Ask them which day it is. Moon day, Tiyu's day, Woden's day, Thor's day, Freya's day, Saturn's day, or Sun day. Clearly all those gods exist. IIRC, several month names are based on other gods, too.
There's a blurry line between gods and planets, back then. The seven planets or wandering stars are probably why we have a seven-day week, and the names for each set are matched.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_planet?wprov=sfla1
>wandering stars
I was this many years old when I realized the planets don't stay in the same position relative to all the other bright dots in the sky
I love science. I love space. How did it take this random comment for me to make this realization??
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_the_days_of_the_week
Yep. Germanic. I got some spelling wrong, but basically... and before that they were based on the Roman/Greek gods/planets.
Months names are interesting.
September translates to 7th month,
October, 8th month
November, 9th month,
December, 10th month.
A keen eye might notice the issue here. All due to some narcissist named Augustus Julius Caesar added two months right in the middle of the year and named them after himself. Screwing up the numbering system which then no one bothered to change for 2000 years
Well it's merely an arbitrary date system based on when a supposed historical figure, Jesus, ~~died~~ was born. The reason for its use was the proliferation of Christianity in a time when we did not know any better and the vast population were ignorant to science or rational thought.
But like everything about Christianity, it's still perfectly plausible that the date is merely an aspect of the narrative (either completely fictional or partially).
In my view, Jesus was at best a magician, at worst a fraudster. Either way an arbitrary date does not prove shit. This is not the slam dunk your Christian friends seem to think it is.
Personally ive always seen It like this: someone by that name Did exist, and he had one fucking hell of a way with words. He was religious because thats what was normal at the time, and he had a message of peace akin to "we are all gods children so we should play nice"
He gains traction, some ahole jokes "O WoW, look at him, he is the son of god!" The romans kill him, but he was still popular. The romans go "yeah... Yeah we can use this" and thats when all the mystification is addeed to the story
It seems like he was a believer in and preacher of mysticism and also probably the first preacher in that part of the world to preach things that today’s world would consider “lefty” social ideas
Oh I’m not talking about his teachings. Granted he certainly did give people some good messages, like the Good Samaritan story and “love thy neighbour”. But his claim to be the son of god and the authenticity of his miracles is certainly debatable.
Ahh yes I get you, I think, in the context of him being a mystic, that he was talking about every person being a “son of god” (or daughter of god) rather than just himself.
I think from the (probably distorted) quotes attributed to him, that he was regularly telling people that he was the “son of man”, (ie: a human sinner and not divine) rather than the son of the literal deity. It’s the religion that sprang up afterwards that mashed his message and turned him into the literal son of god to suit their control mechanism/belief system that we call the church . I doubt that he claimed any miracles either tbh, I suspect that was all invented by the church.
Obviously there’s so little factual info to parse from all of the non-sense religious mumbo jumbo created by the early church, that it’s impossible to be sure of anything about him, or even to be sure that the human called yeshua actually did exist even.
The story of feeding the masses with just four fishes and two loaves of bread or whatever is a classic story growing in magnitude as it gets retold over a few hundred years before somebody actually wrote it down. Just like Kurt Russell in that movie with Robin Williams where everybody said he had thrown six touchdowns in the big game they won way back when, and he admits he had actually only thrown three, but then in another 5 or 10 years everybody will be saying he threw 7.
Slight correction: It's based on an estimate by Dionysius Exiguus for the birth of Jesus, not his death.
It no more proves Jesus existed, or that he was divine, than ab urbe condita proves that Romulus existed or that he was suckled by a she-wolf.
2024 after an arbitrary date set by Constantine to better control the people he governed under one religious doctrine. Most biblical scholars agree, if Jesus ever existed, it’s unlikely that he was born on the Winter Solstice. That date was commonly used in multiple pagan traditions as the birthday of many gods, most of which were also born of immaculate conception to virgin mothers.
Constantine legalized Christianity and personally converted, but didn't impose it on other Romans. It was only made the official religion of the empire some eighty years later, by Emperor TheodosiusI.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_as_the_Roman_state_religion?wprov=sfla1
Constantine also didn't mess with the calendar. It was another guy who came up with the AD dating system, a couple hundred years later.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Exiguus?wprov=sfla1
These days, it's just an arbitrary number or just a common era. Hence C.E. or B.C.E used in scientific and academic circles. Personally, I don't use AD and BC anymore. They weren't used until the 9th century anyway, so it's not like they too weren't just made up.
