Time Began Less Than Three Thousand Years Ago


I can’t take intellectually serious a thing on time and dates that insusts on using BCE as opposed to BC.
We had BC long enough for it to belong to the people. Who presumes to change it? who is this master? We are being treated like a subject people, as discussed in the article, by them not obeying our nations weighs and measures .
Was there a referendum? a vote in congress? more likely a Supreme court decision?
Wht was the DATE of this decision?
ITS BC and AD until the people think it over and allow legislatures to change it.
BCE/cE is very recent and obscure. yet this author passes it off as what everyone knows.
BCE , I accuse, was picked to reject time being divided by Jesus christ coming into the world.
yet BCE still only makes sense if its based on BC. The common ere in no way became common at this date or the rest of the world agreed it became common.
behind it is a rejection of christ, christianity, and our Christian heritage, and our heritage, and our rights to be the boss.
Time has come today to say CEASE AND DESIST to these types who presume to rule us.

Shouldn’t this say “Time began to be measured less than three thousand years ago”?


Journalist sensationalism, more or less.


More ranting about Christian Privilege. What should be used is YBP - Years before present.

I’m not sure I want to recalculate all the dates of every historical event every year :neutral_face:.

Also lots of books would need reprinting constantly. And some renaming: 953 and all that, 35, 18: a space odyssey, …

Can we stick with year before physics?


We should set up years like the Kelvin temperature scale. So now it’s about year 13,900,000,025 ABB (After Big Bang) or 4,500,000,036 AEC (After Earth Coalescence).

One question: How are we compensating for variations in the length of years and days as Earth’s orbit and rotational period change? The Zodiac has been off for quite some time…

1 Like

You are all missing the point. Time began 2400 years ago, not 6000 years ago.

That’s correct. So any analysis of time periods before 311 BCE or 2330 YBP is very inaccurate and very misleading.

1 Like


@deuteroKJ, @jack.collins, and @pmcelliott, and @AllenWitmerMiller, and @jongarvey, is it possible Genealogies in Genesis were a lossy attempt at marking time?

YECs use an analysis by James Ussher to create a universal YEC timeline. But Ussher uses the Bible to go into the deep past, well earlier than 311 BCE. It is not based on anything real.

Really? Did they use it Before Common Era? :smiley: In China, they used the current era of the emperor, for millennia. Additionally, when it comes to continuous numbering systems they have not one but five, all starting from different dates. None of these dates start with Common Era.

Common Era nomenclature started in seventeenth century Europe, and even though it was used in China by some Jesuit missionaries, the Chinese didn’t use it.


Given their socio-historical context, it’s unlikely. What’s fascinating is that no one in the Old Testament refers to them, or uses them as an attempt at marking time. No one does this in the New Testament either. It’s like no one actually in interpreted them literally.


Are you feeling okay? I think you may need to lie down for a while.


Right, my mistake. My point was that most non-Christian countries didn’t use BC.

1 Like

Given that science is now going deeper and deeper into the past with archaeology and ancient genome sequencing, referencing an arbitrary point in time like Jesus’ birth no longer makes sense. Like saying agriculture began in a particular region about 11,000 years before present ago or 9000 BCE. Just drop the referecnce to BCE and just use YBP. It is easier to understand and is more accurate.

Yeah, as @Roy said, that would need constant updates of, well, everything. No one wants to do that.

Yeah Robert’s being a bit precious.

1 Like

Not really. As we go deeper into the past I am seeing more papers with YBP than time before BCE.