Check out this fine academic and his dedicated video ua-cam.com/video/s6Lv3KpphVg/v-deo.html Join this channel to get access to more old school Metatron videos the algorithm wouldn't prioritize! ua-cam.com/channels/IjGKyrdT4Gja0VLO40RlOw.htmljoin Also if you like what I do and wish to support my work to help me make sure that I can continue to tell it how it is please consider checking out my patreon! Unboxings are Patreon exclusives! www.patreon.com/themetatron My video calling out the Canadian university and their nonsense ua-cam.com/video/i2g2oE0Q6fc/v-deo.html My video calling out UK university and their nonsense ua-cam.com/video/X3dhadFchmQ/v-deo.html
My opinion on the subject can be summarized thusly. DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!
UA-cam's begun to add multiple several minute commercials to the start of many channels, probably to discourage viewership. This video had a 45 second commercial followed by a 4 minute one. No way around these.
I had a history professor dock me points for using BC and AD, I wrote a 5 page paper citing the history for the terms and claiming religious intolerance. Dean contacted me and said the professor would be giving me my points back
My old Geography & History teacher many, many years ago also called it that. He didn't care for the pointless change but was required to use it, so he always mentioned it that way and it stuck with me. It was the easiest way to remember for those already familiar with the older style. I still prefer BC and AD though, mostly because I'm an Aussie and it reminds me of AC/DC. 😄
You know what: Neil de Grass Tyson is right. If the Gregorian calendar is a great invention which the whole world still uses, then we have to cite our sources. The contribution should be celebrated. So, the BC/AD works fine for me.
Yeah like, if anti-theists really hate any form of religious-adjacent/tied words, then they just need to make an entirely new calendar dating system. Until they do so, it's just dumb to change mere wording because it's still based on a religion whether you like it or not
@@gamera5160Personally, I think the Holocene calendar is a better system. Makes it slightly less complicated for historical dating and also picks a more interesting period to center around (Neolithic Revolution)
Personally, I just find it disgusting to try and censor/change the origins of anything, just because "it's offensive/problematic/outdated" or whatever reason. And no, I'm not a christian.
That bugs the crap out of me... My family left our church back in the day for a similar reason! Actually (and I might be wrong about it) but I hear Jesus was all about offending people in the name of God! In fact there's this rumor floating around that he may have been killed for it! Crucified even! Obligatory /s
My question with the whole "Before the Common Era/Common Era" thing is, what exactly is the common era, and why is it called the common era? What makes this era "Common?" It just seems pointless to change the BC/AD, because we still base our calendar on the approximation of when Christ was born, whether we are religious or not
BCE and CE are honestly super redundant, because when you look at what the divider for that is, it ultimately surrounds around Christ. It's just a relabeling of BC and AD.
The opening of the Greater Chronicle, by St Bede 673 -735: "The forty-second year of Caesar Augustus, and the twenty-seventh from the death of Cleopatra and Antonius, when Egypt was turned into a [Roman] province; third year of the one hundred and nintey third Olympiad; seven hundred and fifty-second from the foundation of the City [of Rome]; that is to say that year in which all the movements of peoples throughout the world were held in check, and by Gods ordaining Caesar established a very real and lasting peace; Jesus Christ the Son of God consecrated the Sixth Age of the world by his coming." That's the most badass opening I've ever heard.
This shows how, in the past, years were typically numbered by the reign of the king or emperor. And really our calendar is the same as those, because Christ is King. It's just that Jesus, being resurrected in heaven and all that, has reigned for 2000 years.
BCE/CE is confusing, they *sound the same at the end* . BC and AD sounds different to each other like YES and NO, STOP and GO, ON and OFF so very intuitive. BCE/CE is just an unnecessary tongue twister for the snow flakes woke adults who never grew up. Greetings from southeast Asia.
@@c6h5choh-cn82 "BCE/CE is confusing" Not one bit. "they sound the same at the end." So what? English prefer prefexing anyway, information and disinformation, not information and informationdis. "ON and OFF so very intuitive." In my language thats ieslēgt un izslēgt, even more similar once you realize how we assimilate voicing making it ieslēgt and isslēgt, no confusion ever. "BCE/CE is just an unnecessary tongue twister" Improove your vocalization abilities, its not hard at all. "for the snow flakes woke adults who never grew up." Not at all. I for one grew up with P.M.E. and M.E. thus in english I have and always will use BC and OE. "Greetings from southeast Asia." Greetings from northern Europe.
Because for millions of people he is the creator of existence itself and not just a random guy. And that religion had a very important role in the hearts of the people of those countries for for hundreds and hundreds of years. So, it's logical for the people of those countries to set their timeline according to that important event. For not believers it is the same reason why your holidays and a lot of elements of your life are affected by living in those countries.
@@--Sama- You missed the point there. The OP is pointing out the silliness of BCE/CE as a concept. if you remove the significance of Christ, which is the whole point of that silly modern dating system, then that date loses all relevance. Its ONLY relevant due to the birth of Christ, so why would you remove that fact from the title?
I have trouble interpreting speech and because of how some people speak differentiating BCE and CE can become hard since its very short and easy to miss what you meant
as someone with dyslexic, this is so true. the amount of time i need to rewind the video to make sure i heard it right.... man it sucks. I told that to Kings and generals people and they acted hostile to me saying it accommodates people
In Spanish, BCE and CE doesnt even exist. Its just "Before Christ" and "After Christ" (AC-DC Antes de Cristo and Despues de Cristo). Based Spanish Catholic Empire.
In Poland we use "p.n.e." and "n.e." which stand for "przed naszą erą" (before our era) and "naszej ery" ([of] our era). I believe (have no source for this) it was created when soviets occupied Poland post WW2, but it could be older than that. Older texts use either "AD" (Anno Domini) or "roku pańskiego" (year of [our] lord), but we have been taught that "it is believed for Christ to be born on year 5 BC" as the purpose of using "our era" instead. That being said, I think most people from Poland when speaking in English would prefer BC and AD. Heck, for the long time I even believed that "C" in BCE/CE was reffering to "Christ" and just thought those redundant. And yes, Latin is epic.
In latvian it's same as in Polish then: p.m.ē (pirms mūsu ēras (before our era/epoch)) and the other drops the "p." (pirms (before))... Also possibly USSR stuff - although in latvian we don't have also christianic name for Christmass, but instead Ziemassvētki (Winter-feast) Edit: found history book with few pages available online that was made in 1928, so before USSR - we used for BC: "pr. Kr. dz." (pirms Kristus dzimšanas (before Christ's Birth)). But did not find example of AD variation - so possibly we were writing only the before Christ - while just writing century/year if it's AD.
@@ronald3836 Common people like common things. Makes sense. Historical impact of a particular individual, whether religious or not? Oh no, you wouldn't like that, "common" is better for you of course, and it comes to nobody's surprise.
In Czechia we have literally the same thing. It wasnt created during soviet occupation, but by communist regime as a part of their plan to suppress religion.
I'm Polish and I had never thought much about ittill I met woke warriors online getting angry at BC, AD in English. It's not a thing to be angry about. The result is that I try to use "przed Chrystusem, po Chrystusie" (before, after Christ) from time to time.
The thing about religion and terms being based upon it is something I've noticed that oftentimes the hatred is only against things that stem from christianity. It really made me think...
@@ilsignorsaruman2636 The hatred that was cast upon christians in the past few years has really opened my eyes and made me believe even more quite frankly so I will do just that. :)
As the previous comment explained, Christ predicted his followers will be persecuted, and you guys REVEL in it. Nothing like the Christian persecution complex. Isn't there also a quote something like "they hate us because they know we are telling the truth"? Let me ask you this: In a world of increasing irreligiousity, which religion do you think will be targeted by things ranging from mere reforms to persecution? It's going to be the most popular religion in the cultural sphere of the world where irreligion is growing rapidly. Aka, the west. The people who insist on BCE/CE only have christians terms to change, because the west doesn't have nearly as much influence from other religions as Christianity. Well, not religions that are still around anyway. Let's not forget about the decades of anti-muslim propaganda in state media and Hollywood though. Or the increasing anti-semitism right now. You Christians aren't the only persecuted ones at the moment, and I think Christ would be happy if you acknowledged that, or helped with that even.
@christurner6330 Youre basing that off the assumption that we arent infact being kind and helpful to others who are being judged and bullied for their beliefs which is wrong. I have seen several occasions where religious people found common ground in that persecution. I am a person who strives to do good in this rotten world but the fact that christians are being hated only further adds to my faith because as you said it was even written that the world would hate us for we are not of this world and they first hated jesus. So youd do well to stop basing things off assumptions and instead treat each individual the way you should because none of us are alike and we all live our lives differently :)
@christurner6330 yea, no... because a lot of people that are intolerant of Christian terms, values and morals, are often demanding we are tolerant and accept other religions like Islam
I do disagree with him on one thing ... the entire live and let live scolding for people that recognize it was a deliberate move by the same people that rammed political wokeness into every aspect of Western civilization . Pointing to some isolated reference to isolated uses 150 years mean nothing to me . I just saw a tiktoker point to a reference more of "neopron uns" being used more than 200 years ago . The entire CE and BCE garbage swept like typhoid fever across places like Wikipedia ... and it rode the wave of things like claiming my preferred prouns are Beetlejuice ... cat person and Mixlpix ...
As the meme goes - "Oh right, the Common Era. The era known for being common. The era the is common specifically because of the historical event. The Common Era. That Era?"
It's the common era because most people on the world use the same calendar. Before the age of European hegemony over the world, everyone had their own time system and because of Europe's influence (and the Christian influence over Europe) basically everyone is 'forced' to live by our calendar now. So yes, 'common era' is totally appropriate, albeit still arbitraty just like any calendar system is.
No, the era is common because a lot of people use it. And a lot of people use it because a group of religious fundamentalists used a lot of violence. And once we got rid of the fundies it was easier to continue using the same arbitrary meaningless number than coming up with a new one and making sure every other place that got rid of the fundies used the same one.
@@ivantumanov1015 I am not sure what you are talking about? It is not so much religious as it was just the 'standard' being christian in 16-20th century Europe? you know the era Europeans explored and colonized the world and implemented their systems throughout all continents? That is a matter of convenience (and imperialism), not religion...
Also, I love people who try to avoid Christmas by writing, "Xmas." "X" is the Greek letter Chi... which is the first letter of "Christos." So, it doesn't make sense!
How can intelligent people be atheist, i don't get that. Be agnostic like me and many others. Don't you understand that existence itself is paradoxical?
I technically fall under the atheist umbrella, I have been using BC/AD since my primary school years. I can't be asked to start using different names tbh.
same, I am an atheist, and grew up using BC/AD, and for me its just that, and doesnt have any particular meaning expect the time from year 0 in the counting system we are using to calculate the year. Couldnt care less what they call it, but of habbit it will be BC/AD, and do not see any point in changing that as its neutral for me with no deeper meaning for anything else than year 0 and before and after that.
@@christofferdhThe Gregorian calendar was devised usung Roman numerals. There is no 0 in Roman numerals.,There was no year zero. The year after 1 BC was 1 AD.
It's even funnier that by swapping the terms but not changing anything, they are implicitly encoding into a "scientific term" the fact that there's no year zero.
1:20 Somehow I managed to watch your videos for almost a decade now and never realized you were also a Christian. I'm intimidated by how unbiased this man is in his videos.