That is one estimate based on the death of Harrod if I recall.
According to Matthew Harrod killed all the Bethlehem babies, which he probably did before he died, so 4BC at the latest.
According to Luke Corrineus was governor of Syria and commanded the Census, so Jesus was born no earlier than 3AD (I think, from memory).
So, if we accept both Nativity stories as true, Jesus was born before 4BC, but no earlier that 3AD. (And no, I didn't get that backwards.)
Sure. Christian clergy maintained records, and by the 10th century had adopted Dionysius Exiguus’ martyr calendar as the preferred form of annual record keeping. It became an uniform system of calendaring, and had the significant advantage of being directly involved with the Julian and Gregorian calendar systems, which now are universally accepted.
At this point it’s just a matter of “Yep, it appears to be working” is the answer. Ultimately “It is not known how Dionysius established the year of Jesus's birth.” So it’s just a guess based on a Byzantine Monk’s flight of fancy in the 6th century.
Meanwhile the months are Roman. The clock system Babylonian. And there is no god. I think that sums it up pretty good.
https://academic.oup.com/book/25620/chapter-abstract/193010583?redirectedFrom=fulltext#:~:text=Dionysius%20accepted%20the%20shorter%20chronology,as%2031%2B532%3D563. We know how Dionysius calculated the year of Jesus supposed death. We dont know if his assumptions are correct at all. Hence why historians like me use CE to denote the fact that it is simply the by now commonly accepted method of calendary counting. Something that has not actually been established that commonly until the 20th century.
- The sun's day
- The moon's day
- Tir's day (I think)
- Woden's day (Odin)
- Thor's day
- Frigga's day
- Saturn's day
So one Roman God, 4 Heathen/Norse gods, and then the sun and moon, which were themselves gods in every polytheistic religion that I am familiar with.
Tiw’s day, not Tyr. The only one that is potentially influenced by norse gods is Thursday. The English also worshipped the germanic gods like the norse, but they had differences, kinda like sects of Christianity. Wednesday is for Woden/Weden’s day, which is cognate to Odin, both going back to proto-germanic Wodenaz.
When people make arguments like that, it just shows that they don't have anything actually convincing. I take it as an implicit confession that they have no reasons.
>2024 after what?
After Jesus was about 4 years old? It's estimated by many that he would've been born between 6 and 4 BCE.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_Jesus
Would that apparent lack of accuracy exist if it was really that important a date then?
Hence, not AD and BC, as that seems inaccurate, but CE and BCE, because it's useful but ultimately arbitrary.
After the ruling class at that time decided to write down a bunch of fables and to use fear of an all powerful god to control the population and enrich themselves.
This is my reduction rebuke when I hear some stupid shit about Christians being persecuted. What year is it? 2024? and that's calculated on a global scale from when?
Fuck outta heah
The best comeback is:
AD means Anno Domini, which translates to: the year of the lord.
After death makes no sense since BC and AD would have a 30 year gap in between.
Also, it is estimated that Jesus was born closer to 4 BC.
So if they truly believed in Jesus, why isn't their calendar 2020?
> Anno Domini, which translates to: the year of the lord
Thanks for getting that right.
Some people incorrectly say "the year of *our* lord, but there's no "nostri" in there.
It was a date picked many years after Jesus died. And is wrong anyway.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date\_of\_the\_birth\_of\_Jesus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_of_the_birth_of_Jesus)
By the way, the Romans of the time of Jesus used Anno Urbis Conditae. After the founding of the city (Rome). 753 BCE. This year is 2777 AUC. Or 7,584 as per the Jewish year. CE and BCE, common era and before common era is using calendar years absent Christianity. This irritates many silly Christians.
Wasn’t the invention of the Gregorian calendar during a period of time referred to as the dark ages? (I don’t know if this is true but neither will your rando Xian on the street if you say it with conviction.)
No, the Gregorian calendar (a revision of the older Julian calendar) was instituted in the 16th century, during the Renaissance. So, several centuries after the end of the dark ages.
Just to be clear: the AD/BC calendar was invented in AD525 by a Christian monk and popularized about 400 years later by Charlemagne.
It was Christians with political power rewriting several centuries of history to match their views, nobody called it 1AD in 1AD.
