Royal Ontario Museum abandoned Christian dating system for James ossuary
Posted on 03/03/2005 6:10:29 PM PST by A. Pole
BRAVE NEW SCHOOLS
B.C. not P.C. for students
Educators' move to change 'Before Christ' to 'Before Common Era' sparking outrage
In what's perceived as a case of political correctness trumping history and everyday usage, students in Australia are now seeing the calendar term B.C. – which stands for "Before Christ" – being replaced with BCE, meaning "Before Common Era."
"This is political correctness gone mad," Shadow Education Minister Jillian Skinner told the Sydney Daily Telegraph. "You ask the average mum and dad out there how they refer to time and calendars, they will use Before Christ [B.C.]."
The change by the Department of Education was first noticed during this week's English Language and Literacy Assessment test, as 157,000 students in New South Wales were presented with the new term.
A history portion of the test described an ancient flooding problem this way:
"A government surveyor stood beside the Nile River looking worried. Beside him stood his assistants, carrying his equipment. The year was 590 BCE."
A footnote was included to explain to students that BCE means "Before Common Era" (also known as B.C.).
"This is a case of history being rewritten and abandonment of the use of a calendar which has been around for centuries on the basis that the term might offend someone," Skinner told the paper.
She says she's spoken to parents and other educators who are extremely angry over the move.
The headline in the Telegraph declares: "'Mad' bureaucrats censor Jesus Christ."
"They probably replaced an imagined potential controversy – the use of the term B.C. – with a real one," Steven O'Doherty of Christian Schools Australia told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation. "The fact that they've taken it away has now generated the very controversy they may have been hoping to avoid."
While B.C. is used in normal language as a historical and scientific chronology guide, BCE is often footnoted in international academic, scientific and museum contexts.
New South Wales Education Minister Carmel Tebbutt admits her department changed B.C. to BCE, but says it was done without her consent.
"The point I've made to the department is that both terms are in usage," Tebbutt told ABC. "I'm completely comfortable with that. But if a text actually has B.C. in it, then we should be leaving it as B.C. We shouldn't be changing it to BCE."
The case is reminiscent of a December 2002 controversy in North America.
As WorldNetDaily reported, the Canadian museum displaying an ancient box purported to be the ossuary of Jesus' brother James was no longer using the Christian designations of B.C. and A.D. to mark the calendar, opting instead for more "modern and palatable" terms.
Royal Ontario Museum abandoned Christian dating system for James ossuary
After a long internal debate, the Royal Ontario Museum decided to change "anno Domini" – Latin for "in the year of our Lord" – to C.E., referring to the "Common Era." It also shelved B.C. in favor of BCE.
''A lot of people accept the reality of Jesus as a historical figure but don't accept him as Christ, and to use the words 'before Christ' is really quite ethnocentric of European Christians," Dan Rahimi, the museum's director of collections management told Canada's National Post. "And to use 'the year of our Lord' is also quite insensitive to huge populations in Toronto who have other lords."
Hmm, why "Before Christian Era." is to be better than "Before Christ". The established usage is shorter and more elegant.
Next on the agenda is the dedication of young schoolboys to the Goddess Khali and the adoption of the rat as the national symbol of prosperity.
Good Grief!
Before long, some nervous ninny will be "offended" at the sight of a Christian church, and demand that they should be banned.
Then again, these are the kind of people who enjoy listening to themselves talk, so they'll consider it no chore.
At the instant that I hear "BCE" (before calendars existed or before common era) or "AD" (after dating), I immediately turn a deaf ear or turn the channel. I don't wait one second. I have never seen such academic arrogance and nastiness as the deliberate anti-Christianity involved. Academics should be ashamed of themselves.
I saw some nutcase on Hannity & Colmes last night arguing against the use of BC. He said that it its important to use the PC alternative because BC is not inclusive of all the non-Christians.
It was nauseating, and vomit-inducing. Basically it has now gotten to the point where to recognize the events which precipitated the change in historical dating is to be guilty of being insensitive to non-believers.
Even if this is so, then so what? The only people who get offended or upset by such things are people who go looking for things to offend them. To hell with such people! To set policy by such standards it to unconditionally surrender to the dogma of PC diversity.
Didn't you know, "Thou shalt not offend or make uncomfortable or be insensitive to non-Christians" is one of the commandments of the PC Diversity religion to which the left bows down to?
I thought in Canada it was always referred to as BCE -- "Before Christ, Eh?"
Sorry, but I think some of you are over-reacting. The use of C.E. and B.C.E. took hold in academic, particularly theological, circles, mostly among people who have no antipathy toward our faith. The simple fact is that various scholars studying written materials and other matters of ancient history are from a variety of faiths. I see this terminology not as p.c. overkill, but just common courtesy. Flame away.
Just doing your small part for the good of the whole. This is the most ridiculus nonsense I've ever heard. Why do we Americans feel such a strong need to be PC? Other countries do not bother.
Somehow we have determined that,one,everyone has a "right" to be not offended by anyone or anything; and that, two, "offense" shall be determined by the eye of the beholder.