Reasons why I don't use BCE/CE: 1. People know what I'm talking about when I say BC/AD. 2. Its completely unnecessary and redundant to change to BCE/CE since they're both based on the exact same event. 3. You don't have to be Christian to use BC/AD just like you don't have to be Norse Pagan to use the days of week. 4. Knowing this and still insisting on using BCE/CE seems pompous. 5. BC is faster to say than BCE 6. I don't feel like explaining what BCE/CE is every time I use it since most people use BC/AD
Hmm, most people wear clothing... Maybe we should either adapt to calling it clothinge or celothing, or else conform to the culture who invented clothing.
I like Neil DeGrassi Tyson's position on this. He likes BC/AD in that he wants to recognize the hard work that went into developing the calendar. So, the strong atheist and scientist, one who you would think would prefer BCE/CE would rather use BC and AD.
It is nonsense. It's an overcomplication, and there's no distinction. "We don't like that guy anymore, so everybody has to change for us. And we're gonna use even more confusing letters. But we're still using the same year, which is solely significant because of that guy."
Not a Christian but I still use them. If you're going to change the dating system then change the dating system, don't just rename it to erase history.
never been told to use BCE/CE, but I did once get flak for using the terms man and mankind to refer to humans. I was at a Christian university in a theology program and decided to just use the term the Bible translation I used was using. I got marked down on a paper for it. I told the professor that she is incorrect and that my usage of the term is proper English. I further told her that she does not have the authority to regulate my language because she doesn't like it. She got all up in arms and for a moment I thought I went a bit too hard at it and would see backlash. I later was discussing the situation with a professor I respected greatly, and it turns out that he was actually the head of her department and that he was deeply concerned about her behavior. I never once got another complaint out of her.
@@kohakuaikoMost "Christian" universities aren't actually Christian, they merely were in the past and/or they get some funding from a denomination but are run by secular institutions now. It's all about money really, they see a full religious institution as not attractive enough to a broader demographic, so they make the curriculum atheist/secular and only have the religion stuff as largely extra credit or optional altogether (some I have seen a mandatory theology class, but it's learning about all religions and not just Christianity).
@@ChristoffRevan This one is, and that's why the situation was handled well. The university I went to struck a very good balance. Non Christians were welcomed and encouraged to come, but the school was very strict on the fact that all teachers must adhere to their doctrinal statement. The idea is to create a real world mission field at the school without compromising core Christian theology. All of the non religious degree programs were taught in a secular manner as Christianity isn't relevant there. All students were required to take one class on Christianity and the Christian worldview. The theology program was a lot more strict of course since it's there to train future pastors and such. The result was an environment of "All are welcome here, but you need to understand that this is a Christian school. You don't have to BE Christian, but you need to remember whose house you're in so to speak".
In Portuguese we still say Antes de Cristo / Depois de Cristo (Before and After Christ) but funny thing is, a Bishop already streamlined the days of the week for us like 1500 years ago, he claimed they were too pagan and he made them more neutral (now they're Second through Sixth Fair), except for Saturday and Sunday which are Sábado (Sabbat or the day of rest) and Domingo (Dies Dominicus or the day of the Lord).
I think it's still better in Portuguese and Spanish. Antes de Cristo y Después de Cristo for us Spanish speakers. In English would be Before Christ (BC) and After Christ (AC) if translated literally.
Tuesday. Tyrs Day. Tyr, the nordic god. Wednesday. Woodins Day. Odin, nordic god. Thursday. Thors Day. Thor, nordic god. Friday. Friggs Day. Frigg, nordic god.
Germanic gods, of which Nordic was a subdivision. You don't necessarily need to transpose them to their Nordic subvariants when the Germanic ones are just as well known to people interested in ancient history, I think.
Christianity is simultaneously the only religion actively persecuted by militant Antitheists, but is also the only religion that respects your right to be a militant Antitheist.
Christ our Lord said it "if they hate you, remember they hated Me first." And also "you will be hated and persecuted because of Me". We christians follow the teachings of our Lord, Jesus Christ. He said "love one another, as I loved you", and "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". We love everyone and respect everyone, and i'm sorry for whoever suffered because of extremists... Those atheists and anti-theists obviously don't follow Chirst, and they do not respect any of His teachings. But they do not follow the man's morality either, as being rude and offensive is not considered good. They're just rude, and they use their atheism as an excuse.
Also, this should tell you something. What brings all those people to hate on christianity? But they themselves have no problem with any other religion, and instead have great respect for who follows the teachings of Asian sages or who follows pagans gods, or even satanic cults.
Anti-christian people hate Christianity but never researched that most of what they like, enjoy and benefit from the present world could be traced back as indirect results of Christianity, even the philosophy and ideology that they based their hatred for Christianity was made possible and developed because Christianity built universities and other institutions of learning that had endured for centuries. These Christian institutions of learning *studied everything even ideas that are against Christianity* . "Learning the beliefs of those against you is a battle half won."
@@firmak2 Read my comment again, and realize that my comment already answered your question.
13 днів тому+45
My biggest issue with BCE and CE is the fact that the only thing they "change" over BC and AD is the words. They still refer to the same dates, for the same exact underlying (Christian) reasons. All they change is words. An effectively meaningless change, and literally nothing is improved. And it's needlessly anti-religion to boot. So I've never used them, even when educational resources in my country have pressed me to use them. It's an utterly pointless "change" in my opinion and does not improve scholarly discussion.
It's not just anti-religion. It is specifically anti-Christian and we need to call this shit out. These same people wouldn't be getting their panties in a twist over the days of the week being named after Anglo-Saxon and Greco-Roman gods and neither would they be complaining that the months of the calendar being named after Roman and Greek gods and Roman emperors. So there is a specific issue here with Christ itself, not religion per se.
You say nothing is improved, yet it's anti-religion. That's at least one improvement right there. And if the only thing they change is the words, how is it anti-religion or worse? It's not, it's such a non-change that you should have no problem with it.
@@ivantumanov1015 Should we then change the weeks names then? How about the names of the month? Oh, and lets not forget the names for the planets. In the most friendly way I can put this in youtube, you are the worst type of atheist. One that hasn't grown out of their teenage years.
12 днів тому
@@ivantumanov1015 There's nothing inherently good about being anti-religion. Get that out of your head, first of all. 2nd, there was nothing inherently wrong with the BC/AD existing system which BCE/CE has hijacked. So, when this new terminology is pushed on people it achieves nothing; other than toxicity against Christians, because of the implication that referencing the birth of Jesus Christ was somehow morally wrong. If that was your goal, congratulations.
I just love that a Christian, as you said you are, said that they love a day's name is another religion's god's name. Just shows how good and accepting and based of a person you are. Wish more were like that. Edit : this reminds me of Dave Gorman's new calendar. You should wath it, it's on youtube.
13 днів тому+53
"I hate language policing, no matter where it comes from, " is so refreshing to hear from you in these kind of days.
I actually honestly thought that BCE was meant before Christian era... You never ever can imagine the extent of people stupidity. (And I'm atheist. I think the claim from NDG is very US biased. In Europe there is a vast majority of atheist, and we never squabble over this kind of nonsense)
LOVE THIS!!!!!! I thought I was the ONLY person that thought this way!!!! I didn't even think of the argument of "Thor's Day", but, yes, that is a Great argument!!!!! I think God has a sense of humor and daydream that this plays out sort of like with Job: Lucifer goes to Heaven and argues with God about BC/AD and God says something like yeah, you can change it and it won't matter. and the only thing Lucifer can come up with is CE and BCE, which every time I hear it I think BCE - Before Christ's Entrance and CE - Christ's Entrance.
Yep, arrogantly and paternalistically foisting a new unasked-for name onto hundreds of millions of people that makes them sound like something you'd blow your nose on and flush away.... dignified !!!
It’s so frustrating when people try to look like they’re making some kind of stand on these complex social issues by making a simplistic terminology change that risks nothing and accomplishes nothing. It’s like saying you’re minimally committed on an important issue but you want to be credited as a hero for that.
Wow. Two seconds in and I already like this video. My archaeology professor in college threatened to lower my grade from an A to a B because I refused to use BCE/CE. I accepted his challenge. I then took his grade to the department head and argued my case. I won. I got my A, and I didn't have to submit to his nonsense. Another argument i won in that class was his insistence that I refer to religion as "religious myth." I began to refer to his pre-recorded history timeline as the "anthropology myth." He quit correcting me, and I quit correcting him. It was all good. Oddly, that was one of my favorite classes of all time. I'd take it again and again, even with that professor. My reasoning is that we disagreed on two points. That's about .1% of the amount of disagreement I was having with my then boyfriend. Conversely, given the choice, I WOULD NOT date that boyfriend ever again.
I'm an Atheist who uses BC/AD. I got a little nervous when you first mentioned NDT in the video because I know how often the worlds of religion and science are in opposition to each other, and was happy and relieved to hear him talking sense on this one. I also do refer to Christmas as Christmas, but there is nothing religious about how I observe it. I also will quickly point out that too few people are aware of the difference between an atheist and an anti-theist. Most people who complain about atheists are actually complaining about anti-theists.
Oh stop it. I'm an atheist/agnostic and internet atheists have flooded the net and become obnoxious edgelords over the past 15 years. Constantly insulting and trying to pick fights with religious people. Deep down they are just rebellious kids who hate their religious parents and need to lash out. I was raised by secular parents so I have no need to antagonize religious people. Nobody uses the term anti theist
It's funny you say science and religion are often opposed to each other... This might be true for primitive superstitions. But I know this is not true with Bible based religions, because the Bible itself makes very few scientific claims(Miracles are not supposed to be scientific, those are God showing His power over nature, they are literally designed to be 'impossible'). The main one the naturalistic philosophers/atheists in labcoats take issue with, is that the Earth is only a few thousand years old. Meanwhile many of the foundational axioms of scientific thinking are built on Biblical assumptions(We can understand the world, it operates according to fixed law, the pursuit of truth is a good thing, etc.). The naturalistic/atheist philosophers would like to claim credit for modern science, but they have essentially failed to deliver functional new theories despite millions of times the manpower and billions of times the funding that their theistic ideological ancestors possessed(most "modern" scientific advancement is essentially just fleshing out the details of theories that are hundred(s) of years old). After looking at history, I believe naturalistic atheism to have held back science by at least a hundred years, quite possibly more like five hundred.
Thank you for the anti-theists bit - I'd been calling them new atheists but they've been around for a while now so it was getting confusing for younger people I talked to. It's perfectly valid to decide you don't believe there's a God, but quite ridiculous to constantly attack those who do so out of a sense of superiority because they think not believing in God is a mark of greater intelligence (and they long to be thought of as smarter than average). Most of them can't get close to explaining why it might be 'rational' not to believe in a God or Gods (I get a lot of use out of 'you realise that 18th century scientists decided meteors weren't real because Newton said rocks couldn't be in space to fall out of it and many collections of curiosities/museums threw away their meteorites because it was irrational to believe they fell from the sky - denying us the chance to examine them now' ) I expect to get a lot of use out of anti-theists in future :)
Antitheists are the loudest and also claim to represent atheists in general, so the misconception is understandable. But I agree wih you, with a bit of reasoning, it's easy to differentiate the two.
Always boggles my mind at the anti-theists for getting angry at BC/AD because "the words are tied to religion, REEEEE" but yet they still use "oh god", "christ", "holy shit", "for Pete's sake", and other epithets that use religious-adjacent terminology but somehow that's still fine for them. Like, their logic makes zero sense at all, plus most of their hatred usually only seems directed to Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, but they're perfectly fine with Buddhist, Taoist, New Age, paganism, etc concepts....a bunch of hypocrisy really
5:52 That's actually not true at all. There is no single tracable source of pagan rituals involved in any modern traditions of christmas or christmas a festival whatsoever.
@@alexanderren1097 Yes he's serious because he's objectively right. Read actual scholars and watch some videos, there is no relation to paganism whatsoever (except for pagans changing dates AFTER christmas became popular to compete with Christians)
I use it too, a great way to emphasize things using that. Also, my language is a bit more efficient with it, saying the same in only two words, which lowers the threshold.
As an Atheist I do this. I'm not going to kowtow to a few Jewish intellectuals' sensibilities. Also, I may not believe in magic but it's still my narrative and folklore.
Lindybeige's Backwards Chronology and Ascending Dates solution works well to confound the perpetually offended who may rage at BC/AD, but I'm with the Metatron, the other will not be used.
"Latin sounds epic." I mean, he's not wrong... One of my personal favorite Latin sayings is, "Si vis sapientiam, quaere veritatem," "If you want wisdom, seek truth."
Thank you!!! I have always refused to use BCE/CE. Like what separates BCE from CE? What historical event happened between the two? They're only using BCE/CE because they're Christiphobes.
the "historical event" is a bunch of small hatted people from the desert wrote about a fictional character born decades earlier, and magically managed to convince rome by bribery and butchery to convert. Not really deserving of defining our calendar off it.
Let me add my exactly. The people who use BCE/CE want to eliminate Christianity from the culture. They are not non-Christian, they are anti-Christian. It is atheist arrogance and bigotry. I have always wondered atheists want to eliminate my belief in God. Why do they care?
Dunno, I'm not religious. I have always used BC/AD for a couple reasons. My father was a doctor, a scientist, and an archologist and always used it, so I guess it's because that's what I grew up with. I also use it because it's just simple. Also, because in my social circles still use BC/AD.
@@TomasFunes-rt8rd I wish, last time I visited Egypt I found no ark and they wouldn't let me search outside the tourist designated areas. Throwing around my dad's name didn't get me anywhere "Dr Jones" =P.
Agreed. Awesome Metatron. You have a great variety of fair, rational and intelligent content. I, as a Christian really love your Christian related content personally. I really liked your video on Angels. Thank you for your work!
Before watching the video: I never liked BCE/CE because they don't roll off the tongue nearly as easily as BC/AD. Then I thought about it, and I liked them even less hecause they're dishonest; it's still using (the rough estimate of) the birth of Christ as a benchmark for splitting the eras. It's just not honest about it, it's obfuscating the issue.
I always have used BC and AD, but I have no real issue with people using BCE or CE either, most of the time. It does annoy me when I was back in high school, keep in mind a Catholic one, and my paper was "corrected" to BCE and CE...
The first time I learned about bce and ce was when my history teacher used it in 9th grade and he said that it was our choice to use it or bc/ad on our work because both are commonly accepted. He was most likely non religious but I liked him as a teacher, a good man and a good teacher I learned a lot of history from him. Also anyone who says that Yeshua never existed is being historically dishonest, as a brother in Christ and being one who enjoys history I was very interested in your video about the historical evidence of Jesus and I really enjoyed every minute of it. No one has all of the answers but when I want history I come to your channel because I know you're honest and give unbiased facts. God bless you my brother and keep up the great work.
@@humbleopulenceChristians are currently the single most persecuted group in the world. The evidence for their persecution and martyrdom during the early church, especially under Diacletian, is sufficient by historical standards to say it happened. To say otherwise is a giant "NUH UH CHRISTIANS JUST BAD AND PLAY VICTIM." It would be different if christians actually played the victim when they weren't, but it seems they actually are. And funny enough, christians dont really complain about it and are instead viewed as the super well-off entitled untouchable group by most Americans. Christians, according to their doctrine, are to forgive and not expect to be given anything by those who have hurt them as a means of them "making up." Everyone is on equal ground, and everyone needs forgiveness. Furthermore, the Catholic Church is the largest charitable organization in the world. If the point was to gain ground off of martyrdom, they wouldnt be giving anything they have. Also, the christians didnt claim to have set the great fire of Rome, they were blamed by Nero, and subsequently persecuted. The difference with the "woke" crowd is a more marxist approach. The "I am oppressed, those people over there are my oppressors, I need to rise above them for society to be redeemed" mentality. That mindset assumes that certain people are above others, and we need to do whatever we can to correct that imbalance, including tearing down everyone above you. It lacks any goodwill or charitable spirit. Its all about worldly gains and status. The closest thing to that you could attempt to apply to christianity is the retrospective Nietzschean view of christian ethics, which personally I think is very flawed.
@@humbleopulence Blah blah blah, so many words for so much bullshit. Christians, historically and today, are one of the most persecuted minority groups in the world. This isn't my opinion, this is fact that's backed up by Amnesty International's statistics on the matter. On average, about 3,000 Christians are killed every year specifically for their faith, with the rates of that much higher during ISIS' tenure in the Middle East. Especially in Muslim and communist countries, Christians face legal consequences up to and including death more so than any other religious group on the planet. By modern, secular academic estimates, about 3,000-4,000 Christians were executed during the persecutions of Diocletian alone, not counting the smaller persecutions or religious hate crimes over the centuries before Christianity was the state religion. If someone slaughtered the population of a small city in front of your eyes would you still say "barely anyone died." Christians also never were the ones to claim they started the fire of Rome, why would they claim this? If you're trying to say that Christians invented the claim that they were blamed for the fire, this is also not true. Tacitus records that Christians were blamed for starting it. So no, it is not "very well established" that Christians have no reason to feel persecuted. The fact that you're saying that tells me you're a sheltered person living in a developed Western nation and thinks that every Christian on the planet has the luxury of living in a country where they've been the majority for most of their history. Most Christians are not this fortunate, and they face martyrdom both from political and religious enemies every day. Christians being upset at people using BCE/CE also has nothing to do with a lack of confidence in the faith, it's because it is blatantly a further attempt to secularize and erase every Christian contribution to Western civilization.
This is an absolutely retarded take. "You have strong feelings towards something = you are the same as woke people." By that standard every ideology and religion is "woke". What a bunch of nonsense.
5:00 Unironically, when I first heard BCE/CE way back in my school days, I legitimately thought it was just "Before Christ Era / Christ Era." It was like a year later that someone corrected me on what it stands for when I read it out loud instead of the acronym.
I love the stories of culture and various religions which compose our etymology. It's not for everyone, but every time I hear the hidden historical meaning behind a word I feel like I found a small piece of treasure. Thanks Metatron!
I'm a Hispanic in the American southwest in New Mexico. The most common word most prefer in at least NM is Hispanic and not Latino but a minority do prefer Latino. The academics like to refer to us as Latino. The liberal left though didn't like the word Latino because it's masculine. Spanish has the words Latino and Latina (Female). So the liberals invented a new racial word Latinx being gender neutral. Well this bombed really really hard and never took off. My point is I take it that's the same approach academics are taking with BC and AD
I'm with you brother. It would be insane to attempt to remove every idiom, term, or reference related to religion in the language and culture. Even as an atheist, I recognize that religion has held a pervasive position in our history, culture, and language. Removing religion from all historical references is as silly and impossible as removing statues of racists from government lands.
It's not about removing religion and religious references. It's specifically about removing Christianity from traditionally Christian cultures and nations. The people who promulgated BCE/CE were jewish academics attempting to avoid acknowledging Christ as Lord in their writing, and became the standard as they took over our academic institutions.
I'm a religious Jew, and I will only use AD & BC. That's just dating from a historical person in the language of the present dominant culture. The other makes no sense and just shows some kind of hangup about Christianity.
Sometimes it’s just god ol’ Virtue Signaling. Great video. I started hearing this last couple of years and didn’t know when the shift happened or why. Although I kind of figured why. Keep educating!
The fact that BCE and CE both end in the same two sounds is what disqualifies them for me. Having to say three syllables for BCE, plus the first two syllables being the same as BC anyway, are two more reasons BCE/CE are useless.
This is my thoughts on the subject as well. All other arguments aside; replacing BC/AD with BCE/CE is strictly making the system worse by making it easier for them to be confused for each other, both in writing as well as spoken out loud.
One of my objections to BCE and CE is not that there is no world-wide "common era." Hindus, Buddhists, Chinese, and Japanese are examples of those who date their cultures and civilizations from another year than our year one.
It is for precisely that reason why BCE and CE are used, because in science and academic circles the entire world now perforce uses our dating system. At the very least alongside their traditional dating system, but increasingly, in lieu of their native dating entirely. To me this is a small concession, a token which acknowledges the "universality" of choosing Christ's birth year as the start of our "Current Era". Personally I'm well aware of how the date was selected but understand why someone from India, Malaysia, or China might have objections to using a system based on a foreign deity.
@@dscott6629 Exactly. Using CE/BCE does not deny the origins of the calendar. It just signifies that this calendar is now our universal calendar and not restricted to christianity.
Because it's christian common era and it is necessary tool in history and it helps millions of people living mainly in Eastern Europe. It eliminates the problem of different (dual) dates, which are the issue in many eastern orthodox countries, where the government uses Gregorian calendar and the church uses Julian. The eastern church, which keeps a lot of documents, might disagree on "christian" dates, but agree on "common era" dates.
@@ronald3836 I had a woman, a Muslim, who was filling some form next to me in the beautiful city of Chicago a few years ago, who asked me what year it is now. My reaction was "???". She said "We use Hijra, i really do not know what is the number on Western calendar now". i do not think, she is the only one, and she lives in the USA. What about those who live outside? I would very much abstain from calling Christian calendar "wide-spread" and "common".
You are Christian? That's wild. This entire time I thought you were an atheist - I have no idea where I got that from either, odd... Though I still popped in to watch some of your vids because how interesting the topics were, and I've seen your AC Shadow videos going against DEI so it led me thinking you may have been more based than I originally thought. But to find out that you are a brother in Christ as I am, you definitely earned my subscription now. PS: also, love the frog helm - it's definitely one of the cooler looking helms out there.
The biggest flaw with CE/BCE is that it uses the same timeline, zeroing out at the time of Christ on the earth. You are trying to get away from religious connotations but cannot escape it with the timeline. Its just an attempt to impose atheism.
@@HeatherWP But it still bases the time frame around... JESUS CHRIST. Its not trying to be "inclusive" its just trying to reject historical Judeo-Christian influence. As first pushed by the Soviet Union...
I really mean no disrespect, by asking. How can you be an agnostic atheist? Atheist- don’t believe in anything. Will deny God. Agnostic- believes in a higher power, just doesn’t think it’s God.
@@roughneck2204agnostic doesn't mean believes in a higher power that's not god, it's doubting the existence of any god, but not saying that God does NOT exist. Agnostic atheist simply means that while he cannot prove that God doesn't exist, he is 90% sure
@@roughneck2204 a-theist = not a theist; doesn't believe in or worship any god. Emphasis on the god=theos. a-gnostic = doesn't know whether any god exists or not. Emphasis on the knowledge=gnosis. Just nitpicking here. But I'd say you could believe in no god, but still e.g. believe in karma or reincarnation. Well, at least from the definition.
8:43 I don't think he's ever identified as atheist or agnostic. He has identified as, "I DON'T CARE!" And yes, he says that with intensity and has said it many times. He doesn't care so much that he has to passionately emphasize his lack of care. He certainly intensely cares more for his lack of care, then he does for BC/AD
So glad for this! Considering when I hear someone use the asanine "bce and ce" I immediately give a dislike and stop watching the rest of the video. Stay awesome, brother!
One month in as a new subscriber and gotta say, I love Metatron :) This is in my top five must go to channels everyday. I am also having fun back logging views and the materials are copious and wonderfully delightful. Thank you. Veni, Vedi, Pompi
Im thrilled you took on this annoying trend. Reminds me of Romans 1:22, 'Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools'... Seems to me, folks using this term believe they are speaking in an updated, modern way. When in truth they are introducing inaccuracy. Likely, this will eventually become a matter of compelled speech in some institutions, and we should, like Dr Peterson, resist, and insist on accurate speech. Thank you Metatron. I will pray for your mission field, you are loved. You've also challenged my narrow view on men with long hair. Haha. Be well brother.