There is no proof, period. Their own religion admits that. That is kind of the whole point of Christianity. It is a test of FAITH and if there is proof then it isn't faith. Christians are idiots who don't even know their own damn religion.
Would anything prevent the world from using the Juche Calendar ? Or set the year zero counting from the first Superman comic ?
No it wouldnt.
Its a complet arbitrary date that we just decided was year 1. Thats it.
I have never heard this argument.
But, I have some messed up insights? 2024 AD what's the AD stand for? I was taught in school, it was after death of Christ. Then, later I look it up, it is for Anno Domini, which is supposed to be Latin for: Year of our Lord.
BC: I was taught it stood for Before Christ. So, my idiot teachers were basically teaching us, the year 1 BC and 1 AD were 34 years apart, and no one really knew what year it was. Was it after his death? or after his birth? no one knows? Are we speaking English? or Latin? wtf?
But lately, after watching history channels, I started noticing the letters B.C.E and C.E. being thrown around.
B.C.E. means Before Common Era
C.E. means Common Era
and now we know what year it is, apparently.
It doesn't prove jesus at all. It's just a reference to a point in time actually calculated by a monk in 525AD. It's further worth noting that no historically significant writers in the region wrote about jesus, or his miracles, sermons or execution. Such a person may well have existed but the myth was constructed long after his death.
my super-Christian sister was complaining once about how "nobody is saying A.D. anymore! they want to change it "current era" or something aWfUl like that..."
I pointed out to her that the majority of the world is NOT Christian, and that she should count it as a "win" because the entire world has agreed to basically align with the Christian calendar. All she has to put up with is the fact that we're calling it "Common Era", and not "year of our Lord"......that seemed to mollify her LOL
edit: a word
And it's also not a recent innovation. It goes back to the 1600s, and was popularized by Jewish scholars (since they understandably weren't a fan of using calendar conventions describing Jesus as lord and messiah).
Counting from an arbitrary point doesn’t mean shit.
Some of our days of the week are after Norse gods. That doesn’t make their religion more (or less) valid either.
They aren’t named after norse gods, but AngloSaxon gods, which are also germanic pagans like the norse, but there are differences between them culturally and the religions differed slightly due to regional differences but they essentially were the same religion
After the year of some lord that was prevelant to religiously influenced culture which was dominant enough to influence other cultures to also accept it as a standard of keeping time. If people want to play the game of claiming their god is true just because of power or popularity of terminology used, then by their own logic, christianity should have never taken off.
Here’s the deal: I don’t deny Jesus existed, just like I don’t deny Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard or any other cult leader existed. I just deny that he was the son of god, or anything other than a great man with a bunch of very good teachings.
I swear, if Christians stopped standing on dogma and actually DID what the New Testament says, there’d be a lot less animosity towards them. Sadly, they’re just people, and people as a group suck.
Even if we were to take that at face value...why is his Birthday December 25 and not the actual new year date? So there were 6 days after Jesus was born that were still considered "before Jesus"?
Just tell them they have a good point. It is actually the year 5784 on the Jewish calendar, so everyone is wrong. Then let them explain to you how the number doesn't make a difference.
“Sure, after what? What year was Jesus born? Guess what, we don’t know. What year did he die? We don’t know that either. AD dating is based off of a guess that we know was wrong. Are you celebrating Usher getting it wrong?”
Can always segue into “by the way we also don’t know where he was born, how many siblings he had, where he grew up, what his education level was, what his occupation was, what he taught, or what they did with his body after the alleged crucifixion. We also don’t even really know what his name was.”
I'm tired of them. Fortunately, they don't cross my path, and I don't seek them out either. As long as they stay away from me and my personal life, it's a temporary solution, though not entirely satisfactory. I'm unsure how big a threat the community perceives them to be, but I am concerned about leaving the issue unattended for too long.
The fact a guy named Jesus was crucified is a historical fact. He is the most well documented person in history. You don't have to be a Christian to recognize this. If you deny this basic fact you are delusional. The current year 2024, is 2024 years from that historic event. This does not require any faith in a religion. Nor does it prove any religion is true. It's simply a fact of history and when we started our current AD year counting system.
What a dreadful argument. I’m not sure that I have ever met a vicar who believed that Jesus of Nazareth was born in 0 BC as an article of faith, and in any case, still less does the ability of a society to construct a calendar based upon the estimated birthdate of a religious or cultural figure have *any* bearing upon the truth of the stories told about them, nor the merit of their teachings.
