Can’t we go with the first peacetime nuclear reaction? Starting as we mean to go on, and all that.
Failing that, we could go with the first space launch (October '57). Avoids accusations of Ameri-centrism too.
It is totally stupid. Why are we in the year 2009? 2009 years from what? The number is still tied to Jesus, even if people don’t say BC or AD.
If somehow the world ended up using the Muslims’ year numbering system, and this year was considered by Muslims and non-Muslims alike to be 1430 AH (where AH is “anno Hegirae (in the year of the Hijra)”), and if some people started referring to it as 1430 CE, that would also be stupid. Removing the “Hegirae” part does nothing. It would still be 1430 from a major Muslim event.
Keep BC and AD, or redefine CE to be based on a non-religious event.
“Common Era”/“Christian Era” IS a non-religious designation. recognizing the historical significance of Christianity a a religion is not the same as recognizing any truth in it.
Why do you care what convention other people use? No one is saying that YOU have to do it. That’s where those who hate “CE” really have no leg to stand on.
Well, for one, it’s nice if there is a widely accepted notation, and not everyone can just make up the year notation to suit their sensibilities.
People don’t “hate” CE/BCE. It’s just stupid and people are simply pointing that out. Go ahead and use it, knock yourself out.
So Jews who don’t wish to call Jesus “Messiah” or “Lord” are “Stupid?” That’s your position? That they are “stupid” not to want to assert something contrary to their own religious beliefs?
Both are widely accepted, and nobody’s just making up the notation.
Nice strawman.
Saying 2009 AD is not “asserting something contrary to their own religious beliefs”, just as when I refer to Buddha instead of using his name of Siddhārtha Gautama I am not endorsing the Buddhist view of the world, or when someone refers to the Mediterranean they are not endorsing the ancients’ view of the world.
Yes, but I was responding to Dio’s “Why do you care what convention other people use? No one is saying that YOU have to do it.”
By that logic, if over the next few years ten different notations emerge, e.g. AD, CE, WE, RT, PQ, etc, according to Dio’s argument we shouldn’t care, as long as no one is forcing us to use any of them.
If all the notations refer to the same thing (i.e. 2009 since the year Christians believe Jesus was born), then it’s stupid to have more than one way to designate that, and removing the religious significance of “AD” still leaves the religious significance of what 2009 represents.
I agree simply changing what we call it doesn’t make it not based on Christ.
We should show some backbone and pick a milestone most people can agree heralds in our more modern age. Before radio, after radio. Before space age, after space age. Flat earth, after flat earth. Before heliocentrism, after heliocentrism. Before reality TV, after reality TV. Something.
Maybe someone should start a poll thread for suggestions.
Yes it is. Jesus is not their Lord. Only God is their Lord. That IS their religious belief. Ask any Rabbi whether Jesus can be called “Lord.”
I wonder how long it will be before someone renames the nation of El Salvador because the current name is contrary to their religious beliefs.
No, it isn’t.
Do all Rabbis refer to Siddhārtha Gautama only by his name? Does no Rabbi refer to him as Buddha?
That’s right. You shouldn’t care. It’s stupid to care.
No, it leaves the historical significance of the advent of Christianity. That is not the same thing as recognizing any of its beliefs.
More practically, it accepts a numbering convention that is already too “common,” widespread and ingrained to easily change. Actually trying to change the numbers would be an exercise in futility. Hell, I still don’t even know what a kilometer is, and I’m a liberal, pseudo-intellectual who’s lived in Europe. No way are people going to accept some kind of new dating benchmark. “CE” (which is like 300 years old, it’s not some new invention) is a practical, inoffensive compromise for those who don’t want to call Jesus “Messsiah” or “Lord,”: and I’m baffled by anyone would care that they don’t.
If it’s stupid to care about usage of CE vs AD, how much more stupid is it to care that people care about usage of CE vs AD?
Yes it is. This is not even a close question.
Buddha means “awakened.” There is no conflict with Judaism in calling somebody “awakened.” There is no assertion of Godhood, Messiahship or anything inconsistent with Judaism in calling somebody “awakened.” There is also no history of Jews being persecuted and murdered by Budhhists.
ITR, what if the people of El Salvador decided to do this? Suppose there were a widespread conversion to Islam or Jainsim or ShellyRadleyism? Would that bother you?
No, it isn’t. [See, I can play this game too. Fun!]
I’d like to get a ruling from a Jew, and preferably a Rabbi, on this assertion.
So what? What does this have to do with calling Jesus “Christ” vs calling Siddhārtha “Buddha”?
Buddha means awakened one in Sanskrit. It’s a noun, not an adjective.
It literally means “awakened” in Pali Sanskrit. The “one” part is implied. It’s an adjective adopted as a title, Like “Eric the Red” or “Alexander the Great.” He’s “Siddhartha the Awakened.”
Yes, you shouldn’t care. Standards change all the time. Some are successful, and are widely adopted, and some aren’t, and people forget about them or ignore them. That’s how the marketplace of ideas works.
If all languages refer to the same things, concepts, characteristics, or actions, then it’s stupid to have more than one language to refer to the same things, concepts, characteristics, or actions.