It's ultimate subjectivity and empowerment to the unbalanced. All they need to do is cry "offended" and the rest of society must bow to their command.
I'm cool with "Before Christ Existed".
Or "Before Christian Era" (Since Christ has always existed)
My opinion on this matter (and I'm an atheist):
1) The majority of the general world population continues to prefer the usage of 'AD'/'BC'--and many are not even familiar with the 'CE'/'BCE' designations.
2) The specification of the Gregorian calendar rightfully resides with its inventor: The Roman Catholic Church. No changes to the specification of the Gregorian calendar have been authorized by the Pope since the introduction of the calendar. Therefore, 'AD' and 'BC' are still formally correct--and 'CE'/'BCE' are not.
3) The principle of reciprocity requires that each culture respect the standard conventions and usages of all other cultures, provided this does not involve the violation of rights. Since Jews (for example) have no right to not be offended by whatever name Christians choose to use for the eras of their calendar (just as Christians, Hindus, Muslims and atheists have no right to not be offended by the implications of the phrase 'anno mundi,') Christians have the right to name the eras of their calendar whatever they wish, and other cultures are required by the principle of reciprocity to respect it. Just because the names of certain cities in Thailand can be easily taken as vulgar words/phrases in English does not give English speakers the right to dictate to Thais what they call their cities. By the same principle, no one has the right to dictate to Christians what they call their calendar eras--and any attempt to do so is both ill-mannered and offensive.
It must also be mentioned that the stated reason by Jews for their unwillingness to use the designation 'anno domini'--namely, that they do not believe that Jesus is their 'lord'--is inconsistent and hypocritical. No one disputes their disbelief, nor their right to disbelieve (certainly not I--I'm an atheist.) However, Jews also do not believe that Yahshuah is 'ha Mashiahh' (that is, that Jesus is 'the Christ', both 'Mashiahh' and 'Christ' mean 'Annointed One,' a term with special significance in both the Hebrew and Christian scriptures.) Consequently, to be logically consistent, Jews should also be unwilling to use the label 'Christian' in reference to the (self-proclaimed) disciples of Jesus, or to use the term 'Christ' to refer to the central figure of the Christian religion, since they emphatically do not believe this person to have been the Annointed One, nor that those called Christians are in fact the disciples of 'the real' Annoned One (who is yet to come, according to Jewish belief.) Therefore, failure by Jews to avoid all reference to the term 'Christ,' in all its forms (including 'Christian Era,') is thus blatantly and inarguably hypocritical, and renders their objections to 'anno domini' doubly offensive.
Of course, Christians also have no right to force others to use their calendar (or to follow their naming conventions.) Consequently, each individual is free to use whatever calendar and/or era names he/she thinks best. Nevertheless, a public school system should teach its students to use the linguistic conventions that are normative in the culture at large.
So, it's now 2005 After Common Era? ACE?
I ran into this two years ago when my youngest daughter was a freshman in high school. The high school is a Catholic high school, and still, they were pushing the BCE.
It happened before in Soviet Union - the craddle of Separation of Church and State.
BCE means simply Before Christian Era.
"Didn't you know, "Thou shalt not offend or make uncomfortable or be insensitive to non-Christians" is one of the commandments of the PC Diversity religion to which the left bows down to?"
And don't forget, they'll be proudly displayed in every courthouse and government building in the land!!!
This is a nonsense and not courtesy. It is not COMMON era for "variety of faiths". Don't you know that that Muslims, Jews and others do NOT count time from birth of Christ?
If you are really so sensitive to non-Christians, why don't you propose to introduce other calendar Muslim for example? Or maybe it should be secular French Revolutionary Calendar with the ten days cycle in place of a seven days week (insensitive to those who reject the Creation story)?
I think that after the defeat of French Revolution and of Soviet system, the militant secularists decided to work on destroying Christian civilization through small steps.
I guess the American government should stop counting years according to the Christian calendar. What about chosing as year 1 the time of Roe Wade decision or the Lenin's coup d'etat?
The birth of Christ was a historic event, not just a religious one.
''A lot of people accept the reality of Jesus as a historical figure but don't accept him as Christ"
OK, so... B.J. would be acceptable?
I'll be dead in the cold ground before I use "C.E." and "B.C.E." I may start spelling out Anno Domini in response to this garbage.
Teacher: Now the (fill in blank) in (blank) were built in 1250 BCE...
Student: What is BCE?
Teacher:The common era.
Student: What is the common era?
Teacher: Ummmm... Uh.... The Christian era.
Main Entry: Christian era
Function: noun
Date: 1657
: the period dating from the birth of Christ
© 2001 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated Merriam-Webster
No, it's ridiculously shallow PC - because they're still counting from the birth of Christ, just trying to hide or deny what they're doing.
Why should a non-Christian (to include Jews) be forced to use a dating system based upon a religion that they do not follow?
Before Current Erra (B.C.E) or Current Erra (C.E.), is much more generic.
