Is Christianiy the best religion?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
False analogy.

Why?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
No -- apparently they prefer [b]C.E..

Anything to purge themselves of their embarassing past.[/b]

It's just more honest. I can't very well go about saying Anno Domini when he is not my lord. It's also a nod towards cultural relativity, innit? Not a bad thing surely...calendars are just administrative tools these days.

Originally posted by Penguin
Why?

Week-days are cyclical; origin points of calenders are not. Thursday is named after Thor to honour him on a regular basis; AD is a direct counting from when a historical event is supposed to have taken place.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
It's just more honest. I can't very well go about saying Anno Domini when he is not my lord. It's also a nod towards cultural relativity, innit? Not a bad thing surely...calendars are just administrative tools these days.

Whether you call it AD or CE, you're still counting from the same event.

EDIT: And I don't know what cultural relativity has to do with it. Muslim countries use the Islamic calendar in conjunction with the Gregorian one; so does India with the Hindu calendar and possibly China with its own.

EDIT2: And I know from personal experience that neither Islamic countries nor India has really had a problem with calling it "AD". Seems Western anti-Christians are the only ones really bothered by it.

EDIT3: Besides, I don't see anyone clamouring to remove references to pagan religion in the days of the week and the months of the year, do you?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
EDIT3: Besides, I don't see anyone clamouring to remove references to pagan religion in the days of the week and the months of the year, do you?

Why does it bother you so much? I don't care if you use A.D. Using C.E. is just a preference. Can't you respect that?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Whether you call it AD or CE, you're still counting from the same event.

EDIT: And I don't know what cultural relativity has to do with it. Muslim countries use the Islamic calendar in conjunction with the Gregorian one; so does India with the Hindu calendar and possibly China with its own.

EDIT2: And I know from personal experience that neither ve references to pagan religion in the days of the week and the months of the year, do you?

Seems Western anti-Christians are the only ones really bothered by it.

Jews in the diaspora tend to use CE when referring to Gregorian dates in writing for an audience that would be more familiar with that calendar, although using their own calendar for religious purposes. I don’t know what you mean by anti-Christian as opposed to non-Christian, but such Jewish thinkers as Jacob Neusner, Abraham Joshua Heschel or Lawrence Kushner are hardly “anti-Christian,” if you mean some sort of animus.

Similarly, non-Jews have no prohibition on vowelizing the divine name YHVH in order to effect a pronunciation. That does not mean that Jews, when writing for a larger audience, feel free (or compelled) to adopt that same procedure.

Some folks use CE just because they don’t recognize “in the year of our lord.”

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Why does it bother you so much? I don't care if you use A.D. Using C.E. is just a preference. Can't you respect that?

It's a question of consistency. If a person is so bothered by the fact that the words "Lord" or "our Lord" appear in a Latin abbreviation that is skipped in daily use; then it stands to reason that the person should be much more bothered by the fact that the days of the week and the months of the year honour other deities. When he/she isn't, I have to ask what makes BC/AD so much more opprobrious than these other references.

Wouldn't you agree?

EDIT2: vistesd, this would apply to the scholars you cited as well.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
It's a question of consistency. If a person is so bothered by the fact that the words "Lord" or "our Lord" appear in a Latin abbreviation that is skipped in daily use; then it stands to reason that the person should be much more bothered by the fact that the days of the week and the months of the year honour other deities. When he/she isn't, I have to ...[text shortened]... ouldn't you agree?

EDIT2: vistesd, this would apply to the scholars you cited as well.

It’s a fair question, but I think the problem lies in how far how you can go in making your point before nobody knows what you are talking about—in which case, one might as well give up the attempt and simply use one’s own calendar in cross-religious writing, whether or not anybody else understands what you’re talking about.

In such a case, I would simply put the burden on you to look up my terminology in order to carry on a conversation, about historical events that affect both our religions, say. Consider it an act of charity that—once I make my point by using CE—I don’t insist that you learn the Jewish names of the weekdays. 🙂 (And we can give each other the charity of not objecting to each other’s use of CE or AD.)

For months, Jews would have to create new names for the Gregorian ones, because the Jewish months do not correspond.

Originally posted by vistesd
It’s a fair question, but I think the problem lies in how far how you can go in making your point before nobody knows what you are talking about—in which case, one might as well give up the attempt and simply use one’s own calendar in cross-religious writing, whether or not anybody else understands what you’re talking about.

