AD versus Common Era

[Trilliam]

I find it interesting that "Wednesday" (Woden's day) is Mittwoch in Germany.

 

[Rush Limborg]

<sigh> Sorry Christopher, I must have worded that poorly because I certainly would rather not accuse you of reading things in that weren't there. You know what's obnoxious, it's being treated like a fire-breathing fundamentalist that's fighting the "War on Christmas." And are you really saying that BC/AD is persecution towards Jews/Muslims/Hindus/Buddhists/Atheists/etc?

As you said it's ultimately a moot point and BCE/CE works very well, but something you said about inclusiveness is rattling around in the back of my head. Something about the way we're approaching this, and I'd rather add more cultural/religious referents to the soup we have than take any ingredient away from it, but I'm having a hard time formulating what I'm trying to say. Instead of making a bland "one size fits all" designation (that ultimately uses the same reference point, just chooses not to acknowledge it), let's add more cultural markers to the blend. Something like that, maybe it'll come to me later.

Also: Christendom is dead despite the necromantic efforts of the right wing in the US and other places, and it deserved to die. Christendom =/ Christianity, as I'm sure the Hugeonots and Anabaptists and Quakers and Copts would tell you. Not to mention every non-Christian (and probably every non-white) group it ran across.

ITA on the first two paragraphs...but I should note as a member of the right-wing in the US, I say good riddance, regarding the lack of a "Chistendom" theocracy.

Keep the government out of the church, and of the Christian influence already existant in society.

Don't prop it up--and don't tear it down. Don't create religious conventions--and don't remove the ones already there.

 

[Sean Aaron]

I rarely see any need for these markers, usually X number of years ago suffices - but then I don't write historical texts. BCE/CE for me when it happens.

 

[scotpens]

ITA on the first two paragraphs...but I should note as a member of the right-wing in the US, I say good riddance to a lack of a "Chistendom" theocracy.

“Good riddance to a lack of”? I think you just said the opposite of what you were trying to say.

BTW, for the sake of linguistic accuracy, Christendom doesn’t mean Christian domination, Christian rule, or Christian theocracy. It simply means the Christian world or Christians collectively, in the same way Jewry means Jews collectively.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^ Okay...sure.

 

[iguana_tonante]

ITA on the first two paragraphs...but I should note as a member of the right-wing in the US, I say good riddance to a lack of a "Chistendom" theocracy.

Keep the government out of the church, and of the Christian influence already existant in society.

Don't prop it up--and don't tear it down. Don't create religious conventions--and don't remove the ones already there.

Lemme see if I understood it correctly: keep the government out of the church, but don't kick the church out of the government. The church gets to tell government what to do, but the government can't do the same, or even tell the church to shut up.

Keep stuff as they are. I'm sure it's just a very convenient coincidence that stuff as they are now are skewed in favour of your religion. If the situation was opposite, you'd be screaming bloody murder about it. But since it's on your favour, well, it's just tradition, right? Who are we to argue about that? If it was good enough for George Washington and Ronald Reagan, it's good enough for me, dammit. And any attempt at limiting Christian supremacy and privilege... well, that is oppression and persecution, and we can't have it right? AD/BC vs. CE/BCE is just one tiny part of the usual never-ending struggle between those who strive for equality, and those intent on keeping the privilege.

The double standard is staggering, and worst of all, completely unconscious.

 

[James Cole]

If anyone is truly troubled about the AD/BC vs. CE/BCE issue, vote with your dollar or local unit of currency and just don't buy a book that uses the system you disagree with. If a critical mass of people do the same, I'm sure a change would occur.

 

[scotpens]

. . . Keep the government out of the church, and of the Christian influence already existant in society.

Don't prop it up--and don't tear it down. Don't create religious conventions--and don't remove the ones already there.

Lemme see if I understood it correctly: keep the government out of the church, but don't kick the church out of the government. The church gets to tell government what to do, but the government can't do the same, or even tell the church to shut up.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It isn’t the government’s business to tell the church to shut up. Any church. And the last time the church told government what to do was when the Puritans were running things.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^Exactly.

Now, to knock down the pathetic straw man which somehow seems to be set up every dang time: It's not about "the church telling the government what to do". That is not what the debate is about.

 

[Greg Cox]

If anyone is truly troubled about the AD/BC vs. CE/BCE issue, vote with your dollar or local unit of currency and just don't buy a book that uses the system you disagree with. If a critical mass of people do the same, I'm sure a change would occur.

Honestly, who would boycott a book over something like this?

We're talking three or four letters, tops.

Hell, I'm a godless heathen and I can't imagine skipping a STAR TREK book just because a flashback was identified as taking place in 343 BC . . . .

 

[Glitch]

And who knows, maybe Jesus really is the Son of God in the Star Trek universe.

 

[iguana_tonante]

It isn’t the government’s business to tell the church to shut up. Any church. And the last time the church told government what to do was when the Puritans were running things.

Two quick points: as far as I know, in the US the government have the right to tell a church to shut when they actively endorse and support a political candidate, least they lose their tax exempt status; also, I fail to see how it's fair for the government to stay out of church, and yet the church can stay in the government. For reference, see here:

Keep the government out of the church, and of the Christian influence already existant in society. (...) Don't create religious conventions--and don't remove the ones already there.

