B.C.E. and C.E.?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by IFBChristian, Aug 27, 2006.

  1. IFBChristian

    IFBChristian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello brother and sisters in Christ,

    I am taking a history class at college and the other day we was going through the book. Some of the years had B.C.E. and C.E. after them instead of B.C. and A.D. One of the students asked the professor what B.C.E and C.E. was. Well, apparently B.C.E. (Before the Common Era) is now the "politically correct" way to say B.C. (Before Christ) and C.E. (Common Era) is the politically correct way to say A.D. (Year of Our Lord)
    I was just wondering if anybody else has heard or seen this and what your thoughts are. My thoughts are that they are now working on taking Christ out of the textbooks by making B.C. and A.D."politically correct." What's next... the removal of Christianity's history from textbooks or watering it down to make it also "politically correct?" One thing is for sure, the B.C.E.'s and C.E.'s in my book are going to be B.C. and A.D. with the help of my friend Mr. Ink Pen.
     
  2. MatthewDiscipleOfGod

    MatthewDiscipleOfGod
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2006
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have known this for alteast 10 years now, before I became a Christian. Even when I wasn't a Christian I think it was pretty lame to change it just because you want nothing to do with God. As an atheist I didn't see what the fuss was.

     
  3. Not_hard_to_find

    Not_hard_to_find
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    0
    This has been around for decades, as I can remember discussions when I was in school in the 50's (and that wasn't the 1850's, no matter what my husband said!)

    What we said about the CE and BCE usage was: Christian Era and Before Christian Era, using the PC initials, yet mentioning Christ's name. If anyone needed additional info we added that both methods use Christ's birth as a delimiter, making Him still the point around which the world turns.

    Also using their usage to explain that it used to be AD and BC gives a second opportunity to explain how PC changes things.

    Looking for opportunities for positive re-inforcement keeps us ahead of the game.
     
  4. tinytim

    tinytim
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/tim2.jpg>

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    Messages:
    11,250
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its been around for a few yrs, but used mostly in scientific circles...
     
  5. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just substitute Christian for Common and keep on going. Before Christian Era and Christian Era.
     
  6. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    I even did that in seminary . . . the prof wanted to object and he wanted to agree . . .

     
  7. FBCPastorsWife

    FBCPastorsWife
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    4,271
    Likes Received:
    0
    I had briefly heard about this a couple of years ago but this is the first I knew of it actually being in place in a textbook. It really irks me!!!
     
  8. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,413
    Likes Received:
    70
    I don't mind it at all. I think it's unnecessary, but I don't care.
     
  9. Marcia

    Marcia
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    0
    Welcome to the real world! :smilewinkgrin:

    This has been around in textbooks for some time - can't recall when it started exactly, but I seem to remember it from the 80's at least, maybe the 70's. It kind of bugs me but I think there are more important issues to worry about.
     
  10. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    I first saw that in Adam Clarke's set of commentaries. I think they were done in the very late 1700s and early 1800s.

    In the introductory part of Genesis is written

    — Year before the common era of Christ, 4004. — Julian Period, 710. — Cycle of the Sun, 10. — Dominical Letter, B. — Cycle of the Moon, 7. — Indiction, 5.
    — Creation from Tisri or September, 1.

    In the introductory part of Matthew is written

    -Usherian year of the World, 4000. -Alexandrian year of the World,
    5498. -Antiochian year of the World, 5488. -Constantinopolitan
    AEra of the World, 5504. -Year of the Julian Period, 4709. -AEra
    of the Seleucidae, 308. -Year before the vulgar AEra of Christ, 5.
    -Year of the CXCIII. Olympiad, 4. -Year of the building of Rome,
    749. -Year of the Emperor Augustus, i.e. from the battle of
    Actium, 26. -Consuls, Augustus XII. and Lucius Cornelius Sulla.
    -Year of the Paschal Cycle or Dionysian Period, 530. -Year of the
    Solar Cycle, 5. -Year of the Lunar Cycle, 13. -Dominical Letters, B
    A.
     
  11. BruceB

    BruceB
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    It looks like GB93433 is saying that this is a very old method of dating - if the PC crowd has resurrected it to eliminate Christ in the reference then they have only fooled themselves. For me this switch from BC/AD is like weights and measurements in the metric system; I just ignor them or convert them to the way I think (old English system) - it matters not. Bruce
     

Share This Page

Loading...