While this post does not directly relate to the Bible, I feel it may be instructive to clarify how usage is evolving regarding usage of BC and AD in dates compared to the more contemporary designations BCE and CE.
Traditionally, the western world has employed the terms BC and AD in dating historical events. The letters BC stand for “before Christ,” while AD represents the Latin phrase, “anno domini,” or “in the year of our Lord.” This system appears to have been originated in AD 525 with a monk in Rome named Dionysius Exiguus, while attempting to determine the correct dating for Easter. While usage has been more lax in recent years, correct practice is for BC to be placed after the year, whereas AD should come before the year. So the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon should be expressed as 586 BC, while the date of the Council of Nicae would be rendered AD 325. This distinction may make more sense, if we think of what the phrase is actually intended to say. In the first example, we are really trying to indicate that the fall of Jerusalem occurred 586 years before the birth of Christ, so it seems logical to write the 586 BC (or 586 years before Christ). In the second example, however, we are literally using the phrase, “in the year of our Lord 325,” so the AD comes first. It would make no sense to use the phrase “325 in the year of our Lord.” That is why AD is normally placed before the date. I hope this is not too confusing.
In more recent years, a different way of distinguishing between BC and AD has developed. This involves the practice of using BCE (or “before the common era”) in place of BC, and CE (or “common era” in place of AD. These designations are perhaps most frequently used in scholarly writings, although you may hear them in other contexts. The purpose appears to be a recognition that not everyone is a Christian, and so some may be offended by the terms BC and AD. Proper usage of these new designations is to place them after the year. Using this system, the examples above would be written as 586 BCE and 325 CE.
What do you think of this change? I have my view, but I would be interested in hearing yours.
As a person who occasionally writes about historical events before and after Christ, I often deal with this question. I notice that even practicing Christian scholars (i.e. not those who study religion merely for academic purposes) often use the terms “BCE” and “CE” especially in recent years. I have used both sets of terms. The major distinction in my writing is the audience. Academics are more inclined to use “BCE” and “CE”; most other people tend to prefer the traditional “B.C.” and “A.D.” Personally I am struck with the irony of using a different set of terms based on the same historical event. I also believe it is an attempt by an increasingly pluralistic academic community to decrease the influence of Jesus in contemporary terminology. Fine. Despite that bias, personally I believe that the credibility of opinion should be based more on the facts presented rather than the use of these terms. Some might call me wishy-washy, but depending on the audience I choose to use language that increases my credibility to that particular audience.
I’ve used CE and BCE for so long….and I know lots of really devout people who use this for all sorts of reasons. Change is hard, particularly regarding language, but in cases like this I think it is a good change. If I remember correctly it is more accurate to use CE since AD doesn’t actually correlate to the most recent scholarship about when Jesus lived. Choosing to not use it is a choice to sound a little old-fashioned and is sort of code for rejecting a lot of scholarship. I can see reasons for doing either.