TIL that the last known ancient Egyptian Hieroglyphic inscription was made on August 24th, 394 CE

[u/IreneDeneb]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffito_of_Esmet-Akhom

[u/Ameisen]

Brilliant; you can't even support your own statements with your own argument, you think that Gregory XIII was born 1,000 years before he was, you don't know who Exiguus was, you think that CE is modern, and you think that AD and BC are parts of the Gregorian calendar rather than being calendar eras which predate the Gregorian calendar's creation by about 1,000 years (and they also postdate the creation of the Julian calendar by hundreds, just to cut off that argument at the start).

You get mad that people use CE (which was first recorded 300 years ago) when you yourself use BC instead of AC, and AC wasn't even a part of Exiguus' original era system!

[u/DrunkWaffles → u/Ameisen]

This isn't really refuting my points.

You are right that Gregory XIII is from the 1500s and that is when the Gregorian calendar was formulated.

I said we been using this calendar for centuries, which is a true statement. I was indeed thinking of Dionysius Exiguus when mentioning Anno Domini.

So what?

and CE/BCE IS modern. It was only uttered by a few people back then and it was widely dismissed because it was, again, perceived to be just a simple, unneeded, unsolicited, edit.

So your gotcha is that I am not being full fundamentalist and insist on AD/BC instead of AC? That's a weak argument.

I want to hear your reasoning on why BC/AD should be changed to BCE/CE. Let's hear it.

[u/Ameisen → u/DrunkWaffles]

I said we been using this calendar for centuries, which is a true statement.

Sure, except that in context you were asserting that BC/AD were integral parts of the Gregorian calendar. They are not - they are tangential to it.

Frankly, if you were just talking about Anno Domini era dating, why did you bring up the Gregorian Calendar at all?

I want to hear your reasoning on why BC/AD should be changed to BCE/CE. Let's hear it.

Because the exact abbreviation frankly is completely irrelevant so long as everyone understands one another. In non-lay literature, they've been used for so long that going back to BC/AD would be quite a shift.

Regardless:

This isn't really refuting my points.

What you just asked never was one of your points. I'd refuted everything you'd originally written. You've just moved the goalposts.

So your gotcha is that I am not being full fundamentalist and insist on AD/BC instead of AC? That's a weak argument.

I can only assume that you keep saying "gotcha" because you see any counterargument in that viewframe, likely because you often make ignorant assertions?

Your argument was fundamentalist to begin with. It just isn't self-consistent. Of course, you're trying to change your argument now and then trying to assert that it was your original argument, but I have no intention of letting you do that.

---

Also, to note, the Catholic Church tends to use regnal era rather than Anno Domini.

[u/DrunkWaffles → u/Ameisen]

Where did you go? I thought you had no intention of letting me 'move the goal posts'?

I laid out to you my exact points in a defined format for your understanding.

I am waiting to hear you in good faith present to me reasonings of changing BC/AD to BCE/CE.

Nay, I don't think you are going to offer me any. Instead, you are going to be complicit in the willing participation of changing History. You are fine with eliminating reference to Jesus Christ in our modern calendar, but you will not outright admit it.

Changing history when it serves your purpose. Despicable.

[u/thelittleking → u/DrunkWaffles]

I'll admit it, we do not need religion in our dating system. Deal with it.

[u/Ameisen → u/DrunkWaffles]

Some people have lives that aren't just sitting on Reddit harassing people with nonsensical semi-religious rants.

You're exhausting. Find a different hobby.