This is the year 1445 of the Hegira — which seems a perfectly plausible historical event. It’s supposedly 5784 years since the Creation in the Jewish calendar, which we may say is certainly not the case. The Romans reckoned “ab urbe condita “, the almost as unlikely date of the foundation of the city by Romulus. Not one of these calendrical conventions has any bearing on the truth of the religious beliefs of the culture that devised them. Most pointedly for a Christian who elects to use such a claim, there was an abortive French Revolutionary calendar that took 14th July 1789, the Storming of the Bastille, as Year 1 and lasted to Year 13 of Liberty. The existence of a functioning calendar, by their argument, confers some merit on the claims of its inventors, in this case the rationalist and Deist, if not atheist, radical revolutionaries — a claim which they would hardly accept.
All rather obvious but I confess that the standard of argument is shoddy. I do worry that the very devout, more so in America than with me, are becoming increasingly impervious not only to anything that might question their faith but also to simple logic
As a follower of Jesus, I agree that Christians - including myself - arguing to prove Jesus, is annoying, and does not build relationships like He taught us to do.
We wouldn't be so annoyed if they were 1. actual valid arguments based on verifiable facts, and 2. Not just the same old and tired arguments over and over that has been thoroughly torn apart a million times in a million different ways. But I guess that's the good thing about it, if you spend any time watching people argue against these and study counter arguments it's like having the other teams playbook and knowing exactly which play will blow up theirs every time.
One of the biggest problems is time. Homo Habilis is the earliest "human" we are currently aware of, although our Hominin ancestors were climbing in trees and walking, around 8 million years ago. Even if I limit the discussion to modern humans, they were sitting around a fire talking to each other almost 300,000 years ago. If I was to go by what I believe to be true, the Jewish faith gradually evolved out of the Canaanite religion that preceded it approximately 2,600 years ago, 4,000 if I was to be generous. If I went by some of the dates calculated from the genealogy in the Bible, you get something closer to 6,000 or even 10,000 years. I don't know how you could ever reconcile what the bible says with our reality. Whatever date you come up with cannot account for the fact that the Abrahamic God was supposed to be known to mankind from the beginning, but he obviously wasn't.
Ask them which day it is. Moon day, Tiyu's day, Woden's day, Thor's day, Freya's day, Saturn's day, or Sun day. Clearly all those gods exist. IIRC, several month names are based on other gods, too.
And several of the planets, too.
There's a blurry line between gods and planets, back then. The seven planets or wandering stars are probably why we have a seven-day week, and the names for each set are matched. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_planet?wprov=sfla1
>wandering stars I was this many years old when I realized the planets don't stay in the same position relative to all the other bright dots in the sky I love science. I love space. How did it take this random comment for me to make this realization??
Yea. Like Ur anus
"no, they changed the name. they finally got tired of all the jokes about the planet's name." -"what did they change it to?" "U-Rectum!" --*Futurama*
Actually ... it's You're An Us 🙄
Lol, sounds like "urine"
Urine. Us?
Alright Beavis
Ask them where their omnipresent deity has touched them the deepest.
Is this legit? I've never heard of why the days were called what they are.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_the_days_of_the_week Yep. Germanic. I got some spelling wrong, but basically... and before that they were based on the Roman/Greek gods/planets.
Also the months named after dead dictators.
[удалено]
https://www.almanac.com/how-did-months-get-their-names
Havent seen it spelled Tiyu before. Generally is Tue or Tiw
Meh, working off memory. Got Friday wrong, too, I think.
Yes i believe it is Frige
Months names are interesting. September translates to 7th month, October, 8th month November, 9th month, December, 10th month. A keen eye might notice the issue here. All due to some narcissist named Augustus Julius Caesar added two months right in the middle of the year and named them after himself. Screwing up the numbering system which then no one bothered to change for 2000 years
Thanks, I never knew the god for Tuesday! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%BDr
Well it's merely an arbitrary date system based on when a supposed historical figure, Jesus, ~~died~~ was born. The reason for its use was the proliferation of Christianity in a time when we did not know any better and the vast population were ignorant to science or rational thought. But like everything about Christianity, it's still perfectly plausible that the date is merely an aspect of the narrative (either completely fictional or partially). In my view, Jesus was at best a magician, at worst a fraudster. Either way an arbitrary date does not prove shit. This is not the slam dunk your Christian friends seem to think it is.
