About Eastern day and one punishment over 2000 years ago

(Picture 1)

Kimmo Huosionmaa

Today is a Good Friday and we all remember the judgment, what was given to one man in Palestine or Judea, how Romans called that place. Nowadays we know, that the judgment for crucifixion was wrong, an innocent man was dead by the most horrific way, what Romans ever knew. And today we ask one question: why Romans choose that way to execute the man, who was very kind to other people? Why they made service for the people, who wanted to kill that man, who would become known as Jesus Christ?


What was the action that Rabbi made, get that punishment? In the Roman way to act against the persons, who were harmful to them, was not so open, that every people in the world should see those political executions. The Roman way was that those persons who were harmful to it or emperor, just poisoned that they would not tell anything to other people. The killing orders for ordinary people were given the way, that they would not track to the emperor himself. Emperor was above all people, and he was sitting outside everything. If the killing orders were given to some person, the way that can be tracked to emperor's palace, the emperor of the Roman empire would get in danger.


The normal method of crucifixion was used the poisoned whips, and if the used poison was cobra's poison, the whipped person would die immediately. And if the person would send to crucifixion place, the poisoned nails would keep this poor person silent. When we are talking about Apostles and other investigators, they would try to follow the line of the order.


They wanted to know the reason, why the innocent man went to Golgata in that way? Was something, what Jesus made seemed like political radicalism? The crucifixion was meant for royal punishments, and somebody has given little controversial theory, that Jesus took the other person place on the cross in that very long day. We all know that this is the only theory, what is against the official theology of the Church.


So this is only the written thoughts about one of the most well-known mysteries on Earth. What was the thing, what caused that reaction? Has Jesus protected some other person in the very first Eastern in history? When we are talking about the personality of Jesus, we must notice that this man was Rabbi. He was the member of the Theological elite of Judea, and if somebody dares to touch that man, were the punishment death. That was the way in that country. So why people dare to yell at him? Jesus was the holy man, good speaker, and well known Rabbi, and that means the curse for the people, who harmed him.


In some days I have thought that maybe Jesus felt guilty about the things what happened in Jerusalem during his birth. Here I write about the happenings, that all children of that city were slaughtered by Roman legions. Why was Jesus only child who left alive in that town? And why Romans were not looking for him?


When that brutal and horrifying action was done the Romans thought that they were eliminated all family of King David. And in this way to see, the survival of that child might cause the thinkings of quilty in his mind. Here I must say that I know one way to escape from that city. This way makes me feel sad, but maybe Jesus had the twin brother, who was given to Romans. And if this thought were true, the feeling of that man's head and heart might be something else than good. Maybe that caused hate in his mind.


And when we are thinking about the theory of Antichrist, the brother of Jesus, we might think that maybe Romans were saved some of those children. Maybe they found evidence that some of the children had twin brother or sister. And then they would transfer that brother to Rome. And maybe they told to that boy, what his parents have done. This would cause hate in his mind. But as I have written before, this is only thoughts of the Eastern day and the things, what were culminated the point, where innocent man crucified in Palestine.


Picture 1:

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/storyimage/JO/20170411/ARTICLE/304119938/AR/0/AR-304119938.jpg

Writing about sacrifices and the religion

(Picture 1)

Kimmo Huosionmaa

When we are talking about sacrifices, we must consider that many of those rituals are made for the purpose. The leader of the village wanted to see, who will come to take the gift. The sacrificed thing was a trap for the persons, who are collecting taxes from the village And this means that when the chief of the village gives enough important sacrifice, the people of forest would come to take the sacrifice, and they could be ambushed. In some confessions, are spoken, that maybe Jesus was this kind of sacrifice. In this think, the Romans or high priests wanted to give so important gift to the God, who will come and take this sacrifice thing personally.


If this was true, those persons who made that trap believed, that the God was only the human, who has superior technology in his hands. When we are looking at this scenario very careful, we might think that maybe the Hebrew God allowed sacrificing his son for attracting other nations gods to face him on the battlefield. This might seem the little bit too heavy for belief, but I like this theory very much. Why would the crucifixion ever be possible, without God's will?


This is very good idea to talk in some meetings of theologians, who will always think about this kind of thing. When we are thinking about the relationship between Jesus and God, we must know that the man is always beloved by his creators, and if we think those two characters like they would be normal people, we must know that the God taught those skills to Jesus, what made him the “master”. And of course, he was willing to defend his creature or son. The reason for the brutality in the punishment was, that the punishers would want that Jesus uses his skills in that situation. Those persons who wanted to punish and torture innocent man believed that there was something different about this man.


