Why don't we know the date Jesus rose up from the dead?

[Minimalist]

Thanks Min.

What about the Varian 'disaster' (9CE) and its effects on European history? Has that been exaggerated by say German historians?

Probably. Recently there was a major archaeological find in Germany.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germ...20,00.html


A Roman army fighting a battle east of the Rhine in the 3d century? Such a thing was not suspected because it was assumed that the Romans had generally followed Augustus' decision after the Teutoberg Forest disaster to maintain the Rhine as the defensible northern border of the empire.

But even that ignores the fact that in the aftermath of Varus' defeat it was the future emperor Tiberius who retrieved the situation and began the Roman reprisals into Germany a process completed after Tiberius became emperor by his nephew, Germanicus. Still, intense Roman activity in Germany probably did lead to the decision to halt expansion at the Rhine. Tiberius is said to have determined that the climate and the general unsuitability of the land for development, aside from the wildness of the people, made further expansion into Germany too costly for the Romans to pursue. There was simply no long term gain to be seen and even if they had extended their reach to the Elbe (which they certainly knew about) they would not have had a better defense line than they already had along the Rhine.

The archaeological find suggests, as it seems to be a small scale battle, that the Romans maintained their standard policy of supporting some German tribes and opposing others preferring to get their enemies to fight each other. In that sense, what the find might represent is a little foreign assistance to a friendly Germanic ruler?

What does seem to be the case is that Roman writers either lost interest in the area after Tacitus' "Germania" in the second century or, by pure chance, whatever they did write has not come down to us.

---

Star of Bethlehem.net there are real answers at this site.

Why is it that you morons never mention the second part of Matthew's little bullshit story?

9After they had heard the king, they went on their way, and the star they had seen in the east[e] went ahead of them until it stopped over the place where the child was.

So the "star" bounces along the countryside like some sort of ersatz Tinkerbell? How childish does one have to be to fall for such utter nonsense?


How come this "star" didn't lead them right to him? Why the detour to Herod? I'll tell you why, because it is all a set up for the rip off of the Moses story ( itself a rip off of far earlier tales!) which "Matthew" inserts later.

You should be embarrassed for falling for such shit.