Although I had never given much thought to the use of B.C.E./C.E. and B.C/A.D., I have noticed that some Christian writers have taken the time to justify why they will use one or the other. For example, N. T. Wright in his The New Testament and the People of God says that he will use the politically incorrect B.C./A.D. since he is writing as a Christian. So, in a way, the use of B.C./A.D. becomes a statement of your presuppositions and worldview.

N. T. Wrong agrees with N. T. Wright (duh!) that B.C./A.D. should be used, but for another reason. He writes:

“By using ‘C.E.’ and B.C.E.’, we universalize a peculiar tradition. We make it out to be ‘common’ or ‘natural’, not requiring any special marking or qualification. As a consequence of the fact of Western power, the Gregorian calendar has been adopted as the most-used calendar in the world, and so does have some degree of ‘commonality’ in day-to-day use. But the change from A.D. to C.E. (and from B.C. to B.C.E.) obscures the particular Christian basis of this ‘common’ calendar, misrepresenting it as ‘normal’ – as somehow transcending historical particularities. By contrast, the other calendars are made out to be the only ‘localized’ and ‘particular’ calendars. While the Christian calendar is ‘naturalized’ by its designation as ‘common’, other calendars (Jewish, Persian, Islamic, Chinese, Hindu, Ethiopian, Thai, etc) are ‘artificial’ and ‘contingent’.” (N. T. Wrong?, Use A.D. and B.C.! [Out with C.E. and B.C.E.!!])

Read more on Ways to Use B.C. and A.D.: A Christian/Jewish Perspective…