Oh man, I couldn't agree with you more on this whole subject. I've had this position for years but never bothered to weigh in on a discussion about it cause it's not worth it. Great channel Meg! Love you bro 🤙
I think that the part where he says "how would you like your work to be ignored?" got lost in translation. I'm pretty sure he meant something along the lines of "Would you like it if we ignored you work like you are doing to these monks' work?" I'm Mexican though so it isn't my first language either, I could be wrong
Great video! I agree with you, sir. BTW, I have an academic book published in 1988 that uses "International Era (IE)" and "Before International Era (BIE)". I think those terms didn't catch on because they are kind of a mouthful. But whichever one you use, as you've said it's still counting time from the birth of Christ, so....
Fortunately there is no rule even in US and Canada. I am a historian of ancient history and have published essays and books. I don't use BCE or CE and publishers never said anything because they know they can't.
Tbh the main reason i prefer AD/BC is that the two are easily discernible at a glance. Where as BC and BCE is using the same letters and thus increases the risk of mistakes from just mistyping etc.
Same; the different letters make the data more resilient to things like corruption or destruction. And it's better for dyslexic people and others with trouble keeping track of words/time.
I liked it when my tour guide in pompeii talked about "the 2nd century, BEFORE CHRIST!", not even just BC, she announced it loudly and proudly. You may think it overboard to hate BCE/CE but I think it ruins all respect for academia and language when its preferred instead of the tradition of BC/AD, one that i'm glad i was still taught in even in the Western 21st Century.
Well if your guide in Pompei was italian then the reason is that in italian we always say "avanti cristo/ dopo cristo", even if we write the abbreviations (AC/DC lol) we always read them fully. I've never seen anyone complaining about this nomenclature in Italy.
But for a large part of the world it was never tradition. It would be very confusing if people from different countries/religions/whatever used different year numberings in academic publications. Agreeing on a common year numbering is helpful.
Dude, the year of our Lord 2024 sounds so much better. I’m on board with this. Edit: oh yikes, you lost me with the championing of the BCE professor. He “precision defense” seemed dishonest to me.
I've already refused because of one simple reason. There's a reason why that date matters. It's a reference to a historical event. If you change it to BC/BCE then you're removing it from that event and making it arbitrary when it's not. If you're going to choose a calendar system then it's important to know why. Sure we could choose tomorrow to define some other year as year 0. Maybe the first man on the moon or the end of world war 2. In which case it will be BL (before landing) and SA (space age).
The only reason we use it is that everybody else uses it. Nothing to do with that event. Everything to do with agreeing on a standard calendar, which is extremely useful.
Back in highschool, I honestly thought it meant before christian era and after christian era. That's why I thought it was so weird as to why the atheists wanted to change it so bad 😅
Now that you mention it, I believe I thought the same when I started seeing CE and BCE being used. When I realised it was "Common Era" so it becomes agnostic, it made more sense to me.
Its more sinister than that, its a deliberately rewriting of history, and its been tried before, both in the French Revolution and in the Bolshevik USSR.
Since BCE and CE are the exact times as BC and AD, I have to imagine this was coined as to not say the name Christ by irrationally staunch secular types which comes off as petty to me.
It was actually coined by religious people over a Theological basis, as they understand AD to be directly referencing Jesus as Lord.. I use CE to avoid what I see as a theological statement that I disagree with, for I understand AD to be directly referencing Jesus as Lord.
As soon as I saw the title I had to watch. I got my master's in history, and this was one of my two or three big arguments in the field. So, thank you for your views on it too. I will be honest I lost points on more than one paper for my refusal to change even for class work.
Isn't this the same as a professor or journal mandating specific rules on things like writing numbers out as words instead of just numbers? Or using Kelvin instead of Celsius? Why actively go against the convention of the work you are working on?
I am 39, went back to get my Masters in Art History last year/this year, and finished my dissertation. Both my advisor and myself refused to use BCE and CE. This video is my spirit animal.
Eric Klein, a respected if not revered atheist hisotorian of Jewish descent, stated that if you base your dating system on some specific historical e ent - whether it actually happened or not - then it's ridiculous to try to pretend otherwise unless you abandon the dating system altogether.
So we don't. We just picked a random date for the conmon calendar that is used all over the world. It just happens to coincide with the christian calendar, which is convenient for you. Be happy.
@@pohjanvanamo Not false either. Really, you cannot stop anyone from copying the Gregorian calendar and changing an abbreviation. This is just free speech.
Check out this fine academic and his dedicated video
ua-cam.com/video/s6Lv3KpphVg/v-deo.html
Join this channel to get access to more old school Metatron videos the algorithm wouldn't prioritize!
ua-cam.com/channels/IjGKyrdT4Gja0VLO40RlOw.htmljoin
Also if you like what I do and wish to support my work to help me make sure that I can continue to tell it how it is please consider checking out my patreon! Unboxings are Patreon exclusives!
www.patreon.com/themetatron
My video calling out the Canadian university and their nonsense
ua-cam.com/video/i2g2oE0Q6fc/v-deo.html
My video calling out UK university and their nonsense
ua-cam.com/video/X3dhadFchmQ/v-deo.html
My opinion on the subject can be summarized thusly.
DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!DEUSVULT!
UA-cam's begun to add multiple several minute commercials to the start of many channels, probably to discourage viewership.
This video had a 45 second commercial followed by a 4 minute one. No way around these.
"BCE/CE" strips the meaning out of our dating system in order to coddle the wrong sort of people. BC and AD for life!
@jaggedskar3890 I'm using a VPN & no ads (no ad blocker), so it must be determined by the location of the user.
Let's be honest, your only true reason is your adherence despite the evidence against it to this fairy tale way too many people believe in.
I had a history professor dock me points for using BC and AD, I wrote a 5 page paper citing the history for the terms and claiming religious intolerance. Dean contacted me and said the professor would be giving me my points back
Good for fighting back!
On today’s episode of: “This only totally happened on the internet so that I may get up doots!”
@@President-JonSnow.Malkowichalright mister no uploads, the heck you even got a channel for. Just to make dumb comments like this.
Could you post your paper somewhere? I’m very interested in reading it!
@@President-JonSnow.Malkowich
It's not *that* unlikely... but still.
When I first saw BCE/CE I just considered them to mean Before Christian Era and Christian Era. Saying that I prefer BC and AD.
As a halo fan I thought it was Before Combat Evolved and Combat evolved
Same here!!!
@@def3ndr887 And Halo lore actually uses BCE and CE, lol
@@thecatfather857 pretty metal they made a new calendar after Chief blew up halo
My old Geography & History teacher many, many years ago also called it that. He didn't care for the pointless change but was required to use it, so he always mentioned it that way and it stuck with me. It was the easiest way to remember for those already familiar with the older style. I still prefer BC and AD though, mostly because I'm an Aussie and it reminds me of AC/DC. 😄
You know what: Neil de Grass Tyson is right.
If the Gregorian calendar is a great invention which the whole world still uses, then we have to cite our sources.
The contribution should be celebrated.
So, the BC/AD works fine for me.
Yeah like, if anti-theists really hate any form of religious-adjacent/tied words, then they just need to make an entirely new calendar dating system. Until they do so, it's just dumb to change mere wording because it's still based on a religion whether you like it or not
You can do that by calling it the Gregorian calendar. But Gregorius plagiarised most of it anyway.
When anti-theists come up with a better calendar that the entire world adopts, they can call it whatever they want.
@@gamera5160Personally, I think the Holocene calendar is a better system. Makes it slightly less complicated for historical dating and also picks a more interesting period to center around (Neolithic Revolution)
Personally, I just find it disgusting to try and censor/change the origins of anything, just because "it's offensive/problematic/outdated" or whatever reason.
And no, I'm not a christian.
Amen. As a Catholic historian myself, BC/AD is the only way
I heard a priest use bce/ ce repeatedly over several occasions. I called him on it . He didn’t want to offend anyone . Me, “by being religious?”
By having the conceit to think that people of OTHER religions are interested in your 1st century faith healer who fancied himself the half-son of God.
Probably an Episcopalian lmao
@@BlackEpyon 1st Century in relation to what? Also, your christology is a shambles.
That bugs the crap out of me... My family left our church back in the day for a similar reason! Actually (and I might be wrong about it) but I hear Jesus was all about offending people in the name of God! In fact there's this rumor floating around that he may have been killed for it! Crucified even!
Obligatory /s
@ That the guy was in the Jesus business and wouldn’t use Christian nomenclature was a bit hypocritical.
My question with the whole "Before the Common Era/Common Era" thing is, what exactly is the common era, and why is it called the common era? What makes this era "Common?" It just seems pointless to change the BC/AD, because we still base our calendar on the approximation of when Christ was born, whether we are religious or not
Christian Era? Catholic Era? Thats always a fun gag
It makes no sense whatsoever.
I'm not religious, and even I know its all made up
Virtue
signaling.
I made 3vcoms b4 this 1, if any r missing, u know y.
BCE and CE are honestly super redundant, because when you look at what the divider for that is, it ultimately surrounds around Christ. It's just a relabeling of BC and AD.
like when man and woman is relabelled for the modern progressive fictional narrative
Jesus would have been born in 4 - 6 years before christ. Does that make sense?
And whether you believe in Christ or not, the story of his life is a major turning point in history. That is a fact.
@rockhound4080 more like 32 years before Christ, since BC/AD were representing befor and after his crucifixion and resurrection.
@@rockhound4080It's not about making sense for Christians. It's about getting to act like victims if they don't get their way.
The opening of the Greater Chronicle, by St Bede 673 -735:
"The forty-second year of Caesar Augustus, and the twenty-seventh from the death of Cleopatra and Antonius, when Egypt was turned into a [Roman] province; third year of the one hundred and nintey third Olympiad; seven hundred and fifty-second from the foundation of the City [of Rome]; that is to say that year in which all the movements of peoples throughout the world were held in check, and by Gods ordaining Caesar established a very real and lasting peace; Jesus Christ the Son of God consecrated the Sixth Age of the world by his coming."
That's the most badass opening I've ever heard.
😯 Yep!!
This shows how, in the past, years were typically numbered by the reign of the king or emperor. And really our calendar is the same as those, because Christ is King. It's just that Jesus, being resurrected in heaven and all that, has reigned for 2000 years.
@doltBmB Shows us how hard it is to keep time over thousands of years. Well done to them.
*Thank You, Metatron! I grew up using "BC" and "AD"--and intend to keep on using them.*
Same
BCE/CE is confusing, they *sound the same at the end* . BC and AD sounds different to each other like YES and NO, STOP and GO, ON and OFF so very intuitive. BCE/CE is just an unnecessary tongue twister for the snow flakes woke adults who never grew up. Greetings from southeast Asia.
@@c6h5choh-cn82 Yeah, whenever I see BCE/CE, it takes me a minute to know what period is being referred to.
@@c6h5choh-cn82 "BCE/CE is confusing" Not one bit.
"they sound the same at the end." So what? English prefer prefexing anyway, information and disinformation, not information and informationdis.
"ON and OFF so very intuitive." In my language thats ieslēgt un izslēgt, even more similar once you realize how we assimilate voicing making it ieslēgt and isslēgt, no confusion ever.
"BCE/CE is just an unnecessary tongue twister" Improove your vocalization abilities, its not hard at all.
"for the snow flakes woke adults who never grew up." Not at all. I for one grew up with P.M.E. and M.E. thus in english I have and always will use BC and OE.