I suppose it's just a coincidence that the ones already in place are in favour of his chosen religion.

Now, to knock down the pathetic straw man which somehow seems to be set up every dang time: It's not about "the church telling the government what to do". That is not what the debate is about.

It is exactly what the debate is about. Also, the "pathetic strawman" is spot on, since I have yet to hear a justification for giving the Christian religion a privileged place in the political and social discourse, except for: 1) "we have always done so", i.e. tradition; and 2) "I'm one of the privileged, so it's all good", i.e. self-interest.

 

[Trilliam]

This discussion would be much more fun if it were a discourse on the collected works of AC/DC....


"It's a long way to the top
If you wanna Rock & Roll"

 

[Nerys Myk]

That would lead to a highway to hell.

 

[Trilliam]

 

[Thestral]

Lemme see if I understood it correctly: keep the government out of the church, but don't kick the church out of the government. The church gets to tell government what to do, but the government can't do the same, or even tell the church to shut up.

Yeah, this double standard is a real problem for us American Christians, especially those who identify with the so-called "Moral Majority." An unconscious one for some, but gleefully so for others.

AD/BC vs. CE/BCE is just one tiny part of the usual never-ending struggle between those who strive for equality, and those intent on keeping the privilege.

This seems a bit overdramatic, doesn't it?

Keep the government out of the church, and of the Christian influence already existant in society. (...) Don't create religious conventions--and don't remove the ones already there.

I suppose it's just a coincidence that the ones already in place are in favour of his chosen religion.

Well, surely no more of a coincidence than the ones in India are in favor of Hinduism, or the ones in Turkey are in favor of Islam? Culture's not really something that can be imposed in a free society, and as long as people's free practice of their own culture and religion (or lack thereof, or any other rights) aren't being restricted, is it a bad thing if different places have certain cultural conventions that borrow from the dominant culture/religion?

And of course the nebulous fear of "government interference" really has no place in this debate since (to my knowledge) it's not the government dictating BCE/CE, but a cultural shift taking place. But that's more of an aside and not directed so much at you Iguana.

I think I'll just give up on trying to understand what makes BC/AD a big deal but not the days of the week. It's been explained to me but I'm failing to grasp the difference and I think it might just be something about the way I see things. I see them as the same, but I can respect that other people don't.

 

[James Cole]

If anyone is truly troubled about the AD/BC vs. CE/BCE issue, vote with your dollar or local unit of currency and just don't buy a book that uses the system you disagree with. If a critical mass of people do the same, I'm sure a change would occur.

Honestly, who would boycott a book over something like this?

We're talking three or four letters, tops.

Hell, I'm a godless heathen and I can't imagine skipping a STAR TREK book just because a flashback was identified as taking place in 343 BC . . . .

I agree, it would be absurd to boycott a book over BC vs BCE. Sometimes the "religious right" and the "politically correct left" do go to far, but this doesn't really count <G>. But in theory if someone is truly opposed to something (Wal-Mart harming the local community, investments in Sudan etc) they can vote with their money or their Nielsen box.

I find it a little disturbing that In-N-Out Burger has Bible verses on their hamburgers, fries, and drink cups, but I still buy their amazing burgers. It's their freedom of speech and it doesn't impose anything on me

 

[scotpens]

Yeah, this double standard is a real problem for us American Christians, especially those who identify with the so-called “Moral Majority.” An unconscious one for some, but gleefully so for others.

The Moral Majority? Did I just step into a time warp? That organization ceased to exist in 1989.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Hey, I still enjoy the occasional pint of Ben & Jerry's, so...

 

[iguana_tonante]

Yeah, this double standard is a real problem for us American Christians, especially those who identify with the so-called "Moral Majority." An unconscious one for some, but gleefully so for others.

I know it's easy to over-generalize in a debate like that, but I want to point out that I don't extend my criticism of cultural supremacism to all Christians, or all Americans. But there are fringes of both groups that are very intent on imposing their values and culture on other people (consciously or unconsciously), and that's what I dislike.

AD/BC vs. CE/BCE is just one tiny part of the usual never-ending struggle between those who strive for equality, and those intent on keeping the privilege.

This seems a bit overdramatic, doesn't it?

Well, of course. It won't be an internet debate without!

I suppose it's just a coincidence that the ones already in place are in favour of his chosen religion.

Well, surely no more of a coincidence than the ones in India are in favor of Hinduism, or the ones in Turkey are in favor of Islam?

I agree it's not different from other places. I don't think it's bad that different places have different cultural convention. I'd be harping against cultural and/or religious hegemony if I were in those countries too. But I'm a western European, so it's Christian culture that directly impact my life. Nothing personal against your religion in particular.

And of course the nebulous fear of "government interference" really has no place in this debate since (to my knowledge) it's not the government dictating BCE/CE, but a cultural shift taking place. But that's more of an aside and not directed so much at you Iguana.

Yeah, I suppose so. Fear of government is not one of my battle cries.

I think I'll just give up on trying to understand what makes BC/AD a big deal but not the days of the week. It's been explained to me but I'm failing to grasp the difference and I think it might just be something about the way I see things. I see them as the same, but I can respect that other people don't.

And that's why, even when we disagree, it's always a pleasure to talk with you.