This is why the new millenium actually began in 2001, not 2000.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses rather notoriously screwed up their earlier doomsdate due to not realizing this, I’m fairly sure a lot of other sects that popped up in the 1800s did as well.
Also, Jesus probably wasn’t born in 1AD. as a matter of fact is 1AD the year after Christmas where Jesus was born (so he was born in 1BC) or was Jesus not born for the vast majority of 1AD until a week before the end of year?
Crazy what assimilating pagan holidays will do to a religion
Jesus was born in the spring, not the winter. Christmas is an adaptation of northern winter festivities and they slapped a Christian justification on it.
Jesus was never real and was not recorded by dozens of scribes that were in the place at the same time (one famous example was debunked hundreds of years ago). He’s a sun-god astrological myth, like Horus and others before and they all share similar attributes.
His purpose was to signal the start of the age of Pisces (two fish), and the winter solstice will see the sun rise (after 3 days of apparent stagnation) in the Aquarius constellation in 2150 or so. His resurrection is celebrated at Spring equinox, or Easter, when the sun finally overpowers the darkness.
His purpose regarding factualization was a political move by the Romans and the Catholic church, setting the calendar year 1 to the start of the age of Pisces.
Here I was always under the impression that AD was ‘after death’ in the religious world and BC was ‘before christ’. Which would then make the years when the guy was walking around a sort of uncounted void in the timelines I guess.
AD is Anno Domini, “In The Year Of Our Lord” which is why it (is supposed to) start at the Birth of Jesus.
The monk did get his dates wrong and Jesus was actually born in like 3~4 AD
Makes sense, and would give some explanation for the lack of a year 0 of it was counted as ‘the first year of’.
Handy then that the more recent secular take of BCE (before current era) makes some of those discrepancies for when an individual was born a moot point.
Yep!
https://www.britannica.com/story/ten-days-that-vanished-the-switch-to-the-gregorian-calendar
This is not some kind of software bug, it actually reflects how the real, western calendar system was intentionally designed.
Don’t let modern doomsday cults/prophets know about it though, wouldn’t want to further confuse their Bible Math.
Other quirks of our calendar system:
There is no year 0.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_zero
Goes straight from 1 BC to 1 AD.
This is why the new millenium actually began in 2001, not 2000.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses rather notoriously screwed up their earlier doomsdate due to not realizing this, I’m fairly sure a lot of other sects that popped up in the 1800s did as well.
Yo some poor programmer had to manually code this in there
whilst being screamed at by SJ to get it done
Also, Jesus probably wasn’t born in 1AD. as a matter of fact is 1AD the year after Christmas where Jesus was born (so he was born in 1BC) or was Jesus not born for the vast majority of 1AD until a week before the end of year?
Crazy what assimilating pagan holidays will do to a religion
Jesus was born in the spring, not the winter. Christmas is an adaptation of northern winter festivities and they slapped a Christian justification on it.
Jesus was never real and was not recorded by dozens of scribes that were in the place at the same time (one famous example was debunked hundreds of years ago). He’s a sun-god astrological myth, like Horus and others before and they all share similar attributes.
His purpose was to signal the start of the age of Pisces (two fish), and the winter solstice will see the sun rise (after 3 days of apparent stagnation) in the Aquarius constellation in 2150 or so. His resurrection is celebrated at Spring equinox, or Easter, when the sun finally overpowers the darkness.
His purpose regarding factualization was a political move by the Romans and the Catholic church, setting the calendar year 1 to the start of the age of Pisces.
Here I was always under the impression that AD was ‘after death’ in the religious world and BC was ‘before christ’. Which would then make the years when the guy was walking around a sort of uncounted void in the timelines I guess.
AD is Anno Domini, “In The Year Of Our Lord” which is why it (is supposed to) start at the Birth of Jesus. The monk did get his dates wrong and Jesus was actually born in like 3~4 AD
Small correction 6~4 BC not 3~4 AD
Makes sense, and would give some explanation for the lack of a year 0 of it was counted as ‘the first year of’.
Handy then that the more recent secular take of BCE (before current era) makes some of those discrepancies for when an individual was born a moot point.
Can’t believe we skipped both 0 BC and 0 AD.
In all seriousness, we can define the millennium to start on 2000 and work from there. We already do this with decades and centuries.
Just happened to help my 9yo with his homework and they’re learning that centuries are defined as starting at year 1 and ending with a 0.
101 200
1401 1500
Etc
But it’s arbitrary. It doesn’t need to. Centuries are just 100 years. Start at years ending in one or zero.