So because Jesus was different, and people believed his power, Romans wanted to see, what kind of powers that man had. Was he Etruscan, or why Romans were so tough about him? Or did Romans thought that this man was Etruscan, who were slaughtered by consul Sulla just before Caesar took power in this empire? Why Lucius Cornelius Sulla made that massacre is not explained, but their very high-level prosthesis will make me think that maybe Sulla was only jealous, and this made him one of the worst persons ever.   And they hoped that the “Father” would come to rescue the son. And results were something else, what they wanted to see. This hypothesis means that the story of crucifixion would be true.


But if that would be not true. Maybe the story of Easter day torture was meant for the warning about this kind of actions. The dark clouds and rain with storm symbolize the anger what people felt when they noticed that the man, who was tortured under their eyes was innocent about crimes what people claimed done by him. The crucifixion might mean for the gift to the people, that some unholy person claimed to be the son of god, but then Romans overreacted that prosecution. They began to brutally torture person under the eyes of ordinary people. And this caused panic and fear, that everybody can be persecuted by those prosecutions. So is this the story, why those things happened in Jerusalem 2000 years ago? We might ever find the final truth, but maybe there were some very big behind those things, what caused the collapse of the Roman empire about 800 years after this day in Jerusalem.

The story of the crucifixion and the Roman methodology of the punishment.

Uspenski orthodox cathedral Helsinki

Kimmo Huosionmaa

The crucifixion is probably the most hated and brutal way to execute the human been, and because this method was chosen for execution of Jesus Christ we hate that method very much. And we are of course hating Pilatus, the man who gave that judgment after 2000 years. But when we are looking for the method, what was chosen to kill Jesus, we must think that the death penalties are mentioned for the warning, what would happened if somebody speaks or acts against the Roman Emperor. The crucifixion was one method, what was able to use against the people, who threatened the superiority of the Roman Empire, and the problem of that method was that the crucified person should not yell anything against the Rome, and something had to be used to close the victim's mouth.


Because if that person hangs in the execution pile, will that person say something bad for the Rome for last words, and that was the reason, why the death on the cross was so feared. Everybody feared that method and that was not comfortable even for the Roman authorities. So when Roman authorities wanted that the person would be silent forever, they normally send the undercover legionnaires to neutralize the target.


When we are talking about whipping, the methodology what the Roman empire used in that kind of punishment was poisoning with Cobras poison. The whips were moistened in the poison, what was tapped from Cobra or Mamba, and after that, the whips just touched the victim. That poison is the mixture with neurotoxic and the component what destroys tissue, and causes the situation, where on victim's body will open the cut, where the nervous poison will be suck in the victim’s blood, causing the death almost immediately. Same way the crown of thorns could be deadly if that is pet with the poison of those snakes, and of course the nails that are used in this action, would be covered with poison.


So why those methods were not used in this particular punishment? Why Roman Empire and Pontius Pilatus made that man the hero? Was in the Roman interests actually use that very frighten punishment for the man, who did not even take the sword in his hand? The normal methodology what the Romans used was that they were the “nice guys”, who just cut the heads off, and the tough and painful methods were reserved for the vassals of Rome, whose mission was to prepare the area for the Roman control. And those men were extremely hated.



The reason why Roman vassal Herodes ordered the massacre of Jerusalem about 30 years before this particular eastern. The Christmas night massacre, where all children of that city were killed, was meant for killing the King David family and cut the bloodline of the king of Israel. There is one very interesting part of the Holy Bible, and there was mentioned, that Josef was a room and family of King David, what might mean that Maria was actually the member of the royal court of King David. Josef was also the high-rank nobleman, who was from the remarkable family, but not member of the royal family of  David. But the Holy Bible was not ever mentioned one very important thing.


How close member of that royal family was for David. Did they be some kind of cousins? And another question will raise from that book. Why didn’t they have room in that city? When the Romans were ordered that tax collection and the massacre, they were calculated the people, and reserved them the rooms. That would make the arresting easier, but did somebody took the place of that family? Or did Josef or Maria actually lied that they were members of the royal family? And the question is, why they didn’t have that room in the city? Why did they have to go in the cowshed? This is the questions that are made in this case from 2000 years ago.