminology..B.C.E. (before common era) and C.E. (common era) is confusing and waters down the meaning of history to me. Our calendars were set up to reflect the significance of the birth of Christ..since time was arranged to reflect history before and after the birth of Jesus. The new terminology has lost that focus and reflects something which moves away from the importance of Christianity in history..But, what is even meant by the new terms? What is this commonality now expressed? This vague focus does not glorify Christ. Being an old history teacher and a Christian.I hope it goes back to B.C.(before Christ) and A.D. (Anno Domini=the year of the Lord) because Christ IS the focal point of history.

He is the Alpha and the Omega..

Rev 22:13> "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End."

[Michael Snow]

Yes, the removal of B.C. and A.D. (anno Domini, in the year of our Lord) is simply part of the politically correct process to rid the world of references to Christ. Praying that Christians will have the courage to not be ashamed of Christ and to continue the standard usage.
I have had to deal with it in biblical scholarship (I have an M.Div.) and will simply have nothing to do with it.