Friday, October 23, 2009

Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Should Historical Events Be Dated B.C. and A.D. or B.C.E. and C.E.?


Dr. Claude Mariottini has posted an interesting discussion about whether Christians should follow suit with the world and us "BCE/CE" instead of "BC/AD" when we write dates. I've often wondered if anyone else had that question. In my own writing, I have tended to use "BCE/CE" for a few years now but because I noticed that most scholars are using that convention. I think I need to repent.  In the back of my mind I realized that it was an attempt to secularize scholarship and I fell for it. I have heard people justify it by saying that using Jesus' birth as a focal point offends people who aren't Christian. I've got to now wonder, why should that matter to me? Everything else about Jesus offends non-Christians, so why should I change what I am doing? What is more important than the birth of Jesus? Nothing, I like Dr,. Mariottini's response. Here is a quote from him.

According to biblical chronology, David reigned c. 1000 Before the Common Era and Solomon around 960 Before the Common Era. If David and Solomon lived Before the Common Era and we live in the Common Era, why was the age of David and Solomon so uncommon? And what has transformed that “uncommon era” to “the common era”?

There was nothing uncommon about the age of David and Solomon. The truth is that they lived one thousand year before Christ was born. It is the Incarnation of Christ that marks the transition from one era to the other. Even when scholars use BCE and CE to date historical events, one has to ask: what caused the transition from Before the Common Era to the Common Era? There is only one important factor that marks this transition, even when people refrain from using the name of the one person whose existence caused the transition from one era to the other.


Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament: Should Historical Events Be Dated B.C. and A.D. or B.C.E. and C.E.?
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

3 comments:

  1. You know, I tend to use B.C.E./C.E., but I have to admit, I've always found the term "Common Era" a bit strange. Maybe we can go back to the slightly older E.V. ("Era Vulgaris") which translates from Latin about the same, but somehow sounds more appropriate.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interesting. I've never heard of E.V. but it's no surprising that it would be latin. Of course we do get "vulgar" from "vulgaris", so I'm not sure if it sounds better to me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The preposterous point to ponder is just what the difference is between BC/AD and BCE/CE?

    Nothing!

    They pivot around the very same point—the birth of Jesus the Messiah.

    If BCE/CE was based on a whole new point of reference that would be one thing but it is leaving the premise in place whilst merely changing the verbiage.

    Mind you, eventually the mere change of verbiage may go a long ways toward obscuring the fact that the pivot is the birth of Jesus. But where one to ask what the difference is between BCE and CE, when does BCE become CE the one and only answer is; the birth of Jesus.

    Perhaps eventually, this will lead to a new historical pivot all together; such as the date when goat cheese was invented, the date when someone first thought to lick the back of a toad in order to hallucinate or maybe the birth date of Obama.

    But for now; BC/AD or BCE/CE the point is the very same.

    aDios,
    Mariano

    ReplyDelete