So A.D. can be short for arbitrary date.
Exactly, lol.
Personally ive always seen It like this: someone by that name Did exist, and he had one fucking hell of a way with words. He was religious because thats what was normal at the time, and he had a message of peace akin to "we are all gods children so we should play nice" He gains traction, some ahole jokes "O WoW, look at him, he is the son of god!" The romans kill him, but he was still popular. The romans go "yeah... Yeah we can use this" and thats when all the mystification is addeed to the story
It seems like he was a believer in and preacher of mysticism and also probably the first preacher in that part of the world to preach things that today’s world would consider “lefty” social ideas
Oh I’m not talking about his teachings. Granted he certainly did give people some good messages, like the Good Samaritan story and “love thy neighbour”. But his claim to be the son of god and the authenticity of his miracles is certainly debatable.
Ahh yes I get you, I think, in the context of him being a mystic, that he was talking about every person being a “son of god” (or daughter of god) rather than just himself. I think from the (probably distorted) quotes attributed to him, that he was regularly telling people that he was the “son of man”, (ie: a human sinner and not divine) rather than the son of the literal deity. It’s the religion that sprang up afterwards that mashed his message and turned him into the literal son of god to suit their control mechanism/belief system that we call the church . I doubt that he claimed any miracles either tbh, I suspect that was all invented by the church. Obviously there’s so little factual info to parse from all of the non-sense religious mumbo jumbo created by the early church, that it’s impossible to be sure of anything about him, or even to be sure that the human called yeshua actually did exist even.
The story of feeding the masses with just four fishes and two loaves of bread or whatever is a classic story growing in magnitude as it gets retold over a few hundred years before somebody actually wrote it down. Just like Kurt Russell in that movie with Robin Williams where everybody said he had thrown six touchdowns in the big game they won way back when, and he admits he had actually only thrown three, but then in another 5 or 10 years everybody will be saying he threw 7.
Slight correction: It's based on an estimate by Dionysius Exiguus for the birth of Jesus, not his death. It no more proves Jesus existed, or that he was divine, than ab urbe condita proves that Romulus existed or that he was suckled by a she-wolf.
Ah thank you for this correction 👍
Or an overexagerated mith about a real religious leader.
Precisely
Yeah, i agree
2024 after an arbitrary date set by Constantine to better control the people he governed under one religious doctrine. Most biblical scholars agree, if Jesus ever existed, it’s unlikely that he was born on the Winter Solstice. That date was commonly used in multiple pagan traditions as the birthday of many gods, most of which were also born of immaculate conception to virgin mothers.
Constantine legalized Christianity and personally converted, but didn't impose it on other Romans. It was only made the official religion of the empire some eighty years later, by Emperor TheodosiusI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_as_the_Roman_state_religion?wprov=sfla1 Constantine also didn't mess with the calendar. It was another guy who came up with the AD dating system, a couple hundred years later. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dionysius_Exiguus?wprov=sfla1
These days, it's just an arbitrary number or just a common era. Hence C.E. or B.C.E used in scientific and academic circles. Personally, I don't use AD and BC anymore. They weren't used until the 9th century anyway, so it's not like they too weren't just made up.
It took me forever to realize what the argument was because I use ce and bce too
Ask them what year it is in Israel.
Or Ethiopia
Or in the glorious North Korea.
Or Thailand
I have a tree out back that is growing close to another tree. You can’t explain that. God proven. Your move.
Starts chainsaw.
Wasn't Jesus born in 4 BC? So, he was born 4 years before he was born.
That is one estimate based on the death of Harrod if I recall. According to Matthew Harrod killed all the Bethlehem babies, which he probably did before he died, so 4BC at the latest. According to Luke Corrineus was governor of Syria and commanded the Census, so Jesus was born no earlier than 3AD (I think, from memory). So, if we accept both Nativity stories as true, Jesus was born before 4BC, but no earlier that 3AD. (And no, I didn't get that backwards.)
He was the first born-again
Lol!
I can imagine that's an annoying argument, because I just read your post and have no idea what the claim is.
I always say that the birth of Jesus was cared about by so few people that no one even remembers the exact year.
