Poll: 'Anno Domini' in other cultures

Recommended Videos

aashell13

New member
Jan 31, 2011
547
0
0
TheIronRuler said:
You can also say fuck time, why doesn't it work inb the metric system?
Why won't a minute be comprised of 100 seconds, an hour of 100 minutes and a day of 20 hours? have a week of ten days and a month of 100.
Because, quoting 'Bob' here, "The World.. Is... WEIRD!"
If I remember correctly, the French Revolution tried something like that in the 1790's. Everyone else thought it was a retarded idea and refused to have anything to do with it though.

On Topic: yes, I've known that AD stood for the latin form of 'Year of Our Lord' since sometime in middle school. But, I live in Texas so I suppose I don't get points for that. I think the CE/BCE dating system is kind of silly, as someone else pointed out it's the exact same but with a little fig leaf for people who would like to pretend that Christianity wasn't so significant in European history.

Also, I do like bagels. particularly toasted with butter.
 

subtlefuge

Lord Cromulent
May 21, 2010
1,107
0
0
AD is fine. It's visually distinct from BC (unlike BCE/CE), and it's Latin, which is always cool. People shouldn't be so wrapped up in destroying reminders of historical Christianity. It's not imposing anything, and affects absolutely nobody. Most people have no clue what AD stands for or means anyway.

I like bagels, but I'm admittedly a bigger fan of English muffins. Especially EM pizza.
 

subtlefuge

Lord Cromulent
May 21, 2010
1,107
0
0
NaramSuen said:
As an atheist historian who lives in a non-Christian country, this is actually an important issue for me. I see BCE/CE as an attempt to be more inclusive and it is the accepted system used in the discipline of History.
Since you have knowledge in this matter, what exactly is the reason for the switch? To me, as well as probably many other non-historians, switching seems needlessly complex.

It's kinda like adding an "X" to the end of your name.
 

NaramSuen

New member
Jun 8, 2010
261
0
0
subtlefuge said:
NaramSuen said:
As an atheist historian who lives in a non-Christian country, this is actually an important issue for me. I see BCE/CE as an attempt to be more inclusive and it is the accepted system used in the discipline of History.
Since you have knowledge in this matter, what exactly is the reason for the switch? To me, as well as probably many other non-historians, switching seems needlessly complex.

It's kinda like adding an "X" to the end of your name.
Although many countries use their own calenders, the Gregorian calender has become the world standard for dating. Once this happened, there was a movement to adopt a more culturally neutral system of dating. Using the phrase In the Year of Our Lord might upset people who put their faith in a different deity or deities. The use of Common Era actually has a long history and Jewish scholars have been using some variation of it since the 19th century. Around 1980, more and more scholars, institutions, publishers and textbooks started adopting the BCE/CE system. It has become so pervasive that when I read the rare history book which uses BC/AD I do a double take.

Hope that helps.
 

TheIronRuler

New member
Mar 18, 2011
4,283
0
0
Ghengis John said:
TheIronRuler said:
She has a fetish for disregarding christianity, so when in class she use the genesis count.. Is that how you say it in English?
She is one teacher out of many that use the christian calender.
Mind if I ask what you think of that?
Nothing special.
Extreme right wing secular zealot, with a love for "the culture of Judiasm".
 

TheIronRuler

New member
Mar 18, 2011
4,283
0
0
Aurora Firestorm said:
Cyberjester said:
The question is, why do you care?

Over on another forum, I don't tend to hang around on this one as much now so can't comment, but they reported "Merry Christmas" as religious and inflammatory. And there's a current push in politics to get rid of Christmas. Which is kinda funny considering Santa isn't Christian, he's a Coke marketing gimmick. And a bloody good one.

I use AD and I also say "Merry Christmas" if I do offer a seasons greetings rather than "Happy Holidays" or CE. The only people I've come across who take exception to that are "hardcore" atheists who are looking for an excuse to rag on someone.

Like the homosexual pair (not a couple mind) who went out of their way to go to a hotel in the middle of nowhere that had a policy of "No unmarried couples in the same room/bed". Which is reasonable enough, cuts down on prostitution, keeps them out of any sordid business with secretaries and lawyers. But the pair sued them for discrimination and won. That's what this thread looks like IMO.

Grow up, you're giving the rest of us a bad name.
I agree with the spirit of this post. The Internets love to collectively act like a giant raging atheist and quash any kind of religious wording, ever. It bothers the hell out of me. If you guys are willing to use the name of my chosen deity as a swear word, you better get off your soapbox when I want to say Merry Christmas. There is no excuse for abusing someone's religion like that, and you guys whine at us for having religious-oriented acronym that most of American probably doesn't know what it means?

Tolerance doesn't mean sterilizing everything of any trace of religious history. If instead of "BC" and "AD," there were other acronyms standing for, I don't know, some Chinese religious thing, I wouldn't care. It's just history.
This isn't supposed to be a cleansing of anything religious off the face of existance. I am simply telling the user population about this phrase, and try to start a conversation.
 

SilentCom

New member
Mar 14, 2011
2,417
0
0
I didn't know about Anno Domini before this. I did know about CE and BCE however. Lastly, yes I like bagels. Sometimes I make sandwiches out of them.
 

Cain_Zeros

New member
Nov 13, 2009
1,494
0
0
Yes, I know what AD stands for. I still use it, even though I'm not at all religious. I say "God damn it" a lot too.
 