"Greetings from southeast Asia." Greetings from northern Europe.
Why does the 'Common Era' start at the birth of a random Jew in Judea? Without religious connotation, it just doesn't make sense to call it 'common'.
Because he undeniably changed history, worldwide.
Because for millions of people he is the creator of existence itself and not just a random guy. And that religion had a very important role in the hearts of the people of those countries for for hundreds and hundreds of years. So, it's logical for the people of those countries to set their timeline according to that important event. For not believers it is the same reason why your holidays and a lot of elements of your life are affected by living in those countries.
@@--Sama- You missed the point there. The OP is pointing out the silliness of BCE/CE as a concept. if you remove the significance of Christ, which is the whole point of that silly modern dating system, then that date loses all relevance. Its ONLY relevant due to the birth of Christ, so why would you remove that fact from the title?
Common Era should start at the birth of a Chinese. You know, Chinese have the most population most of the time, hence common. Or, Indian. /s
Because the world has agreed to standardize on a common calendar.
Whenever I see BC/AD my mind reads it as AC/DC and I get thunderstruck stuck my head. Which is fine on a Thursday.
I just call it Thorsday now 😂
:D No shame in that, my friend!
In Italian BC/AD are, actually, AC/DC (Avanti Cristo/Dopo Cristo : Before Christ/After Christ).
I read it as "and I get THUNDERSTRUCK", period. It would made more of a comedic impact if you left out the other words ;D
@@Halo_Legend Too true
Yes, please say "in the year of our Lord" I love it. Great video!
I don't like BCE/CE simply because the two options sound too similar. I often miss which one someone said. There's no confusing BC and AD.
Honestly, this. Since I'm not used to bce/be and I'm kinda dyslexic it throws me off sometimes. Can't confuse BC and AD
I have trouble interpreting speech and because of how some people speak differentiating BCE and CE can become hard since its very short and easy to miss what you meant
It’s a bit “push/pull” that we put on doors, or the ▶️◀️ vs ◀️▶️ of elevator buttons.
If you go back far enough AD was anno Diocletian. Anno Domini was introduced to marginalise Diocletian by Exiguus, or Dennis the Small.
as someone with dyslexic, this is so true. the amount of time i need to rewind the video to make sure i heard it right.... man it sucks.
I told that to Kings and generals people and they acted hostile to me saying it accommodates people
In Spanish, BCE and CE doesnt even exist. Its just "Before Christ" and "After Christ" (AC-DC Antes de Cristo and Despues de Cristo).
Based Spanish Catholic Empire.
Same in german
The Child sacrifices will stop!
They do exist. They are a.e.c. (antes de la era común) or a.n.e. (antes de nuestra era) and e.c. (de la era común) or n.e. (de nuestra era).
@@serafan3556 en España, no. Nunca en mi vida lo he visto u oído, vaya. Y me alegro
That’s great
In Poland we use "p.n.e." and "n.e." which stand for "przed naszą erą" (before our era) and "naszej ery" ([of] our era). I believe (have no source for this) it was created when soviets occupied Poland post WW2, but it could be older than that.
Older texts use either "AD" (Anno Domini) or "roku pańskiego" (year of [our] lord), but we have been taught that "it is believed for Christ to be born on year 5 BC" as the purpose of using "our era" instead.
That being said, I think most people from Poland when speaking in English would prefer BC and AD. Heck, for the long time I even believed that "C" in BCE/CE was reffering to "Christ" and just thought those redundant.
And yes, Latin is epic.
I also thought BCE/CE was redundant, but then I found out the C was for Common, and I liked that.
In latvian it's same as in Polish then: p.m.ē (pirms mūsu ēras (before our era/epoch)) and the other drops the "p." (pirms (before))... Also possibly USSR stuff - although in latvian we don't have also christianic name for Christmass, but instead Ziemassvētki (Winter-feast)
Edit: found history book with few pages available online that was made in 1928, so before USSR - we used for BC: "pr. Kr. dz." (pirms Kristus dzimšanas (before Christ's Birth)). But did not find example of AD variation - so possibly we were writing only the before Christ - while just writing century/year if it's AD.
@@ronald3836 Common people like common things. Makes sense. Historical impact of a particular individual, whether religious or not? Oh no, you wouldn't like that, "common" is better for you of course, and it comes to nobody's surprise.
In Czechia we have literally the same thing. It wasnt created during soviet occupation, but by communist regime as a part of their plan to suppress religion.
I'm Polish and I had never thought much about ittill I met woke warriors online getting angry at BC, AD in English. It's not a thing to be angry about. The result is that I try to use "przed Chrystusem, po Chrystusie" (before, after Christ) from time to time.
The thing about religion and terms being based upon it is something I've noticed that oftentimes the hatred is only against things that stem from christianity. It really made me think...
Continue thinking!
"You will be hated, and persecuted, because of Me" said Jesus Christ, to the people that believed in Him.
@@ilsignorsaruman2636 The hatred that was cast upon christians in the past few years has really opened my eyes and made me believe even more quite frankly so I will do just that. :)
As the previous comment explained, Christ predicted his followers will be persecuted, and you guys REVEL in it. Nothing like the Christian persecution complex. Isn't there also a quote something like "they hate us because they know we are telling the truth"?
Let me ask you this: In a world of increasing irreligiousity, which religion do you think will be targeted by things ranging from mere reforms to persecution? It's going to be the most popular religion in the cultural sphere of the world where irreligion is growing rapidly. Aka, the west. The people who insist on BCE/CE only have christians terms to change, because the west doesn't have nearly as much influence from other religions as Christianity. Well, not religions that are still around anyway.
Let's not forget about the decades of anti-muslim propaganda in state media and Hollywood though. Or the increasing anti-semitism right now. You Christians aren't the only persecuted ones at the moment, and I think Christ would be happy if you acknowledged that, or helped with that even.
@christurner6330 Youre basing that off the assumption that we arent infact being kind and helpful to others who are being judged and bullied for their beliefs which is wrong. I have seen several occasions where religious people found common ground in that persecution. I am a person who strives to do good in this rotten world but the fact that christians are being hated only further adds to my faith because as you said it was even written that the world would hate us for we are not of this world and they first hated jesus. So youd do well to stop basing things off assumptions and instead treat each individual the way you should because none of us are alike and we all live our lives differently :)
@christurner6330 yea, no... because a lot of people that are intolerant of Christian terms, values and morals, are often demanding we are tolerant and accept other religions like Islam
Brilliant videon Metatron! 100% agree and support your decision to start using "In the year of our Lord!"
Thats actually lame
Anno Domini all the way!!!
Amen
@@jozefcyran2589it’s the same thing just different language
@@jozefcyran2589 Thats what Anno Domini means
I do disagree with him on one thing ... the entire live and let live scolding for people that recognize it was a deliberate move by the same people that rammed political wokeness into every aspect of Western civilization .
Pointing to some isolated reference to isolated uses 150 years mean nothing to me . I just saw a tiktoker point to a reference more of "neopron uns" being used more than 200 years ago .
The entire CE and BCE garbage swept like typhoid fever across places like Wikipedia ... and it rode the wave of things like claiming my preferred prouns are Beetlejuice ... cat person and Mixlpix ...
As the meme goes - "Oh right, the Common Era. The era known for being common. The era the is common specifically because of the historical event. The Common Era. That Era?"
It's the common era because most people on the world use the same calendar. Before the age of European hegemony over the world, everyone had their own time system and because of Europe's influence (and the Christian influence over Europe) basically everyone is 'forced' to live by our calendar now. So yes, 'common era' is totally appropriate, albeit still arbitraty just like any calendar system is.
@@gousmannetje
TLDR Reddit tier opinion.
Cope.
Seethe.
Mald.
Dilate.
So on & so forth
Christ is King.
No, the era is common because a lot of people use it. And a lot of people use it because a group of religious fundamentalists used a lot of violence. And once we got rid of the fundies it was easier to continue using the same arbitrary meaningless number than coming up with a new one and making sure every other place that got rid of the fundies used the same one.
@@ivantumanov1015 I am not sure what you are talking about? It is not so much religious as it was just the 'standard' being christian in 16-20th century Europe? you know the era Europeans explored and colonized the world and implemented their systems throughout all continents? That is a matter of convenience (and imperialism), not religion...
Should have stayed with Ab Urbe Condita - year of founding of ROME the eternal city
BC/AD work just fine. Changing them is just linguistic vandalism.
It's historical revisionism at it's most basic and petulant form.
It's political activism.
wat
My University for Seminary uses bce/ce
Agreed! It's a crime against history.
Also, I love people who try to avoid Christmas by writing, "Xmas." "X" is the Greek letter Chi... which is the first letter of "Christos." So, it doesn't make sense!
I'm Athiest and I still prefer BC and AD
Especially since we use the gregorian calendar anyways.
How can intelligent people be atheist, i don't get that.
Be agnostic like me and many others.
Don't you understand that existence itself is paradoxical?
I agree.It irritates me with that modern garbage
@@Boris82real intelligent people are followers of Jesus since he is the ultimate truth
@@Boris82I think a lot don't care enough to pick between atheists or agnostics.
I technically fall under the atheist umbrella, I have been using BC/AD since my primary school years. I can't be asked to start using different names tbh.
“asked” surprisingly works, but I suspect an autocorrect occurred here.
There's no reason to use it when it's still referring to the same period of time, they just wanna be "snowflakes" lol
same, I am an atheist, and grew up using BC/AD, and for me its just that, and doesnt have any particular meaning expect the time from year 0 in the counting system we are using to calculate the year. Couldnt care less what they call it, but of habbit it will be BC/AD, and do not see any point in changing that as its neutral for me with no deeper meaning for anything else than year 0 and before and after that.
I love the reasoning, "Im lazy and it means the same time /year so eh fuck it"
@@christofferdhThe Gregorian calendar was devised usung Roman numerals. There is no 0 in Roman numerals.,There was no year zero. The year after 1 BC was 1 AD.
Not a christian, but always still use BC/AD. We're one step away from renaming our months and weekdays because of their history. No.
Because of whose history?
@@panzer00 because theyre named after roman and (i think) greek gods.
Slippery slope argument.
@@tguit-fiddler5692 Germanic Pagan gods too - Odin and Thor.
I can't even fathom what type of argumentation could be made in favor of changing them.
Right?! Agreed.
It's even funnier that by swapping the terms but not changing anything, they are implicitly encoding into a "scientific term" the fact that there's no year zero.
1:20 Somehow I managed to watch your videos for almost a decade now and never realized you were also a Christian. I'm intimidated by how unbiased this man is in his videos.
He only confirmed that in a video earlier this year (or maybe late last year).
He’s a man for the evidence :)
And even if he declares a bias here or there, he usually lets the sources speak for themselves
You miss some of his videos, obviously lol
Lol you will know them by their fruits. He bleeds being a Christian. Ive watched him for less than a year on and off and i just assumed
Are you kidding me? Or are you blind and deaf? Lol unbiased.
Reasons why I don't use BCE/CE:
1. People know what I'm talking about when I say BC/AD.
2. Its completely unnecessary and redundant to change to BCE/CE since they're both based on the exact same event.
3. You don't have to be Christian to use BC/AD just like you don't have to be Norse Pagan to use the days of week.
4. Knowing this and still insisting on using BCE/CE seems pompous.
5. BC is faster to say than BCE
6. I don't feel like explaining what BCE/CE is every time I use it since most people use BC/AD
But youre passing up such an easy opportunity to virtue signal and be woke, its only one extra letter!
what event? when was Jesus born?
Exactly! 👊👊✊✊👏👏👏
@@TheSuperappelflap HAHAHA!!! 😁😁😂😂🤣🤣 Truly.