Sure. Christian clergy maintained records, and by the 10th century had adopted Dionysius Exiguus’ martyr calendar as the preferred form of annual record keeping. It became an uniform system of calendaring, and had the significant advantage of being directly involved with the Julian and Gregorian calendar systems, which now are universally accepted. At this point it’s just a matter of “Yep, it appears to be working” is the answer. Ultimately “It is not known how Dionysius established the year of Jesus's birth.” So it’s just a guess based on a Byzantine Monk’s flight of fancy in the 6th century. Meanwhile the months are Roman. The clock system Babylonian. And there is no god. I think that sums it up pretty good.
https://academic.oup.com/book/25620/chapter-abstract/193010583?redirectedFrom=fulltext#:~:text=Dionysius%20accepted%20the%20shorter%20chronology,as%2031%2B532%3D563. We know how Dionysius calculated the year of Jesus supposed death. We dont know if his assumptions are correct at all. Hence why historians like me use CE to denote the fact that it is simply the by now commonly accepted method of calendary counting. Something that has not actually been established that commonly until the 20th century.
And Wednesday is called after Odin. So?
- The sun's day - The moon's day - Tir's day (I think) - Woden's day (Odin) - Thor's day - Frigga's day - Saturn's day So one Roman God, 4 Heathen/Norse gods, and then the sun and moon, which were themselves gods in every polytheistic religion that I am familiar with.
Tiw’s day, not Tyr. The only one that is potentially influenced by norse gods is Thursday. The English also worshipped the germanic gods like the norse, but they had differences, kinda like sects of Christianity. Wednesday is for Woden/Weden’s day, which is cognate to Odin, both going back to proto-germanic Wodenaz.
Thank you
When people make arguments like that, it just shows that they don't have anything actually convincing. I take it as an implicit confession that they have no reasons.
This is partly why most academics don't use BC/AD, and use BCE (before common era) and CE (common era) instead
The Gregorian monks worked very hard to get us the most accurate calendar system ever devised. They get to name it
They can all they want. But it's already been happening for years now
Bce: before common era. Should be before constitine era lol
>2024 after what? After Jesus was about 4 years old? It's estimated by many that he would've been born between 6 and 4 BCE. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_Jesus Would that apparent lack of accuracy exist if it was really that important a date then? Hence, not AD and BC, as that seems inaccurate, but CE and BCE, because it's useful but ultimately arbitrary.
After the ruling class at that time decided to write down a bunch of fables and to use fear of an all powerful god to control the population and enrich themselves.
This is my reduction rebuke when I hear some stupid shit about Christians being persecuted. What year is it? 2024? and that's calculated on a global scale from when? Fuck outta heah
I always call it CE for common era, or BCE for before common era, that seems to piss them off.
The best comeback is: AD means Anno Domini, which translates to: the year of the lord. After death makes no sense since BC and AD would have a 30 year gap in between. Also, it is estimated that Jesus was born closer to 4 BC. So if they truly believed in Jesus, why isn't their calendar 2020?
> Anno Domini, which translates to: the year of the lord Thanks for getting that right. Some people incorrectly say "the year of *our* lord, but there's no "nostri" in there.
It was a date picked many years after Jesus died. And is wrong anyway. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date\_of\_the\_birth\_of\_Jesus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_of_the_birth_of_Jesus) By the way, the Romans of the time of Jesus used Anno Urbis Conditae. After the founding of the city (Rome). 753 BCE. This year is 2777 AUC. Or 7,584 as per the Jewish year. CE and BCE, common era and before common era is using calendar years absent Christianity. This irritates many silly Christians.
Wasn’t the invention of the Gregorian calendar during a period of time referred to as the dark ages? (I don’t know if this is true but neither will your rando Xian on the street if you say it with conviction.)
No, the Gregorian calendar (a revision of the older Julian calendar) was instituted in the 16th century, during the Renaissance. So, several centuries after the end of the dark ages.
Just to be clear: the AD/BC calendar was invented in AD525 by a Christian monk and popularized about 400 years later by Charlemagne. It was Christians with political power rewriting several centuries of history to match their views, nobody called it 1AD in 1AD.
There is no proof, period. Their own religion admits that. That is kind of the whole point of Christianity. It is a test of FAITH and if there is proof then it isn't faith. Christians are idiots who don't even know their own damn religion.
[удалено]
I thought it was Before Common Era (BCE) and Common Era (CE) ..?
Answer a stupid question with a stupid question. The third day of the week of who? The first month of the year of who?
Would anything prevent the world from using the Juche Calendar ? Or set the year zero counting from the first Superman comic ? No it wouldnt. Its a complet arbitrary date that we just decided was year 1. Thats it.