Wake up -- it's still the same dating system! They're still counting from the birth of Christ - even though they're trying to cover up that fact with a ridiculous euphemism. If they want to ignore Christ, adopt the Chinese calendar, which starts counting thousands of years earlier (they're in year 4,000- something right now). But it's sophomoric and self-contradictory to say that we can't use a "dating system" that is founded on the belief that Christ is the hinge of history - - and then continue to count from the birth of Christ.
"Common Era" has no meaning. The era that starts at 1 CE is the Christian Era, even if they adopt a term that has no meaning, to try to deny that fact. If you're going to insist on politeness, as you claim to be doing, then let's have some politeness toward people, like me, who can't suffer fools or foolishness - or make-believe, meaningless terms like "common era"
They sould be more open and change it to what they really believe - BN and AN, Before Nothing and After Nothing.
What's really going on is that the Left hates Western Civilization and hates admitting that Christianity is the founding force of Western Civilization. Our dating system reflects the fact that the birth of Christianity triggered a revolutionary change in history - and led to the development of the culture that has culminated in the United States, with our unparalleled institutions and principles. The Left hates it all, and wants to try to erase it. Just like the European Constitution authors want to deny Christianity's role in the shaping of Europe - - - they got an earful from the Pope for their effort to deny historical truth.
Japan, China, and all other non-western civilizations have adopted our dating system.
However, using the term "Common Era" is a good compromise.
To be expected......Daniel 7:25
2453433.71446
Ask any astronomer, and they will explain to you why scientist us the Julian date for all event timings.
And China, by the way, still uses a dating system that ignores Christ's birth, but starts long before that. (In dealings with the West, they'll use the Christian dating system, but not internally)
I agree!
It is now: 2453433.72656
Julian dates (abbreviated JD) are simply a continuous count of days and fractions since noon Universal Time on January 1, 4713 BCE (on the Julian calendar). Almost 2.5 million days have transpired since this date. Julian dates are widely used as time variables within astronomical software. Typically, a 64-bit floating point (double precision) variable can represent an epoch expressed as a Julian date to about 1 millisecond precision. Note that the time scale that is the basis for Julian dates is Universal Time, and that 0h UT corresponds to a Julian date fraction of 0.5.
It is assumed that 7-day weeks have formed an uninterrupted sequence since ancient times. Thus, the day of the week can be obtained from the remainder of the division of the Julian date by 7.
Calendar dates — year, month, and day — are more problematic. Various calendar systems have been in use at different times and places around the world. This application deals with only two: the Gregorian calendar, now used universally for civil purposes, and the Julian calendar, its predecessor in the western world. As used here, the two calendars have identical month names and number of days in each month, and differ only in the rule for leap years. The Julian calendar has a leap year every fourth year, while the Gregorian calendar has a leap year every fourth year except century years not exactly divisible by 400.
This application assumes that the changeover from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar occurred in October of 1582, according to the scheme instituted by Pope Gregory XIII. Specifically, for dates on or before 4 October 1582, the Julian calendar is used; for dates on or after 15 October 1582, the Gregorian calendar is used. Thus, there is a ten-day gap in calendar dates, but no discontinuity in Julian dates or days of the week: 4 October 1582 (Julian) is a Thursday, which begins at JD 2299159.5; and 15 October 1582 (Gregorian) is a Friday, which begins at JD 2299160.5. The omission of ten days of calendar dates was necessitated by the astronomical error built up by the Julian calendar over its many centuries of use, due to its too-frequent leap years.
The changeover to the Gregorian calendar system occurred as described above only in Roman Catholic countries, however. Adoption of the Gregorian calendar in the rest of the world progressed slowly. For example, for England and its colonies, the change did not occur until September 1752. (The Unix cal command for systems manufactured in the U.S. reflects the 1752 changeover.)
For a list of when certain countries switched to the Gregorian calendar, see section 2.2.4 of Claus Tøndering's Calendar FAQ. More information on calendars and their histories can be found in L. E. Doggett's "Calendars" chapter of the Explanatory Supplement to the Astronomical Almanac (ed. P.K. Seidelmann, 1992, University Science Books).
So, like, what's the date in the metric system?
Hint: This is the biblical date of creation!
Now, can you explain to us why Christians would be offended by the Julian date?
JD is metric!
Wow! I'm gettin smart! What about those dates from the French Revolution, where they only had about 10 months? The only one I remember is "Thermidor".
However, for the purpose of this topic, the concept of Julian dates was appropriate. Notice the reference to January 1, 4713 BCE as the official starting time.
BCE
This recognizes both the biblical date of creation, and also our common dating system which is based upon the life of Jesus.
Can you explain to us, why this would offend any Christian?
This is pretty common here in the USA as well.
Most of my textbooks use the terms BCE and CE.
I don't like it, but I get worked up about other stuff more.
Teachers below college still usually call it BC and AD though.
I love the poem Ozymandius......though that is not your name.
Anyway, I am not really that offended either. I am not excited about it, but I will just say Before the Christian Era and the Christian Era.
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.