Hmm, most people wear clothing... Maybe we should either adapt to calling it clothinge or celothing, or else conform to the culture who invented clothing.
I like Neil DeGrassi Tyson's position on this. He likes BC/AD in that he wants to recognize the hard work that went into developing the calendar. So, the strong atheist and scientist, one who you would think would prefer BCE/CE would rather use BC and AD.
Something about even a stopped clock being right twice a day...
About the only time I've ever agreed with Tyson.
@@CurCam713Can you give me any examples that you do not agree with?
@@olleolausson they're Christian so they probably disagree with a lot of facts
Other societies have put a lot of effort into their calendars too, to the point they use it in favor over Gregorian. It's arbitrary.
It is nonsense. It's an overcomplication, and there's no distinction.
"We don't like that guy anymore, so everybody has to change for us. And we're gonna use even more confusing letters. But we're still using the same year, which is solely significant because of that guy."
Not a Christian but I still use them. If you're going to change the dating system then change the dating system, don't just rename it to erase history.
Barring a world changing event, the best time to change the dating system would have been the year 2000.
BC / AD itself is already the product of cultural / theological takeover. Ab Urbe Condita is the true calendar (year since founding of ROME)
never been told to use BCE/CE, but I did once get flak for using the terms man and mankind to refer to humans. I was at a Christian university in a theology program and decided to just use the term the Bible translation I used was using. I got marked down on a paper for it. I told the professor that she is incorrect and that my usage of the term is proper English. I further told her that she does not have the authority to regulate my language because she doesn't like it. She got all up in arms and for a moment I thought I went a bit too hard at it and would see backlash. I later was discussing the situation with a professor I respected greatly, and it turns out that he was actually the head of her department and that he was deeply concerned about her behavior. I never once got another complaint out of her.
She had no business teaching in a Christian university if she was going to pull stunts like that.
@@kohakuaiko agreed. It could have been a lot bigger of an issue if the university itself was actually in line with that way of thinking
@@kohakuaikoMost "Christian" universities aren't actually Christian, they merely were in the past and/or they get some funding from a denomination but are run by secular institutions now. It's all about money really, they see a full religious institution as not attractive enough to a broader demographic, so they make the curriculum atheist/secular and only have the religion stuff as largely extra credit or optional altogether (some I have seen a mandatory theology class, but it's learning about all religions and not just Christianity).
@@ChristoffRevan This one is, and that's why the situation was handled well. The university I went to struck a very good balance. Non Christians were welcomed and encouraged to come, but the school was very strict on the fact that all teachers must adhere to their doctrinal statement. The idea is to create a real world mission field at the school without compromising core Christian theology. All of the non religious degree programs were taught in a secular manner as Christianity isn't relevant there. All students were required to take one class on Christianity and the Christian worldview. The theology program was a lot more strict of course since it's there to train future pastors and such. The result was an environment of "All are welcome here, but you need to understand that this is a Christian school. You don't have to BE Christian, but you need to remember whose house you're in so to speak".
Way to go. You NEVER should fail to slap down leftist abuse.
In Portuguese we still say Antes de Cristo / Depois de Cristo (Before and After Christ) but funny thing is, a Bishop already streamlined the days of the week for us like 1500 years ago, he claimed they were too pagan and he made them more neutral (now they're Second through Sixth Fair), except for Saturday and Sunday which are Sábado (Sabbat or the day of rest) and Domingo (Dies Dominicus or the day of the Lord).
Thank you for the information :)
I like it.
That's pretty cool. You wouldn't happen to know the name of the Bishop who did this, would you? I'd like to read about him a little.
I think it's still better in Portuguese and Spanish. Antes de Cristo y Después de Cristo for us Spanish speakers. In English would be Before Christ (BC) and After Christ (AC) if translated literally.
@@InvisibleMan-tb8ke São Martinho de Dume, bishop of Braga.
Thank you, I've been saying some of these same reasons for a while. I'm glad to hear someone express it with MORE reasons than I could've conjured.
Tuesday. Tyrs Day. Tyr, the nordic god. Wednesday. Woodins Day. Odin, nordic god. Thursday. Thors Day. Thor, nordic god. Friday. Friggs Day. Frigg, nordic god.
Are you sure it’s not Freys day, from Frøya?
In French, 6 days of the week are named after Roman gods.
Germanic gods, of which Nordic was a subdivision. You don't necessarily need to transpose them to their Nordic subvariants when the Germanic ones are just as well known to people interested in ancient history, I think.
Then there's the three outliers, Moon's day, Sun's day, and Saturn's day
@@tau-5794Those are also gods, at least Saturn is.
Christianity is simultaneously the only religion actively persecuted by militant Antitheists, but is also the only religion that respects your right to be a militant Antitheist.
Christ our Lord said it "if they hate you, remember they hated Me first."
And also "you will be hated and persecuted because of Me".
We christians follow the teachings of our Lord, Jesus Christ.
He said "love one another, as I loved you", and "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
We love everyone and respect everyone, and i'm sorry for whoever suffered because of extremists...
Those atheists and anti-theists obviously don't follow Chirst, and they do not respect any of His teachings. But they do not follow the man's morality either, as being rude and offensive is not considered good. They're just rude, and they use their atheism as an excuse.
Also, this should tell you something.
What brings all those people to hate on christianity?
But they themselves have no problem with any other religion, and instead have great respect for who follows the teachings of Asian sages or who follows pagans gods, or even satanic cults.
have you seen how muslims treat atheists?
Anti-christian people hate Christianity but never researched that most of what they like, enjoy and benefit from the present world could be traced back as indirect results of Christianity, even the philosophy and ideology that they based their hatred for Christianity was made possible and developed because Christianity built universities and other institutions of learning that had endured for centuries. These Christian institutions of learning *studied everything even ideas that are against Christianity* . "Learning the beliefs of those against you is a battle half won."
@@firmak2 Read my comment again, and realize that my comment already answered your question.
My biggest issue with BCE and CE is the fact that the only thing they "change" over BC and AD is the words. They still refer to the same dates, for the same exact underlying (Christian) reasons. All they change is words. An effectively meaningless change, and literally nothing is improved. And it's needlessly anti-religion to boot. So I've never used them, even when educational resources in my country have pressed me to use them. It's an utterly pointless "change" in my opinion and does not improve scholarly discussion.
It's not just anti-religion.
It is specifically anti-Christian and we need to call this shit out.
These same people wouldn't be getting their panties in a twist over the days of the week being named after Anglo-Saxon and Greco-Roman gods and neither would they be complaining that the months of the calendar being named after Roman and Greek gods and Roman emperors.
So there is a specific issue here with Christ itself, not religion per se.
Much like woke culture in general, it's all just cosmetics and surface deep.
You say nothing is improved, yet it's anti-religion. That's at least one improvement right there. And if the only thing they change is the words, how is it anti-religion or worse? It's not, it's such a non-change that you should have no problem with it.
@@ivantumanov1015 Should we then change the weeks names then? How about the names of the month? Oh, and lets not forget the names for the planets.
In the most friendly way I can put this in youtube, you are the worst type of atheist. One that hasn't grown out of their teenage years.
@@ivantumanov1015 There's nothing inherently good about being anti-religion. Get that out of your head, first of all. 2nd, there was nothing inherently wrong with the BC/AD existing system which BCE/CE has hijacked. So, when this new terminology is pushed on people it achieves nothing; other than toxicity against Christians, because of the implication that referencing the birth of Jesus Christ was somehow morally wrong. If that was your goal, congratulations.
I just love that a Christian, as you said you are, said that they love a day's name is another religion's god's name. Just shows how good and accepting and based of a person you are. Wish more were like that.
Edit : this reminds me of Dave Gorman's new calendar. You should wath it, it's on youtube.
"I hate language policing, no matter where it comes from, " is so refreshing to hear from you in these kind of days.
I choose AC⚡️DC ! Cheers 😄
That's actually how you say BC and AD in Italy 😂
Avanti Cristo - Dopo Cristo
You've been thunderstruck 👍
I use TNT but my foreigners don't appreciate it !
@@elioamedeo Same in Portugal
@@marSLaZZ66yeah it's dynamite
I actually honestly thought that BCE was meant before Christian era...
You never ever can imagine the extent of people stupidity.
(And I'm atheist. I think the claim from NDG is very US biased. In Europe there is a vast majority of atheist, and we never squabble over this kind of nonsense)
I definitely noticed while in Europe that the atheists there are much less pretentious than in North America.
LOVE THIS!!!!!! I thought I was the ONLY person that thought this way!!!! I didn't even think of the argument of "Thor's Day", but, yes, that is a Great argument!!!!! I think God has a sense of humor and daydream that this plays out sort of like with Job: Lucifer goes to Heaven and argues with God about BC/AD and God says something like yeah, you can change it and it won't matter. and the only thing Lucifer can come up with is CE and BCE, which every time I hear it I think BCE - Before Christ's Entrance and CE - Christ's Entrance.
It is reminiscent of the woke changing words like Latino/Latina to Latinx. Or redefining the word woman or man. Or "herstory."
Yep, arrogantly and paternalistically foisting a new unasked-for name onto hundreds of millions of people that makes them sound like something you'd blow your nose on and flush away.... dignified !!!
It’s so frustrating when people try to look like they’re making some kind of stand on these complex social issues by making a simplistic terminology change that risks nothing and accomplishes nothing. It’s like saying you’re minimally committed on an important issue but you want to be credited as a hero for that.
Its as thought the last hit of acid got stuck.
Yes. It’s a direct attack on a common language for the people of a culture to share. It breaks down social cohesion.
It's religious, Christianity is original sin.
Wow. Two seconds in and I already like this video. My archaeology professor in college threatened to lower my grade from an A to a B because I refused to use BCE/CE. I accepted his challenge. I then took his grade to the department head and argued my case. I won. I got my A, and I didn't have to submit to his nonsense. Another argument i won in that class was his insistence that I refer to religion as "religious myth." I began to refer to his pre-recorded history timeline as the "anthropology myth." He quit correcting me, and I quit correcting him. It was all good. Oddly, that was one of my favorite classes of all time. I'd take it again and again, even with that professor. My reasoning is that we disagreed on two points. That's about .1% of the amount of disagreement I was having with my then boyfriend. Conversely, given the choice, I WOULD NOT date that boyfriend ever again.
I'm an Atheist who uses BC/AD. I got a little nervous when you first mentioned NDT in the video because I know how often the worlds of religion and science are in opposition to each other, and was happy and relieved to hear him talking sense on this one. I also do refer to Christmas as Christmas, but there is nothing religious about how I observe it.
I also will quickly point out that too few people are aware of the difference between an atheist and an anti-theist. Most people who complain about atheists are actually complaining about anti-theists.
Oh stop it. I'm an atheist/agnostic and internet atheists have flooded the net and become obnoxious edgelords over the past 15 years. Constantly insulting and trying to pick fights with religious people.
Deep down they are just rebellious kids who hate their religious parents and need to lash out. I was raised by secular parents so I have no need to antagonize religious people. Nobody uses the term anti theist
It's funny you say science and religion are often opposed to each other... This might be true for primitive superstitions. But I know this is not true with Bible based religions, because the Bible itself makes very few scientific claims(Miracles are not supposed to be scientific, those are God showing His power over nature, they are literally designed to be 'impossible').
The main one the naturalistic philosophers/atheists in labcoats take issue with, is that the Earth is only a few thousand years old.
Meanwhile many of the foundational axioms of scientific thinking are built on Biblical assumptions(We can understand the world, it operates according to fixed law, the pursuit of truth is a good thing, etc.).