HandsomeJack

New member
Jul 17, 2009
120
0
0
TheIronRuler said:
The definitive lot of you use the phrase 'Anno Domini' when they write down years (in dates), for example this year is AD 2011.
Anno Domini is latin (and also a short version) for 'in the year of our lord'. This implies that Jesus Christ is your lord, and that you are christian.
What about people that don't believe in Jesus Christ, what do they do?
There is actually a replacement for such people, it's called 'CE' in English, and it means 'Common Era'. 'BC' would be replaced with 'BCE' - Before Common Era.
I want to ask you this -
Did you knew what 'Anno Domini' means?
What will you use now?
And lastly, Do you like bagels?
Just means "In the Year of the Lord" which, yes, is a reference to Jesus as it is of latin origin. However, I dont feel that imposesed belief...after all, I can refer to King Henry V without feeling he was in anyway my king or that I owe him any fealty. He was someones king, and that is how he is known and remembered, just not mine. There was a Jesus who is the centrific figure of a widespread religion, who's members created a uniform calendar, but you dont have to believe anymore than he was a man who's birth is a marker for year 1 to use the western calendar.

When I was in highschool I remember having to answer a question about how the universe came to be. The only acceptable answer the school accepted was The Big Bang theory. I refused to agree with the school for two reasons:

1) I am religious, therefore I believe there is a divine element...though I also believe there is a lot of stuff that isnt explained in religion that science is revealing to us.

2) The Big Bang is a theory and I refuse to purport it as fact JUST as much as I would refuse to put the "world created exactly 7000 years ago, please ignore the dinosaurs" creationist answer if my great aunt who is a nun handed me a test asking the same question. We have ideas and some circumstantial evidence, but noone knows for a fact. We have a Bible, but some of it is allegory and it isnt always clear when it is and when it is literal.

However, there was a way around it that I feel works so people who dont dont buy into christian belief can use the same calendar without feeling disingenuous. On my test I put "Many believe that..." at the start of the answer. Science and religion dont have to be hostile to eachother just because they may not agree on everything. Civil dissagreement.

Bagels are nifty. Here were I live, they make this AWESOME smoked salmon cream cheese spread for em.
 

Wintermoot

New member
Aug 20, 2009
6,563
0
0
I knew what AD was before this post.
And I think we should look for a new "year 1/0" we don,t even know if Jesus was real or not!
PS
There is a new calendar that uses Human,s start of society as year one it,s called "Human Era" (HE) and ads 10.000 year,s to the AD year (making this HE 12011)
 

Taylor Long

New member
Apr 13, 2011
3
0
0
I knew it. I use AD because CE is idiotic (THANK YOU for putting "AD" before the year...no one ever does...). Also, fuck bagels.
 

HandsomeJack

New member
Jul 17, 2009
120
0
0
NaramSuen said:
subtlefuge said:
NaramSuen said:
As an atheist historian who lives in a non-Christian country, this is actually an important issue for me. I see BCE/CE as an attempt to be more inclusive and it is the accepted system used in the discipline of History.
Since you have knowledge in this matter, what exactly is the reason for the switch? To me, as well as probably many other non-historians, switching seems needlessly complex.

It's kinda like adding an "X" to the end of your name.
Although many countries use their own calenders, the Gregorian calender has become the world standard for dating. Once this happened, there was a movement to adopt a more culturally neutral system of dating. Using the phrase In the Year of Our Lord might upset people who put their faith in a different deity or deities. The use of Common Era actually has a long history and Jewish scholars have been using some variation of it since the 19th century. Around 1980, more and more scholars, institutions, publishers and textbooks started adopting the BCE/CE system. It has become so pervasive that when I read the rare history book which uses BC/AD I do a double take.

Hope that helps.
Under the banner of your logic, I would gladly accept "Common Era." I will continue to use AD for now though, simply because that is what is almost exclusively used in my location, but if CE starts to really catch on I wont begrudge the change. Accepting is a helluvuh lot better reason for change than resenting.
 

HandsomeJack

New member
Jul 17, 2009
120
0
0
The Mighty Thesaurus said:
HandsomeJack said:
The Big Bang is a theory and I refuse to purport it as fact
and this is why we shouldn't let laymen (doh hoh ho) come across scientific terminology.
I assume that jab was meant to imply that Big Bang is factual and "Laymen" are to simple to understand it.

You do know that theory means it hasnt been definitively proven, especially when the material falls under "Speculative Physics." And givent that it is still being refined as is considered open to further research and speculation and review by the scientific community I feel that hardly qualifies it as fact.

If that is not what you intended to convey, I appologise and am curious what you actually meant to imply. Text can be both precise and explicit, but is often devoid of the nuances of non-verbal communication.
 

Kaymish

The Morally Bankrupt Weasel
Sep 10, 2008
1,256
0
0
hehe ive known that since primary school and then i was imprisoned in a catholic school and lorded that knowledge over my social studies teacher for a week she thought it meant after death (of the j man) the whole christian Resurrection thing ya know

and even though i am an anti theist i don't care about what words are used to express the date weather it be 'Anno Domini' christian era or current era or common era or what ever else

and i don't particularly bagels they are far too solid for my taste give me a croissant or pain Au chocolate any day of the week
 

The Mighty Thesaurus

Lumen timeo
Feb 23, 2010
46
0
0
HandsomeJack said:
Theories are explanations of empirical observations, often based on mathematical models; they do not fit on a fact/non-fact axis. Of course, one may always describe a theory as being non-factual, but this is about as useful as saying that it isn't green. A more useful criticism of a given theory is that it's predictions do not match the observed outcomes.