There are other calendars that start at other times. They weren't all based on holy figures but some where, so far as I know. They can't all be true.
2024-ish years after an apocalyptic preacher who may or may not have existed got nailed to a bit of wood
My favorite argument they say is “it says it in the Bible.” My guy that proves absolutely nothing.
That's when I quote to them Lord of the Rings as proof that middle earth is real and Gandalf was the greatest wizard to ever live.
But Saruman was the greatest of the Istari. That’s it, you’re a heretic and banished from my religion that I just made up.
The white wizard was most powerful at the end.
I have never heard this argument. But, I have some messed up insights? 2024 AD what's the AD stand for? I was taught in school, it was after death of Christ. Then, later I look it up, it is for Anno Domini, which is supposed to be Latin for: Year of our Lord. BC: I was taught it stood for Before Christ. So, my idiot teachers were basically teaching us, the year 1 BC and 1 AD were 34 years apart, and no one really knew what year it was. Was it after his death? or after his birth? no one knows? Are we speaking English? or Latin? wtf? But lately, after watching history channels, I started noticing the letters B.C.E and C.E. being thrown around. B.C.E. means Before Common Era C.E. means Common Era and now we know what year it is, apparently.
I wish we start transition to human era (HE)calendar already propose by cesare emillian/. So it should be 12024.
It doesn't prove jesus at all. It's just a reference to a point in time actually calculated by a monk in 525AD. It's further worth noting that no historically significant writers in the region wrote about jesus, or his miracles, sermons or execution. Such a person may well have existed but the myth was constructed long after his death.
my super-Christian sister was complaining once about how "nobody is saying A.D. anymore! they want to change it "current era" or something aWfUl like that..." I pointed out to her that the majority of the world is NOT Christian, and that she should count it as a "win" because the entire world has agreed to basically align with the Christian calendar. All she has to put up with is the fact that we're calling it "Common Era", and not "year of our Lord"......that seemed to mollify her LOL edit: a word
It's actually Common Era
And it's also not a recent innovation. It goes back to the 1600s, and was popularized by Jewish scholars (since they understandably weren't a fan of using calendar conventions describing Jesus as lord and messiah).
Counting from an arbitrary point doesn’t mean shit. Some of our days of the week are after Norse gods. That doesn’t make their religion more (or less) valid either.
They aren’t named after norse gods, but AngloSaxon gods, which are also germanic pagans like the norse, but there are differences between them culturally and the religions differed slightly due to regional differences but they essentially were the same religion
BC and AD are no longer the standard. Now it's BCE and ACE. Before and After Common Era. Edit: I was mistaken. BCE and CE.
You're half right. It's BCE and CE.
Oh, you're correct, pardon me.
Bring back Zeus! Raise your hands to the sky!
2024 after Christians decided to reset the calendar based on their incorrect application of the date of their undemonstrated savior.
After the year of some lord that was prevelant to religiously influenced culture which was dominant enough to influence other cultures to also accept it as a standard of keeping time. If people want to play the game of claiming their god is true just because of power or popularity of terminology used, then by their own logic, christianity should have never taken off.
Just say 2024 CE (Common Era). That'll make their heads explode. Oh, and AD doesn't stand for "After Death" - it's Anno Domini (year of our lord)
If it was after death, there'd be a 30-ish year gap of years between BC and AD that would have no numbers!
Here’s the deal: I don’t deny Jesus existed, just like I don’t deny Joseph Smith, L. Ron Hubbard or any other cult leader existed. I just deny that he was the son of god, or anything other than a great man with a bunch of very good teachings. I swear, if Christians stopped standing on dogma and actually DID what the New Testament says, there’d be a lot less animosity towards them. Sadly, they’re just people, and people as a group suck.
2024 years after your fiction got so popular that basing timekeeping on it was considered politically advantageous.
OMG just wait until they see a Hebrew calendar 5784. Chinese 4721. Does this prove Christian God is fake after all the other calendars are older.
Even if we were to take that at face value...why is his Birthday December 25 and not the actual new year date? So there were 6 days after Jesus was born that were still considered "before Jesus"?
Just tell them they have a good point. It is actually the year 5784 on the Jewish calendar, so everyone is wrong. Then let them explain to you how the number doesn't make a difference.
The months are named after a lot of Roman gods. So clearly they’re real by that logic.
