An interesting topic came up on my Ferrari board today: BC or BCE - which is right (or more right)?
Interesting debate running in World Archeology magazine the last 2 issues - all over
the use of BC/AD vs. BCE/CE. WE's editorial stance is to ALWAYS use BC/AD when
talking about dates - and they're pretty adamant about it.
Their reasoning? Whether we like it or not, it's two thousand ten years after a
guy named Jesus was born, and that's what the modern calendar is based upon.
Furthermore, they argue, using the term "Common Era" (CE) and "Before Common Era"
(BCE) is insulting to all the non-Christian people on earth who are "perfectly common"
using whatever year THEIR country wants to use (notably, China, Tibet, and Israel).
They feel it's insulting to these people, whose own "common era" might be the year
4707 (China) or 5771 (Hebrew).
I replied this to it:
I differ with the position RE Jesus Birth and use of BC versus BCE.
I think that practically every realistic religious scholar now places the actual birth of Christ somewhere between 2 BCE and 6 BCE - which makes the whole BC number system off from the start. Going all the way back to James Ussher who personally tried to name the day and even the hour of the creation of Adam...
Which makes Common Era more logically coherent.
