Hey Atheist?

Question

What do you think about this. You've successfully taken BC out of the history books and now it's B.C.E, well let's think what event are you basing it off of? let's hear it come on anyone? What happened 2,007 years ago that we are currently basing the BCE off of, anyone?

Answer 1

The fictional character Jesus was created by borrowing from older mythological god-men.

* * *
Did a historical Jesus exist?
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
[Excerpt]

ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources derive from hearsay accounts.

Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.

Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay provides no proof or good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.

* * *
The Myth of the Historical Jesus
http://mama.indstate.edu/users/nizrael/jesusrefutation.html

Pagan origins of Jesus:
http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/index.html
http://geocities.com/christprise/
http://mama.indstate.edu/users/nizrael/jesusrefutation.html
http://www.rationalresponders.com/a_silence_that_screams_no_contemporary_historical_accounts_for_jesus
http://www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/pcc/pcc09.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa3.htm
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/resurrection/lecture.html
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/virgin.html
http://www.harrington-sites.com/motif.htm
http://altreligion.about.com/library/weekly/aa052902a.htm

Answer 2

You really should do your homework before posting nonsense like this. If you had, you'd realize the terms BCE and CE were mainly used in THEOLOGICAL writings and have been used since at least 1770.

And, according to most biblical scholars, nothing happend 2,007 years ago as they believe Jesus was born several years BEFORE the year 1 CE/AD.

Using any of these terms does NOT mean one has to recognize Jesus as the son of god. Please get over yourselves.

Answer 3

Actually BC was taken out not because of atheist, but because of all non-christians. They want to REVERT back to what was commonly used .... Before Common Era. Get your facts right first.

Then we use another calendar, what is the big deal?

Anyway, just to piss protestant off ..... the Gregorian Calendar we use now is introduce by the person you hate most, the pope in 15th century. If he did not advocate the Gergorian Calendar, then we will still be using the Julian Calendar, that solve the problem with BC and AD thing.

Answer 4

It's not only atheists that would have lobbied for such a change. Considering only 32.9% of the world is Christian, that means there are alot of people out there who wouldn't recognize that as a valid way of measuring history.

It's still based off of that because it was how it was measured for a long time and it would be too hard at this point to change it.

Answer 5

Only in Western culture. Many other cultures have other calendars which are meaningful to them. Christianity just happens to be the belief system that dominated the western hemisphere and then went on a brutal "Convert or Die" campaign, attaining control.
Get over yourself.

Answer 6

There is more then one atheist in the world... since you didn't seem to know that.

But there is no proof of Jesus (etc), so it shouldn't be in the history books. I really don't care though, and what else are we to call the calendar switch?

Answer 7

The Bible is not history, I think it's perfectly permissable to use B.C. and A.D. when referring to Jesus or the Bible stories otherwise it's better to use B.C.E. (Before Common Era) and C.E. (Common Era).

Answer 8

Actually, I have heard this but haven't seen real evidence of it happening, and I have no idea!
And I didn't have anything to do with it!

Answer 9

Oh no that was about the time the Savior of the word lived

Answer 10

b.c. doesn't mean jesus was the son of god, it just means 'before christ'. "Christ" could have been a regular person.

so both christians and atheists are wrong (but for different reasons).