The naturalistic/atheist philosophers would like to claim credit for modern science, but they have essentially failed to deliver functional new theories despite millions of times the manpower and billions of times the funding that their theistic ideological ancestors possessed(most "modern" scientific advancement is essentially just fleshing out the details of theories that are hundred(s) of years old). After looking at history, I believe naturalistic atheism to have held back science by at least a hundred years, quite possibly more like five hundred.
Thank you for the anti-theists bit - I'd been calling them new atheists but they've been around for a while now so it was getting confusing for younger people I talked to. It's perfectly valid to decide you don't believe there's a God, but quite ridiculous to constantly attack those who do so out of a sense of superiority because they think not believing in God is a mark of greater intelligence (and they long to be thought of as smarter than average). Most of them can't get close to explaining why it might be 'rational' not to believe in a God or Gods (I get a lot of use out of 'you realise that 18th century scientists decided meteors weren't real because Newton said rocks couldn't be in space to fall out of it and many collections of curiosities/museums threw away their meteorites because it was irrational to believe they fell from the sky - denying us the chance to examine them now' ) I expect to get a lot of use out of anti-theists in future :)
Antitheists are the loudest and also claim to represent atheists in general, so the misconception is understandable. But I agree wih you, with a bit of reasoning, it's easy to differentiate the two.
Always boggles my mind at the anti-theists for getting angry at BC/AD because "the words are tied to religion, REEEEE" but yet they still use "oh god", "christ", "holy shit", "for Pete's sake", and other epithets that use religious-adjacent terminology but somehow that's still fine for them. Like, their logic makes zero sense at all, plus most of their hatred usually only seems directed to Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, but they're perfectly fine with Buddhist, Taoist, New Age, paganism, etc concepts....a bunch of hypocrisy really
5:52 That's actually not true at all. There is no single tracable source of pagan rituals involved in any modern traditions of christmas or christmas a festival whatsoever.
JJ Jameson: You serious? BAH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
@@alexanderren1097 Yes he's serious because he's objectively right. Read actual scholars and watch some videos, there is no relation to paganism whatsoever (except for pagans changing dates AFTER christmas became popular to compete with Christians)
As someone who uses AC/DC, all I can say is that the version in Portuguese is superior
Which, by the way, translates to "Before Christ/After Christ " ("Antes de Cristo"/"Depois de Cristo" thus AC/DC) for non-Portuguese speakers.
@@Herandro_just_Herandro I just thought he liked to rock out
@@tguit-fiddler5692 like a hurricane
I was about to write this. Portuguese is way better.
Damned, your comment Shook Me All Night long, and left me Thunderstruck. Have A Drink On Me.🤣
I am both obnoxious and inefficient, I say "year of Our Lord," even while speaking.
The hero we need...
You've been better than me, I think I will follow suit.
Gigachad mindset
I use it too, a great way to emphasize things using that. Also, my language is a bit more efficient with it, saying the same in only two words, which lowers the threshold.
As an Atheist I do this. I'm not going to kowtow to a few Jewish intellectuals' sensibilities. Also, I may not believe in magic but it's still my narrative and folklore.
Lindybeige's Backwards Chronology and Ascending Dates solution works well to confound the perpetually offended who may rage at BC/AD, but I'm with the Metatron, the other will not be used.
"Latin sounds epic." I mean, he's not wrong...
One of my personal favorite Latin sayings is, "Si vis sapientiam, quaere veritatem," "If you want wisdom, seek truth."
Thank you!!! I have always refused to use BCE/CE. Like what separates BCE from CE? What historical event happened between the two? They're only using BCE/CE because they're Christiphobes.
@@KornPop96 Exactly. And when you ask them what "common era" even means they have no idea.
the "historical event" is a bunch of small hatted people from the desert wrote about a fictional character born decades earlier, and magically managed to convince rome by bribery and butchery to convert.
Not really deserving of defining our calendar off it.
Let me add my exactly. The people who use BCE/CE want to eliminate Christianity from the culture. They are not non-Christian, they are anti-Christian. It is atheist arrogance and bigotry. I have always wondered atheists want to eliminate my belief in God. Why do they care?
Who's "afraid" of Christianity?
It's arbitrary just like choosing some guys death
Dunno, I'm not religious. I have always used BC/AD for a couple reasons. My father was a doctor, a scientist, and an archologist and always used it, so I guess it's because that's what I grew up with. I also use it because it's just simple. Also, because in my social circles still use BC/AD.
So you're pretty much Indiana Jones, right...?
@@TomasFunes-rt8rd I wish, last time I visited Egypt I found no ark and they wouldn't let me search outside the tourist designated areas. Throwing around my dad's name didn't get me anywhere "Dr Jones" =P.
Agreed. Awesome Metatron. You have a great variety of fair, rational and intelligent content. I, as a Christian really love your Christian related content personally. I really liked your video on Angels. Thank you for your work!
I remember when i learned what AD meant "the year of our lord" i was so fascinated
Before watching the video: I never liked BCE/CE because they don't roll off the tongue nearly as easily as BC/AD. Then I thought about it, and I liked them even less hecause they're dishonest; it's still using (the rough estimate of) the birth of Christ as a benchmark for splitting the eras. It's just not honest about it, it's obfuscating the issue.
I always have used BC and AD, but I have no real issue with people using BCE or CE either, most of the time. It does annoy me when I was back in high school, keep in mind a Catholic one, and my paper was "corrected" to BCE and CE...
Im atheist and BCE is Annoying
It's an explicitly Jewish tradition to use BCE and CE, you shouldn't use it if you aren't Jewish.
@@mandowarrior123oh stop it Adolphus
CE = Christ Era. Rejoice! For we live in the Era of Christ.
The first time I learned about bce and ce was when my history teacher used it in 9th grade and he said that it was our choice to use it or bc/ad on our work because both are commonly accepted. He was most likely non religious but I liked him as a teacher, a good man and a good teacher I learned a lot of history from him. Also anyone who says that Yeshua never existed is being historically dishonest, as a brother in Christ and being one who enjoys history I was very interested in your video about the historical evidence of Jesus and I really enjoyed every minute of it. No one has all of the answers but when I want history I come to your channel because I know you're honest and give unbiased facts. God bless you my brother and keep up the great work.
the concept of BCE/CE may not be woke but the "insistence" upon its use is woke.
@@humbleopulenceChristians are currently the single most persecuted group in the world. The evidence for their persecution and martyrdom during the early church, especially under Diacletian, is sufficient by historical standards to say it happened. To say otherwise is a giant "NUH UH CHRISTIANS JUST BAD AND PLAY VICTIM." It would be different if christians actually played the victim when they weren't, but it seems they actually are. And funny enough, christians dont really complain about it and are instead viewed as the super well-off entitled untouchable group by most Americans. Christians, according to their doctrine, are to forgive and not expect to be given anything by those who have hurt them as a means of them "making up." Everyone is on equal ground, and everyone needs forgiveness. Furthermore, the Catholic Church is the largest charitable organization in the world. If the point was to gain ground off of martyrdom, they wouldnt be giving anything they have. Also, the christians didnt claim to have set the great fire of Rome, they were blamed by Nero, and subsequently persecuted.
The difference with the "woke" crowd is a more marxist approach. The "I am oppressed, those people over there are my oppressors, I need to rise above them for society to be redeemed" mentality. That mindset assumes that certain people are above others, and we need to do whatever we can to correct that imbalance, including tearing down everyone above you. It lacks any goodwill or charitable spirit. Its all about worldly gains and status. The closest thing to that you could attempt to apply to christianity is the retrospective Nietzschean view of christian ethics, which personally I think is very flawed.
@@humbleopulence Blah blah blah, so many words for so much bullshit. Christians, historically and today, are one of the most persecuted minority groups in the world. This isn't my opinion, this is fact that's backed up by Amnesty International's statistics on the matter. On average, about 3,000 Christians are killed every year specifically for their faith, with the rates of that much higher during ISIS' tenure in the Middle East. Especially in Muslim and communist countries, Christians face legal consequences up to and including death more so than any other religious group on the planet. By modern, secular academic estimates, about 3,000-4,000 Christians were executed during the persecutions of Diocletian alone, not counting the smaller persecutions or religious hate crimes over the centuries before Christianity was the state religion.
If someone slaughtered the population of a small city in front of your eyes would you still say "barely anyone died." Christians also never were the ones to claim they started the fire of Rome, why would they claim this? If you're trying to say that Christians invented the claim that they were blamed for the fire, this is also not true. Tacitus records that Christians were blamed for starting it. So no, it is not "very well established" that Christians have no reason to feel persecuted. The fact that you're saying that tells me you're a sheltered person living in a developed Western nation and thinks that every Christian on the planet has the luxury of living in a country where they've been the majority for most of their history. Most Christians are not this fortunate, and they face martyrdom both from political and religious enemies every day. Christians being upset at people using BCE/CE also has nothing to do with a lack of confidence in the faith, it's because it is blatantly a further attempt to secularize and erase every Christian contribution to Western civilization.
@@humbleopulence Congratulations on finding 3 morons to agree with this assessment.
Of course, it is woke. It is about erasing our history. It always was.
This is an absolutely retarded take. "You have strong feelings towards something = you are the same as woke people." By that standard every ideology and religion is "woke". What a bunch of nonsense.
I did NOT expect to hear that defense from narcissistic black science guy. Props to him.
He is a nutter but reasonable at times 😂
Date pronouns are the only invalid pronouns
Sometimes scientists get self awareness and remember their whole institution was founded by the church
He is a christian nowadays.
@@ronald3836he isn't
5:00 Unironically, when I first heard BCE/CE way back in my school days, I legitimately thought it was just "Before Christ Era / Christ Era." It was like a year later that someone corrected me on what it stands for when I read it out loud instead of the acronym.
I love the stories of culture and various religions which compose our etymology. It's not for everyone, but every time I hear the hidden historical meaning behind a word I feel like I found a small piece of treasure. Thanks Metatron!
I'm a Hispanic in the American southwest in New Mexico. The most common word most prefer in at least NM is Hispanic and not Latino but a minority do prefer Latino. The academics like to refer to us as Latino. The liberal left though didn't like the word Latino because it's masculine. Spanish has the words Latino and Latina (Female). So the liberals invented a new racial word Latinx being gender neutral. Well this bombed really really hard and never took off. My point is I take it that's the same approach academics are taking with BC and AD
I'm with you brother. It would be insane to attempt to remove every idiom, term, or reference related to religion in the language and culture. Even as an atheist, I recognize that religion has held a pervasive position in our history, culture, and language. Removing religion from all historical references is as silly and impossible as removing statues of racists from government lands.
It's not about removing religion and religious references. It's specifically about removing Christianity from traditionally Christian cultures and nations. The people who promulgated BCE/CE were jewish academics attempting to avoid acknowledging Christ as Lord in their writing, and became the standard as they took over our academic institutions.
I, on the other hand, am an abolitionist about religious language.
I'm a religious Jew, and I will only use AD & BC. That's just dating from a historical person in the language of the present dominant culture. The other makes no sense and just shows some kind of hangup about Christianity.
I thought Jews is a degratory term to the actual people group.......Don't Israelis use year since Genesis? This being "Heshvan 5785"
Well done for sticking up for the normal use of BC & AD!
Sometimes it’s just god ol’ Virtue Signaling.
Great video. I started hearing this last couple of years and didn’t know when the shift happened or why. Although I kind of figured why. Keep educating!
The fact that BCE and CE both end in the same two sounds is what disqualifies them for me. Having to say three syllables for BCE, plus the first two syllables being the same as BC anyway, are two more reasons BCE/CE are useless.
This is my thoughts on the subject as well. All other arguments aside; replacing BC/AD with BCE/CE is strictly making the system worse by making it easier for them to be confused for each other, both in writing as well as spoken out loud.
One of my objections to BCE and CE is not that there is no world-wide "common era." Hindus, Buddhists, Chinese, and Japanese are examples of those who date their cultures and civilizations from another year than our year one.
It is for precisely that reason why BCE and CE are used, because in science and academic circles the entire world now perforce uses our dating system. At the very least alongside their traditional dating system, but increasingly, in lieu of their native dating entirely. To me this is a small concession, a token which acknowledges the "universality" of choosing Christ's birth year as the start of our "Current Era". Personally I'm well aware of how the date was selected but understand why someone from India, Malaysia, or China might have objections to using a system based on a foreign deity.
@@dscott6629 Exactly. Using CE/BCE does not deny the origins of the calendar. It just signifies that this calendar is now our universal calendar and not restricted to christianity.
Because it's christian common era and it is necessary tool in history and it helps millions of people living mainly in Eastern Europe. It eliminates the problem of different (dual) dates, which are the issue in many eastern orthodox countries, where the government uses Gregorian calendar and the church uses Julian. The eastern church, which keeps a lot of documents, might disagree on "christian" dates, but agree on "common era" dates.
@@ronald3836 I had a woman, a Muslim, who was filling some form next to me in the beautiful city of Chicago a few years ago, who asked me what year it is now. My reaction was "???". She said "We use Hijra, i really do not know what is the number on Western calendar now". i do not think, she is the only one, and she lives in the USA. What about those who live outside? I would very much abstain from calling Christian calendar "wide-spread" and "common".
@@_Diana_SBut it _is_ widespread and common. 🤷 That doesn't preclude other systems from being used, widespread, and also common.
You are Christian? That's wild.
This entire time I thought you were an atheist - I have no idea where I got that from either, odd...
Though I still popped in to watch some of your vids because how interesting the topics were, and I've seen your AC Shadow videos going against DEI so it led me thinking you may have been more based than I originally thought.
But to find out that you are a brother in Christ as I am, you definitely earned my subscription now.
PS: also, love the frog helm - it's definitely one of the cooler looking helms out there.
The biggest flaw with CE/BCE is that it uses the same timeline, zeroing out at the time of Christ on the earth. You are trying to get away from religious connotations but cannot escape it with the timeline. Its just an attempt to impose atheism.
It could also be an acknowledgment that the whole world isn’t Christian.
@@HeatherWP But it still bases the time frame around... JESUS CHRIST. Its not trying to be "inclusive" its just trying to reject historical Judeo-Christian influence. As first pushed by the Soviet Union...
@@HeatherWP Then stop using a Christian calendar if you are so offended!
@@speckbretzelfan happy to. Never said I was offended though
Nope, it is just a small concession to non-christians. In return. they use "your" system of numbering the years, which is very helpful.
I am an agnostic atheist, and I prefer the use of BC/AD. I don't like Tyson, but he is right on this fact.
I really mean no disrespect, by asking. How can you be an agnostic atheist?
Atheist- don’t believe in anything. Will deny God.
Agnostic- believes in a higher power, just doesn’t think it’s God.
@@roughneck2204agnostic doesn't mean believes in a higher power that's not god, it's doubting the existence of any god, but not saying that God does NOT exist.
Agnostic atheist simply means that while he cannot prove that God doesn't exist, he is 90% sure
@ I’ll have to look at it again but always understood agnostic as you believe something out there, you just don’t know what
@@roughneck2204 a-theist = not a theist; doesn't believe in or worship any god. Emphasis on the god=theos.
a-gnostic = doesn't know whether any god exists or not. Emphasis on the knowledge=gnosis.
Just nitpicking here. But I'd say you could believe in no god, but still e.g. believe in karma or reincarnation. Well, at least from the definition.
@@roughneck2204 You also have the dyslexic agnostic who wakes up in the middle of the night wondering if there is a dog.
8:43 I don't think he's ever identified as atheist or agnostic. He has identified as, "I DON'T CARE!" And yes, he says that with intensity and has said it many times. He doesn't care so much that he has to passionately emphasize his lack of care. He certainly intensely cares more for his lack of care, then he does for BC/AD
That's being an apatheist, the best choice, frees a lot of time.
So glad for this! Considering when I hear someone use the asanine "bce and ce" I immediately give a dislike and stop watching the rest of the video. Stay awesome, brother!
As a Polish guy, I must say BCE/CE is already there in our language for decades now! Since, you know, Iron Curtain.
change it.
@@AS-np3yq no
@@AS-np3yq I don't mind it myself, 'cause I'm not religious. Also, couldn't fix it if I wanted to.
@@Neferkariusz31You could fix it for yourself.
You're not under the Soviet era anymore
Which is a clue.
Good to see this. As a history teacher I refuse to use bce/ce too. Many sites are now using it.
One month in as a new subscriber and gotta say, I love Metatron :)
This is in my top five must go to channels everyday. I am also having fun back logging views and the materials are copious and wonderfully delightful.
Thank you.
Veni, Vedi, Pompi
Im thrilled you took on this annoying trend.
Reminds me of Romans 1:22, 'Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools'...
Seems to me, folks using this term believe they are speaking in an updated, modern way. When in truth they are introducing inaccuracy. Likely, this will eventually become a matter of compelled speech in some institutions, and we should, like Dr Peterson, resist, and insist on accurate speech.
Thank you Metatron. I will pray for your mission field, you are loved. You've also challenged my narrow view on men with long hair. Haha. Be well brother.
Jesus is the central figure of human history. He just is...and that's ok. He will always be the center of all things.
Oh man, I couldn't agree with you more on this whole subject. I've had this position for years but never bothered to weigh in on a discussion about it cause it's not worth it.
Great channel Meg! Love you bro 🤙
Thanks!
Meg for Megatron?
@@riukrobu No, for Megalodon.
@@1Kapuchu100 😂
I think that the part where he says "how would you like your work to be ignored?" got lost in translation. I'm pretty sure he meant something along the lines of "Would you like it if we ignored you work like you are doing to these monks' work?"
I'm Mexican though so it isn't my first language either, I could be wrong
Great video! I agree with you, sir. BTW, I have an academic book published in 1988 that uses "International Era (IE)" and "Before International Era (BIE)". I think those terms didn't catch on because they are kind of a mouthful. But whichever one you use, as you've said it's still counting time from the birth of Christ, so....
BCE and CE are only common in the academies of the US and Canada. This has not taken hold worldwide.
Fortunately there is no rule even in US and Canada. I am a historian of ancient history and have published essays and books. I don't use BCE or CE and publishers never said anything because they know they can't.
@ agreed. I was just pointing out that it’s common to hear the terms in the US and Canada, not that they are required. Cheers.
Tbh the main reason i prefer AD/BC is that the two are easily discernible at a glance. Where as BC and BCE is using the same letters and thus increases the risk of mistakes from just mistyping etc.
Same; the different letters make the data more resilient to things like corruption or destruction. And it's better for dyslexic people and others with trouble keeping track of words/time.
as a history lover who is agnostic BC & AD just make more sense and sound better lets be honest. 100%!!
Thank you! I've felt so alone saying this for years. Saying bce/ac is the same as getting upset when someone says merry Christmas.
8:45 - I'm pagan and still use BC and AD. BCE/CE is ridiculous.
based
and one day we'll just use "AC". That'll be fun.
@@xShadowChrisxAfter conquest?
Same!!
I'm Christian and I still use Thursday and Friday
1:10 and then those people would still celebrate Christmas and other holidays that have roots in Christianity.
5:50 lol
I liked it when my tour guide in pompeii talked about "the 2nd century, BEFORE CHRIST!", not even just BC, she announced it loudly and proudly. You may think it overboard to hate BCE/CE but I think it ruins all respect for academia and language when its preferred instead of the tradition of BC/AD, one that i'm glad i was still taught in even in the Western 21st Century.
Well if your guide in Pompei was italian then the reason is that in italian we always say "avanti cristo/ dopo cristo", even if we write the abbreviations (AC/DC lol) we always read them fully. I've never seen anyone complaining about this nomenclature in Italy.
But for a large part of the world it was never tradition. It would be very confusing if people from different countries/religions/whatever used different year numberings in academic publications. Agreeing on a common year numbering is helpful.
BC / AD itself is the product of usurping western tradition. Ab Urbe Condita is the true way - year since the founding of ROME the eternal city
Dude, the year of our Lord 2024 sounds so much better. I’m on board with this.
Edit: oh yikes, you lost me with the championing of the BCE professor. He “precision defense” seemed dishonest to me.
I've already refused because of one simple reason. There's a reason why that date matters. It's a reference to a historical event. If you change it to BC/BCE then you're removing it from that event and making it arbitrary when it's not. If you're going to choose a calendar system then it's important to know why. Sure we could choose tomorrow to define some other year as year 0. Maybe the first man on the moon or the end of world war 2. In which case it will be BL (before landing) and SA (space age).
The only reason we use it is that everybody else uses it. Nothing to do with that event. Everything to do with agreeing on a standard calendar, which is extremely useful.
The way the world is going, we're gonna start using PC/AC - Pre-Covid and After Covid
If you Want a New Calendar, make one. Start over with Year Zero being 2000 A.D. or better at 1984.
Back in highschool, I honestly thought it meant before christian era and after christian era. That's why I thought it was so weird as to why the atheists wanted to change it so bad 😅
Now that you mention it, I believe I thought the same when I started seeing CE and BCE being used. When I realised it was "Common Era" so it becomes agnostic, it made more sense to me.
Anti-thiests: *use BCE and CE to get away from Christianity*
Me: "BCE stands for Before Christ's Era, and CE means Christ's Era"
Resist the politically correct bullcrap.
Its more sinister than that, its a deliberately rewriting of history, and its been tried before, both in the French Revolution and in the Bolshevik USSR.
Since BCE and CE are the exact times as BC and AD, I have to imagine this was coined as to not say the name Christ by irrationally staunch secular types which comes off as petty to me.
It was actually coined by religious people over a Theological basis, as they understand AD to be directly referencing Jesus as Lord.. I use CE to avoid what I see as a theological statement that I disagree with, for I understand AD to be directly referencing Jesus as Lord.
As soon as I saw the title I had to watch. I got my master's in history, and this was one of my two or three big arguments in the field. So, thank you for your views on it too. I will be honest I lost points on more than one paper for my refusal to change even for class work.
Isn't this the same as a professor or journal mandating specific rules on things like writing numbers out as words instead of just numbers? Or using Kelvin instead of Celsius? Why actively go against the convention of the work you are working on?
I am 39, went back to get my Masters in Art History last year/this year, and finished my dissertation. Both my advisor and myself refused to use BCE and CE. This video is my spirit animal.
Eric Klein, a respected if not revered atheist hisotorian of Jewish descent, stated that if you base your dating system on some specific historical e ent - whether it actually happened or not - then it's ridiculous to try to pretend otherwise unless you abandon the dating system altogether.
So we don't. We just picked a random date for the conmon calendar that is used all over the world. It just happens to coincide with the christian calendar, which is convenient for you. Be happy.
@@ronald3836But that's not true?!
@@pohjanvanamo Not false either. Really, you cannot stop anyone from copying the Gregorian calendar and changing an abbreviation. This is just free speech.
You should totally make a video about the origins of Christmas traditions! I love those videos and would love to hear your perspective.
I don't know what's the problem with it:
CE - Christian Era.
BCE - Before Christian Era
Honestly, I always thought thats what it was anyway, and its still less imposing for non Christians than BC and AD
@@humbleopulence cant tell if sarcasm or if you two are actually just that dumb...