In such a case, I would simply ...[text shortened]... ld have to create new names for the Gregorian ones, because the Jewish months do not correspond.

Consider it an act of charity that—once I make my point by using CE—I don’t insist that you learn the Jewish names of the weekdays. 🙂

If I wanted to communicate with you in Hebrew, I cannot avoid the Jewish names now, can I? If I were to write to you in Hebrew, but decided to transliterate the days of the week from English (say -- though it might be more fun in French), would you consider my actions reasonable?

I have to wonder what would've happened if Pope Gregory had changed the names of the days of the week to Marysday, Paulsday, Petersday etc.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
[b]Consider it an act of charity that—once I make my point by using CE—I don’t insist that you learn the Jewish names of the weekdays. 🙂

If I wanted to communicate with you in Hebrew, I cannot avoid the Jewish names now, can I? If I were to write to you in Hebrew, but decided to transliterate the days of the week from English (say -- though i ...[text shortened]... ope Gregory had changed the names of the days of the week to Marysday, Paulsday, Petersday etc.[/b]

If I wanted to communicate with you in Hebrew, I cannot avoid the Jewish names now, can I? If I were to write to you in Hebrew, but decided to transliterate the days of the week from English (say -- though it might be more fun in French), would you consider my actions reasonable?

I agree. My point is that I can make a symbolic gesture by using CE, without pushing the logical point to such extremes that communication breaks down—we make concessions in order to communicate with each other.

I have to wonder what would've happened if Pope Gregory had changed the names of the days of the week to Marysday, Paulsday, Petersday etc.

I would only be making blind speculations... 🙂 Maybe he’d have had to change the calendar to a 12-day week, in order to accommodate all the apostles...

Originally posted by vistesd
I agree. My point is that I can make a symbolic gesture by using CE, without pushing the logical point to such extremes that communication breaks down—we make concessions in order to communicate with each other.

But is the concession reciprocal?

Originally posted by lucifershammer
But is the concession reciprocal?

If I object to you writing AD, and/or you object to my using CE, then no.

Another example, perhaps: Suppose a Christian who normally uses the word "lord" (or kyrios or dominus) chooses to say/write "Yahweh" only when addressing a Jewish audience. Or, in general uses CE (some Christian writers do), but only uses AD when addressing non-Christians...

I think the idea is to treat each other with some sense of equal regard, without being dishonest about our beliefs.

Then again, since I live a quasi-eremetical life anyway, maybe I can drop the Gregorian calendar... 😉 I've already dropped television; next step may be the web...

Originally posted by Penguin
This topic came up on the Evolution thread but has nothing to do with Evolution so I've started a new one.

A bit of the original discussion follows the end of this for context.

Basically, DJ pointed me at Ravi Zacharias for an objective explanation of why Christianity holds more value than any other religions and why it should be believed more than the spelcom.net/epages/rzim.storefront/4522082d00c13a34271d45579e7c0602/Product/View/SBK9

Christianity is not a religion. Remember, Jesus is watching us all on an individual basis.

Religion is like a rock in our hands, but it's not really there. We say it is, but it's not.

However, Christianity is Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who the historian Josephus says DID INDEED LIVE. Not to mention two other historical accounts. Not to mention an entire world of disciples and people having changed lives because of HIM. Not to mention that He LIVES and rose the grave in 3 days to die for you even if you DO NOT believe in Him when all the evidence points to the fact that HE DID LIVE and did DIE for YOU! Jesus loves you all and so do I! Please read A Case For Christ by Lee Strobel. After that, then doubt the Son of God when some of the greatest minds in our time doubted into BELIEF! Believe! HE LIVES and is coming back soon.

Originally posted by lucifershammer
Week-days are cyclical; origin points of calenders are not. Thursday is named after Thor to honour him on a regular basis; AD is a direct counting from when a historical event is supposed to have taken place.

This is a distinction without a difference. To honor Thor is to accept his existence. To start a calender from the date of Jesus' birth is to accept that such an event occurred. The analogy holds as to the point being discussed i.e. the using of either as "proof" of the existence of the being.

(Of course, AD doesn't even start from Jesus' birth due to computational errors).

Originally posted by powershaker
[snip...who the historian Josephus says DID INDEED LIVE. Not to mention two other historical accounts. ...[snip]

Unsurprisingly, this turns out not to be the case:

http://skeptically.org/newtestament/id22.html

...or, at least a serious instance of irrational justification. Par for the course, I'm afraid.