Who was Christ to Atheists/Scientists?

[Anonymous]

So I know scientists aren't much on the believing in God stuff but I am genuinely curious onto why they use Christ as a reference of time, I find it kind of odd for them to use the name of a person they don't believe has much importance, even if they believe Jesus was real what made Jesus so important to scientists that they made the time period before Christ BC? They could've used anything else couldn't they?

I'm a believer and a Christian so personally from my point of view it's obvious and makes perfect sense, BC is before Christ, using Christ to put a line on the timeline before the birth of Christ because it's a memorable moment for us that God came to earth, lived perfect and died for our salvation so having that to count time is actually kinda cool. Maybe the scientists that created the BC were Christians?

[Miah06]

Can't speak on atheists but almost all scientists and historians, see him as a real man, who was rumored to have been the son of christ and performed miracles.

They do not argue his existence.

They argue the validity of his miracles.

a lot believe he was a man who was charismatic and able to convince people to follow him.

He was originally a jew, who was very devoted. The jewish religion split into factions and had high tensions he opened his own synagogue. He had a big followers and one day he had the realization he was the son of god here to sacrifice himself for our sins. That is when he became the jesus most of us know today, and where historians have a different views of him.

He is in many history books and depending who speaks of him the view is different.

Some jewish scholarship call him a false profit.

Roman/greek basically saw him an annoyance. Because he was causing an uproar in roman controlled areas that had a lot of jewish citizens who saw him as a false profit.

[Asker]

Interesting

[Miah06]

Most people think the first mention of him comes from religious works but that is not the case

[Maybe_Maybe_not]

I wouldn't confuse atheism with science here, historically. Considering, soft science or hard science of the tracks, that many scientists were believers. Which is just normal, contextually, when they lived in times where a godless world was yet inconceivable (or socially punishable).

Speaking about soft science, there are two Jesus, historical Jesus and biblical Jesus. The former is being studied from an historical & sociological perspective, the latter is being studied from a theological perspective. In a so called Western world where Christianity was the norm, it made sense to use BC and AC, whether or not we relate to Jesus in a biblical sense or an historical sense, both are deeply affecting the landscape, traditions, history and societies.

However, Anno Domini (AD) and before Christ (BC) are competing, a little, for attention, there are other terms, religiously neutral, that may or may not gain popularity to replace BC/AD. Known as Common Era, giving BCE/CE instead of BC/AD.

That said, from an Eastern viewpoint, it would not make much sense for say, India, Japan or China to relate to BC or AD, since these societies & traditions evolved far away from Christianity, using their own religious or spiritual institutions.

[Lliam]

The terms "BC" (Before Christ") and "AD" (Anno Domini - the year of our lord) predate modern science.
The monk Dionysius Exiguus first used the terms Anno Domini (AD) and Before Christ (BC) in the calendar system around 525 AD. He devised the system to replace the existing method of dating from the reign of the Roman Emperor Diocletian.

Modern scientists tend to use BCE (before current era) and CE (current era).

Although, BC and AD have been used for so long and are so widely recognized that they are still used, even by some scientists.

[Asker]

Interesting 🤔

[purplepoppy]

Whether you believe in him or not is irrelevant, he's simply a long established reference point that everyone understands so why change things. Throughout the west every country has its own significant event they could base time on but that would be confusing. Since most Western countries are Christian it makes sense to use Christ as a common reference point.

[Asker]

I would imagine because scientists and atheists aren't big fans on mixing truth and fiction, that's where I think wether they believe in him or not has relivence so logically speaking that would probably mean that they at the very least believed Jesus was a real person.

[Asker]

Because think of it, it's like scientists using a unicorn horn to measure, if a fan fiction said a unicorn horn is always 12 inches long then it's like making a unicorn horn another way of measurement in mathematics.

[purplepoppy]

For centuries across Europe, religion was the one common thread people shared regardless of what tribe or country you belong to or whether you were king or peasant. Religion may not be as important to us now but it was a huge thing to our ancestors who decides on the AD/BC thing

[Asker]

So they believed

[Orion84]

My response was going to be very similar to @Lliam and so I will forego repeating what he already wrote.

I will, however, add that, as an athiest, I believe there was an actual historical figure named Jesus Christ, and that he was an influencial person, particularly during the period of time je was alive.

Just because I don't believe in him as the literal Son of God, that doesn't preclude me from acknowleging his place in history, or his work in establishing Christianity as a religion. I don't have to be a believer to understand his significance as a person of the time.

[strateguy632]

That is not the reason they call c. e. common era from christ. Just Christians used numbers for centuries so scientists use the same numbers as Christians For simplicity.

Christian scientists made the word b. c. as you concluded "scientists that created the BC were Christians",

due to Christian faith in Christianity, but later others used the same numbers for simplicity.

In the big picture each religion has its year number rabbis say 5700, kadi said 1300, but hindu year hindu said 2080 and the famous maya "end of the world calendar " in 2012 completed the Maya Long Count cycle that is 5,125 years long. Ended in 2012.

[wynning]

I can tell you now that a lot of the scaffolding (like significant historical "points of time") that's used in the academics is for brevity and ease so the focus can be put on the theory and sciences.
I think this might be more relevant for the humanities but Jesus seems to be regarded as a historical figure regardless of the divinity associated with him.

[Staximus]

Most scientists were still Christians or believed in a god until the 20th century

[Asker]

Ooohhh okay interesting 🤔

[Dongie]

Yeah, but actually there are a great number of scientists who now believe in God. It's from discoveries they have made.

[Anonymous]

Realistic scientists use the term "before the Common Era" (BCE), not BC.

To atheists, Christ was just a mythological character.

[4ngelic]

i dont think there's really an equivalent