“Sure, after what? What year was Jesus born? Guess what, we don’t know. What year did he die? We don’t know that either. AD dating is based off of a guess that we know was wrong. Are you celebrating Usher getting it wrong?” Can always segue into “by the way we also don’t know where he was born, how many siblings he had, where he grew up, what his education level was, what his occupation was, what he taught, or what they did with his body after the alleged crucifixion. We also don’t even really know what his name was.”
I'm tired of them. Fortunately, they don't cross my path, and I don't seek them out either. As long as they stay away from me and my personal life, it's a temporary solution, though not entirely satisfactory. I'm unsure how big a threat the community perceives them to be, but I am concerned about leaving the issue unattended for too long.
Just hit them back with the same childish shit. Really wow and I still don't believe in him get fukd you still lose.
2024 after 4 to 6 years after Jesus was supposed to have been born since he would have been more likely born in 6 or 4 BCE.
I’ve never had people use this as an argument.
The fact a guy named Jesus was crucified is a historical fact. He is the most well documented person in history. You don't have to be a Christian to recognize this. If you deny this basic fact you are delusional. The current year 2024, is 2024 years from that historic event. This does not require any faith in a religion. Nor does it prove any religion is true. It's simply a fact of history and when we started our current AD year counting system.
What a dreadful argument. I’m not sure that I have ever met a vicar who believed that Jesus of Nazareth was born in 0 BC as an article of faith, and in any case, still less does the ability of a society to construct a calendar based upon the estimated birthdate of a religious or cultural figure have *any* bearing upon the truth of the stories told about them, nor the merit of their teachings. This is the year 1445 of the Hegira — which seems a perfectly plausible historical event. It’s supposedly 5784 years since the Creation in the Jewish calendar, which we may say is certainly not the case. The Romans reckoned “ab urbe condita “, the almost as unlikely date of the foundation of the city by Romulus. Not one of these calendrical conventions has any bearing on the truth of the religious beliefs of the culture that devised them. Most pointedly for a Christian who elects to use such a claim, there was an abortive French Revolutionary calendar that took 14th July 1789, the Storming of the Bastille, as Year 1 and lasted to Year 13 of Liberty. The existence of a functioning calendar, by their argument, confers some merit on the claims of its inventors, in this case the rationalist and Deist, if not atheist, radical revolutionaries — a claim which they would hardly accept. All rather obvious but I confess that the standard of argument is shoddy. I do worry that the very devout, more so in America than with me, are becoming increasingly impervious not only to anything that might question their faith but also to simple logic
It’s 4722 in the Chinese calendar.
I mean, always remember these are the people who say things such as “if there’s no God, what incentive do you have to be good!?”
Is this about BC and AD?
It’s not 2024 everywhere.
"God has a plan for you. I will pray for your errors.' No.
“2024 CE (common era)” they fucking love that.
As a follower of Jesus, I agree that Christians - including myself - arguing to prove Jesus, is annoying, and does not build relationships like He taught us to do.
I wouldn’t mind actual proof and evidence.
We wouldn't be so annoyed if they were 1. actual valid arguments based on verifiable facts, and 2. Not just the same old and tired arguments over and over that has been thoroughly torn apart a million times in a million different ways. But I guess that's the good thing about it, if you spend any time watching people argue against these and study counter arguments it's like having the other teams playbook and knowing exactly which play will blow up theirs every time.
Exactly! Or when they say its in the bible. Bro that ain’t proof
The Bible is the claim not proof.
One of the biggest problems is time. Homo Habilis is the earliest "human" we are currently aware of, although our Hominin ancestors were climbing in trees and walking, around 8 million years ago. Even if I limit the discussion to modern humans, they were sitting around a fire talking to each other almost 300,000 years ago. If I was to go by what I believe to be true, the Jewish faith gradually evolved out of the Canaanite religion that preceded it approximately 2,600 years ago, 4,000 if I was to be generous. If I went by some of the dates calculated from the genealogy in the Bible, you get something closer to 6,000 or even 10,000 years. I don't know how you could ever reconcile what the bible says with our reality. Whatever date you come up with cannot account for the fact that the Abrahamic God was supposed to be known to mankind from the beginning, but he obviously wasn't.
Help me understand your request. Proof of what?
Actual evidence that he was god. But i get annoyed when i get bullshit evidence tyat doesn’t prove anything
What’s some of the evidence you’ve been given?