Posted on 06/15/2006 5:05:48 PM PDT by xzins
No, Augustus did not start a dating system. But neither did baby Jesus.
The dividing line need not be a significant moment. Since there was no earth-shaking event on Dec 31, 1 BC/ Jan 1, 1 AD it really doesn't matter.
Too bad it wasn't Lexington Kentucky. It would have complimented that observation with a little more historical reference.
I am? Where did I say that?
Get real. Nobody except a few scholars knows who he is.
I pity the ignorant fool who doesn't even know who Caesar Augustus was.
But censors like you - apparently somebody who doesn't like Christianity - would like to blot out history in order to further your anti-Christian bias.
You make a lot of ASSumptions.
If a Buddhist and Hindu are living in America, they get our culture and it has a calendar that goes AD/BC. That's just the way it is.
"Scholarly?"
Is there something more "scholarly" about saying 1776 AD than 1776 CE?
That's just sleight of hand for SOME reason. I suspect the reason is secular materialism's hatred of Christianity and all things Christian.
Actually, my preference would be to push the zero point back far enough that we would never need to use negative numbers.
Bingo. The dating system was devised with reference to Christ's birth. The only reason for changing it now -- substituting a historical even that was contemporaneous with Christ's birth -- would be to try to downplay Christ and Christ's role in the development of Western (read: Christian) civilization. It's all about memory holes. Winston Smith (in "1984") would recognize what these folks are doing.
You nailed it.
You mean they can actually find a publisher who uses BC and AD?
Funny. I went to Catholic school for my entire school life short of college and we heard BC and AD once maybe twice a year. I think this is getting a bit much. Although, I guess it makes a great story. It is funny how our country has gone wacko on both sides.
These are Southern Protestants and not northern Catholics. I went to school down South and saw only BC and AD.
The thing that really got me was a Catholic priest who liked to use BCE and CE.
I always tell people the "C" means "Christian". In one sense, I guess it does.
"The era that began with the establishment of the Roman Empire by Augustus in somewhere between 15 and 1 B.C., which was a far more significant event than the birth of Christ."
If you believe that you have chosen the first half of your nick quite well. Rome, not Caesar Augustus the individual, definitely had a strong influence on the development of Western civilization, but to suggest even that was of greater import than the life of Jesus is, well, luncacy.
Redcloak:"I thought that it was "Christian era" and "before Christian era"."
I remember, when the acronyms CE and BCE were introduced, that is exactly what they meant. Only later was the word "Common" substituted. Can anyone else recall that being the case?
I fear it is worse than that, Skydancer. "Orient" is derived from the Latin "oriri" which meant "to arise". Thus "orient" referred to the direction from which the sun arose, or the East. To ban the word "Oriental" is to display an ignorance of the origins of our language, something which does not surprise me when talking about any government official here in WA.
Footnote:since I am in pedantic mode, I should add that "Occident" comes from "occidere", meaning "to set" and refers to the direction in which the sun sets.
Class dismissed.
I have always understood BCE to be "Before the Common Era", but if you Christians want to hijack this, too I guess that's your business.
Really? You were around in the early 1700s???
Quote heard on the radio: "This (BCE & CE) is a solution in search of a problem" LOL!
Christian Era and Before Christian Era does have the ring of a certain kind of humorous justice, doesn't it?
The point in my mind is that it's a little ignorant to say "1776 is still 1776 BUT we're more scholarly."
Rotflol!! The ignorance is hysterical.
"I have always understood BCE to be "Before the Common Era", but if you Christians want to hijack this, too I guess that's your business."
I am not attempting to hijack anything. My first encounter of the terms "CE" & "BCE" did have the appellations attached that I noted
"Really? You were around in the early 1700s???"
If that is an historically accurate statement, then I stand corrected, and willingly admit so. I never saw the terms used until sometime in the 60s, and assumed, incorrectly it appears, they were the latest salvo by the secularists in their war on Christianity. When the terms originated hardly seems a matter of overwhelming importance in any case, though their intent does.
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.