Re: A83: (no subject)
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: A83: (no subject)
4 BC..
Right... but why start counting when Jesus was born? Humans and time
existed before that...
--
Bryan Rabeler
rabelerb@pilot.msu.edu
http://www.msu.edu/~rabelerb/
"The first sign of corruption in a society that is still alive is that the
end justifies the means." - Georges Bernanos
----- Original Message -----
From: "mhlandry" <mhlandry@bellsouth.net>
To: <assembly-83@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 26, 1999 7:29 PM
Subject: Re: A83: (no subject)
>
> Daan {DreAdFaq} Schulpen wrote:
> >
> > >Anyway, it's interesting to see how everybody is basing their date
> > >calculations off of the Gregorian calendar. We all know that time
existed
> > >before that arbitrary point known as "Christ's birth" (viz. Greek
> > >civilization); so where does that come into play when dealing with how
many
> > >millenia have passed?
> >
> > Actually, we didn't start counting when Christ was born. Christ was
actually
> > born in 4 AD or BC, I'm not sure...
>
> Muwahahah... nope. After *they* (see note) figured out this stuff about
> every four years we have an extra day, they went back and recalculated
> everything. When calculated with leap years, Jesus was born ~6 B.C.
> - Matthew
>
>
> >
> > DreAd
>
>
References: