Original subtitles

[Eric] The Christian Church claims Jesus Christ

died on the cross for our sins.

He was a victim of crucifixion,

one of the most savage executions

ever invented by humans.

This is a form of punishment where

bones were broken,

you're covered in blood,

you're suspended,

so you're finding it hard to breathe,

you are dying in excruciating agony.

Ahhh!

[Eric] But could the story of Jesus

dying on the cross be a myth?

Archaeologically speaking,

crucifixion might as well have not existed.

The evidence is just tiny.

It's perfectly possible that Jesus

was not crucified on the cross.

[Eric] What is the truth?

Was Christ really crucified on the cross as the Bible claims?

Or is it just a story made up by the Church?

If Jesus did not die on the cross, it would mean that

he may not be the Son of God.

[Eric] At the core of Christianity

is the crucifixion,

the story of Jesus nailed to a cross

and left to die.

But did this momentous event really happen?

The crucifixion of Christ is probably the most famous,

the most portrayed event in human history.

It's relayed to us in countless paintings,

in movies, in books.

I mean, we are told every last thing

that happened on that terrible day.

[Eric] Considered barbaric by today's standards,

crucifixion was part execution

and part public spectacle.

Crucifixion is, uh, an ancient torture technique,

most likely begun by the Persians,

but it was perfected by the Romans,

and it is effectively an impaling technique.

Uh, it was a gross and humiliating way to die,

and that's precisely what the Romans wanted.

When it comes to crucifixion,

this was not just a way of getting rid of somebody.

It was protracted.

It was for the public to witness.

Really, it was a circus of death.

[Andy] Typically, crucifixion victims would die

over the course of hours, sometimes even days.

And so you almost have to picture the scene

of someone naked,

battered, bruised and gasping for breath.

The body is attached to the cross.

It's left there hanging.

You can only imagine

if your legs no longer could support you,

your body would've slumped forward

and this would have caused the lungs to fill up with fluid.

You would have suffocated.

[indistinct background chatter]

[Eric] Despite the gore depicted in Hollywood films,

historians are struggling to distinguish fact from fiction

in the real crucifixion story.

A lot of our understanding of crucifixion

has been informed by Hollywood,

by tradition, and that...

if you were to simply look at the Gospel texts,

could you say for sure

that Jesus was crucified

in the way that a lot of traditional portrayals

of the crucifixion, um, depict?

[Eric] While the Church supports all four Gospels

as factual accounts of Christ's life,

many scholars are less convinced.

The official line of the churches

is that each of the Gospel writers had some connection to Jesus,

that they knew him.

The evidence for that is vanishingly slight.

The four Gospels just aren't historical documents.

They probably weren't written by the people whose names are on them.

They were written by communities and teams over time.

And they were written much later, generations later.

[Peter] The Gospels were written between 60 A.D.

and, um, a 100 plus A.D.

We have no conclusive evidence

that the Gospels are written by people

who had actually stood in Jesus's presence.

[Eric] Stockholm, Sweden.

While hunting for the origin of the crucifixion legend,

theologist, Gunnar Samuelsson,

has spent almost ten years scouring the earliest records

of this execution technique.

Uh, my research into the crucifixion,

it began with, uh,

reading a book, of course,

searching for a text about crucifixions.

[Eric] Gunnar studied every ancient manuscript

he could find referencing crucifixion,

the oldest of which dates back to the ninth century B.C.

It was a painstaking work.

I was Indiana Jones.

You know, you never know what will be in the next text.

I was trying desperately

to find information about crucifixions.

[Eric] After searching through manuscripts in Greek,

Latin, Hebrew, and Aramaic,

to his shock, Gunnar discovered

that these ancient texts

didn't describe crucifixion as we understand it today.

I started to realize that

in these texts you have a problem.

[Eric] The problem was

that none of the texts mention a cross,

which today many consider the key implement of crucifixion.

So, uh, when did the, the symbol of the cross came from?

[Eric] Turning to a non-biblical text from ancient Greece,

Gunnar found a detailed description

of the execution technique,

but it suggested a cross may not have been used at all.

The only use is, this verb stavron,

which means Essen... essentially means

to sus... to suspend, a suspension, a general suspension.

[Eric] Today, the word crucifixion

has become synonymous with the cross.

Yet if Gunnar's research is correct,

the word evolved from the Greek term, stavron,

which has no direct link to a shape.

Since the New Testament was first written in Greek,

this finding could mean that the symbology

at the very heart of the Christian Church

is not accurate.

Greek texts of the New Testament said

that Jesus was stavron.

Only that. No details.

No information of how it looked like.

So, the text of the New Testament

said that Jesus was suspended.

In my mind, it's not crucifixion,

it's suspension of corpses.

All words evolve over time.

Nowadays we see stavron as, meaning crucifixion

because of what's in the Bible.

But actually, originally it just meant to suspend

and it meant to suspend in a vast variety of ways,

possibly on a stake, on a pail, on a tree.

In one text, it's even used to describe

a dog being spitted on a spear.

It was a very broad word.

[Eric] The possibility that a key part of the crucifixion story

is incorrect

is unthinkable to many in the Church.

But perhaps it helps explain

one of the peculiarities of the modern Bible,

why the cross is barely referenced.

[Andy] The cross isn't really mentioned in the Bible,

and therefore it's perfectly possible

that Jesus was not crucified on a cross structure.

[Eric] In an attempt to find the truth in the biblical story,

Gunnar turned to the Codex Sinaiticus,

the world's oldest complete Bible

written in the fourth century A.D.

But in this manuscript, he found another mystery.

[Gunnar] So if you go to Codex Sinaiticus,

you will get one surprise,

you have the death of Jesus.

So they have Jesus suspended,

and then...

it says that someone took a spear

and he punched the side of Jesus.

And Codex Sinaiticus

have an addition, Jesus shouted out loud...

-Ahhh! -...and died.

He was, uh, killed by a Roman spear.

[Eric] The modern Bible does mention Jesus

being pierced by a Roman spear,

but it only happens after Christ has already died on the cross.

Why would a detail as crucial as this be left out?

I mean, isn't it a bit strange that for some reason

this reference to a Roman spear

being a cause of the death of Jesus

is removed from later versions of the Bible?

[Eric] Whether killed by a Roman spear

or just suspended,

Gunnar's research casts doubt

over the whole crucifixion narrative.

But today,

Christian iconography is centered around

the symbol of the cross,

which surprisingly is not documented

until centuries after the death of Jesus.

The symbol of the cross, I...

It appears to be of a little later date.

[Janina] The crucifixion actually doesn't appear

in Christian art till about the fifth century,

so that's, um, four or five centuries after the event.

[Eric] The story of the cross appears to have some roots

in fourth century Jerusalem,

where according to Roman legend,

it was discovered where Christ was crucified.

It's where archeologist, Bena Mantel

is hunting for answers.

So we're standing outside the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

And for the majority of the Christians of the world,

this is the place of the crucifixion.

[Eric] Is this really the spot where Jesus died on the cross?

What actually happened on that day?

At the foundation of Christianity

is the story of Jesus dying on the cross.

But is this the truth?

Is that really how Jesus died?

Retracing Christ's last steps,

Bena Mantel is in Jerusalem

at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

So for the majority of the Christians of the world,

this is it, this is the place of the crucifixion.

The foundation of Christianity really

is linked to this place right here.

[Eric] According to legend,

this church was built on the spot

where Jesus's cross was discovered.

[Bena] So the church is built in the fourth century

by Helena, mother of emperor Constantine.

[Eric] As the first Roman emperor to convert to Christianity,

Constantine wanted to seize holy relics

to bring power to his empire.

[Andy] Constantine seconded his mother, Helena,

uh, in about the year 326

to go and find the site of Jesus's crucifixion.

[Eric] Legend has it

that Helena set out on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem.

Once in the Holy Land,

she was taken to the site

where the locals claim Jesus was crucified.

What she found there was a Roman temple.

They'd built a temple to Roman Gods on, on the site.

But because she was the emperor's mother, she could have it removed.

The excavations were carried out there

and they found various fragments of a cross.

[Eric] Believers claim the wooden fragments

were from the Latin cross used to crucify Jesus.

A long, tall cross with a shorter crossbar towards the top.

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre was built on the spot

where it was supposedly found.

Today, the site attracts

thousands of tourists and pilgrims,

many coming to see the stone

where Christ's dead body was apparently laid.

So this is the anointing stone.

The body has to be taken off the cross

anointed with oil,

and then it is covered in shrouds.

And from here it goes into the burial cave.

Pilgrims from all over the world will actually come

and put their precious possessions

and consecrate them on this rock.

[Eric] The Church claims that as well as being the site of the crucifixion,

it's also the place of the resurrection.

Inside the church is a tiny sacred crypt

where some believe this miracle happened.

[Bena] This is the Chapel of the Angel,

which is the first room

where the rolling stone was rolled out.

And the tradition is that this rock

that you're seeing here is a fragment

from the original rolling stone,

and then the inner room

has the stone bed where Jesus was laid.

You can see a little bit of iconography, but of course,

as a commemoration site,

this is the place of the miracle.

From here, Jesus was resurrected.

[Eric] For many, this is enough

to confirm the church as the spot where Jesus died.

So do I think that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre

is the place of the crucifixion?

If you're asking me personally,

without a shred of doubt.

[Eric] Despite its fame and 1,700 years of tradition,

some questioned this church's authenticity.

[Andy] The Church of the Holy Sepulchre,

being the site of Jesus's crucifixion,

is really based on speculation.

There is no direct evidence

that Jesus was crucified at that particular site.

[Eric] Disbelievers in the site's authenticity

point to Jewish tradition,

which considers corpses impure.

This means that in ancient Jerusalem,

crucifixions and burials

took place outside of the city limits.

Yet some claim the Holy Sepulchre

is inside the ancient city walls.

[Bena] We know for a fact

that Jews wouldn't be executed within the city.

In other words,

the church could not have been inside the city

if it is built on the location of the crucifixion.

Part of the dilemma with the location

of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre

is that its outer sections

may have been within the walls of the city.

[Eric] Although the city boundaries

from the biblical era are unclear,

a surprising event revealed something unexpected.

In 1808, the Church of the Holy Sepulchre

was ravaged by fire.

[Bena] The fire did reveal something.

This hole here.

And inside, we can actually see that we're seeing a corner

of a Jewish burial site.

And based on the cutting techniques

and based on the architectural style

of this burial site,

we can date it back to the times of Christ.

In other words, I cannot say for a fact

that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre

is the burial place of Jesus,

but what I can say, without a shred of doubt,

is that 2000 years ago, Jews are buried here.

[Eric] For this to have been a Jewish tomb

at the time of Christ,

it must have been outside of the city walls

and therefore could have been the site of the crucifixion after all.

Yet, despite the evidence,

some scholars still have their doubts.

To me, the Holy Sepulchre has never quite rung true

as the site for the crucifixion.

Apart from anything else, it's just all a bit too convenient.

The site of the crucifixion, the site of the Tomb of Jesus

in exactly the same spot,

I think most people who visited the Holy Sepulchre

have had this sneaking feeling

that it isn't the site of the crucifixion.

There is another possibility

for a site where Jesus may have been crucified,

and that is called Golgotha,

which means, the skull.

[Eric] Meaning skull in Aramaic,

many believe the name Golgotha is a clue,

as the Bible describes Jesus being crucified on Skull Hill.

Since the 19th century, some Protestants

have claimed that a skull shaped hill

just outside the Damascus gate in Jerusalem

is a more credible site for the crucifixion of Jesus.

And there are some compelling reasons for that.

I mean, for one, the situation is ideal.

It's definitely outside the city walls.

[Eric] Without solid evidence,

the exact location of Christ's death

will remain a mystery.

Although the Church of the Holy Sepulchre

is supposedly built on the spot where the cross was found,

other archeological evidence for crucifixion

is near non-existent.

Today, we think of crucifixions

as a very common execution during the Roman period.

However, there's very little

archeological evidence we've ever uncovered.

[Eric] According to the Roman era

Jewish historian, Josephus,

up to 500 people a day were crucified

in the Jerusalem region.

But despite this high number,

it's a mystery why such little

archeological evidence exists.

Archaeologically speaking,

the evidence for crucifixion is just tiny.

It is minuscule in comparison to the number of individuals

that we have reason to believe suffered this fate.

[Eric] Yet at Tel Aviv University,

there lies a crucial clue

to solving the mystery of this ancient execution technique.

Physical evidence of an actual historical crucifixion.

Whenever I pull out the box from the safe,

I'm getting excited.

It's one of the rare find that I've ever encountered.

[Eric] Discovered in 1968,

this heel still has the nail stuck in the bone.

Crucially, like Jesus,

its victim was Jewish

and crucified around the same time.

Could this relic solve one of the world's greatest mysteries?

Did Christ die on the cross?

When Christ was crucified on the cross,

the world changed forever.

According to texts from the Roman era,

thousands of people died by this execution method.

Yet, despite its infamy,

evidence for the horrific technique

is nearly non-existent.

Professor Israel Hershkovitz of Tel Aviv University

has been studying the first archeological evidence

of crucifixion ever found.

It has been scientifically dated back to the time of Jesus.

[Israel] This is the only evidence

that we have for crucifixion.

What we see here actually is the heel bone.

It's almost a complete heel bone.

And we see an iron nail actually running

and penetrating from this side of the heel bone

coming out from the opposite side.

Archeologists really put these remains

through the wringer and conclusively

have decided that, this is an example of crucifixion.

And it's stunningly important

because it does prove that crucifixion was practiced

during this time period in the Roman Empire.

[Eric] Since its discovery in 1968,

in an ancient Jewish crypt,

only a handful of remains

from other suspected crucifixion victims have been found,

but none have stood up to the scrutiny

of this heel bone.

[Dominic] The extraordinary thing about the discovery

was that it has a bone with a nail still going through it.

This was the first time this had ever been discovered,

and it proves at least

that the Romans did crucify with nails.

[Eric] Before this incredible find,

historians were under the impression

that most crucifixion victims

weren't permitted a proper burial.

It was thought their bodies were either left to rot where they hung

or were buried in a shallow grave.

If that were the case,

it would contradict the Bible's claim that

Jesus's body was placed in a tomb.

Yet this bone was found in an ossuary

in an ancient Jewish crypt.

[Israel] We know that the name of the deceased,

Johanan, the name was engraved on the side of the,

uh, of the o... ossuary

in a Hebrew letter that we can even read today.

[Eric] Since Johanan was granted funeral rites,

it proves that a part of the Bible's crucifixion story

could be true,

that Jesus was placed in a tomb

after his body was removed from the cross.

[Dominic] Johanan and his bones

are unbelievably important for us,

because not only was he crucified by the Romans,

but he was crucified by the Romans

in the same place as Jesus,

in the same century as Jesus.

[Karen] This find in Jerusalem is critically important

in our consideration of whether,

like, the story of Jesus that we read in the Bible

could have been true.

They're both prominent Jews.

They were given proper burials.

So, it's not as if this case of Jesus is just an anomaly.

[Tony] This bone of Johanan

could finally tell us what really happened

that day to Jesus Christ.

[Eric] Analysis of the heel reveals another clue,

the remains of a piece of wood.

[Tony] One particularly gruesome detail

is that there appears to be a small piece of wood

under the head of the nail

that would have stopped the person from

wriggling free off the cross.

The piece of the wood that was actually

lying between the head of the nail

and the surface of the heel

was made of an olive tree.

It's... it's interesting because, uh,

according to the tradition,

the cross was made of olive tree.

[Eric] Historical accounts of crucifixion

offer no conclusive answer for the type of wood used.

But when fragments of the cross

supposedly found by Helena

in the fourth century were tested,

they were found to be olive wood,

leading to modern day theories

that this wood was used for crucifixions.

While Johanan's bone supports this theory,

for Professor Hershkovitz,

it strikes a blow to the possibility

that Jesus died on a Latin cross.

Olive tree, as we all know,

doesn't have a full body of a tree.

It's, it's a trunk, it's all penetrated

and distorted and, and so on.

And you cannot create a long log from an olive tree.

[Eric] The Latin cross is made from huge wooden planks,

the type that's nearly impossible to produce from olive wood.

One thing that's really important to consider,

uh, which is easy to forget,

is that wood of a sufficient size to support a human body

would have been in scarce supply

in the region of the Holy Land.

[Eric] So if Christ was not crucified on a tall Latin cross,

what actually happened on that day?

The concept of Jesus dying on the cross

is at the center of Christianity.

Professor Israel Hershkovitz

has spent over a decade studying crucifixion

and questions the symbology at the heart of the religion.

I don't think that it was a T-shaped cross.

I mean, it really doesn't make sense.

Not from, from the evidence that we have,

and not from a simple anatomic logic.

[Eric] To determine how Jesus was hung on the cross,

Professor Hershkovitz has studied artworks of the crucifixion.

He believes the position of the body

in relation to the crossbar,

depicted in many portraits,

makes the Latin cross an impossibility.

Usually the crossbar

was placed according to only construction against the neck.

[Eric] While many paintings portray

Christ's hands nailed to the front of the cross,

Professor Hershkovitz believes this would not have

supported the weight of his body

for the entire crucifixion.

Therefore, he believes

Jesus's arms must have been positioned behind the crossbar.

The hands are running actually behind the crossbar.

So try to do it.

You see it's impossible.

You n... You need to twist the whole body,

and it's still impossible.

I have to, to take it down, very down,

almost to, to, to the center of the back over here,

for him to be able actually to hold,

to hold the crossbar from the opposite side,

and nobody would say that this is the way

the Roman crucified people.

[Eric] Is this the final nail in the coffin for the Latin cross?

Perhaps another shape could unravel this enigma.

I believe that the, uh,

the only cross that makes sense

and follow the evidence, the hard evidence

is the X-shaped cross.

Now, for another example,

let's say it was an X-shaped cross.

In an X-shaped cross, put your hand

and put the palm of the hand at the back. You see?

This is the way he hold the, the X... X-shaped cross.

[Eric] For many, the simplicity of the X-shaped cross

makes it a viable solution for the crucifixion mystery.

I think that the theory that by using

smaller pieces of wood affixed together in an X shape,

rather than the big long pole,

actually makes a lot of sense.

Like, you know, the fact is you can't conjure

natural resources out of thin air.

The X-shaped cross is perfectly credible.

It may be that people were nailed to a tree in an X shape

or there were two pieces of wood

that just happened to be attached to each other

and they were just used because it suited the purpose.

[Eric] Astonishingly, historical records show

that the X-shaped cross has been used in crucifixions.

One of Jesus's disciples, Andrew,

the patron saint of Scotland,

was crucified in this way.

The X shape is remembered today on the country's flag.

But if Jesus was crucified like this,

why is the most fundamental symbol of Christianity

a Latin cross and not an X?

Maybe the oldest known depiction of the death of Christ

found in Rome can help solve the mystery.

The earliest record of Jesus being crucified

is most likely the Alexamenos graffito.

Now, this was an etching

on the edge of the Palatine Hill.

And the etching depicts a crucifixion victim

with the head of a donkey

and, uh, a young worshiper at the bottom with the,

the inscription, "Alex worships his God".

Now this was clearly a, a, a kind of mockery.

This graffiti dates back to 200 A.D.

and at this point in time,

Christianity was still not...

a religion to be respected in Rome.

[Dominic] It shows that at that date

there were many people who ridiculed Jesus.

They didn't see him as this great and important figure.

They were poking fun by putting a donkey's head on him.

But in Rome, where people really did know

what crucifixions looked like,

they depict it with a T-shaped cross.

[Eric] This graffiti appears to show Jesus

being crucified on a shape

very close to the Latin cross.

The graffiti from Italy

provides pretty compelling evidence

that Christ probably was hung on some form of cross,

because this is an insult.

This is a parody.

Why include that detail if it's simply not true?

[Karen] This is a political statement from its time,

but it also is a really interesting reinforcement

of the story of the crucifixion that we read in the Bible.

[Eric] Does this graffiti finally prove

that Jesus died on the Latin cross?

While many scholars need more conclusive evidence,

some point to a passage in the crucifixion story,

which might be able to be backed up by science.

There is one thing in the Bible

that could help to identify the time and place of the crucifixion,

and that's an earthquake.

[Eric] The crucifixion of Christ

was an event that shook the world.

Scholars have spent centuries

trying to scientifically prove the biblical story.

Like so much of what is written in the Bible,

it's very hard to disentangle hard fact from faith.

But one piece of that story of Jesus's crucifixion

absolutely could have been true.

And that is the report of an earthquake,

at the time Jesus died.

As the Bible tells it,

the curtain in the temple was rent in two and the earth shook.

Now we know in the Bible's story that as Jesus died on the cross,

that the ground shook.

And this is undoubtedly an area of huge seismic activity.

So it's not beyond the realms

that we may have had an earthquake at that time.

[Eric] The Dead Sea, Israel.

Located about 20 miles east of Jerusalem,

it acts as a geological record of the region.

Geologist, Shmuel Marco,

is hunting for evidence of this crucifixion quake.

The Dead Sea, uh, for us geologists

is a history book.

It's been here for ages, millions of years,

and the biblical story of Jesus

are included in this time.

At the time of the crucifixion,

there was an... a strong earthquake.

So the earthquake should be recorded

in the sediments.

[Eric] The idea of an earthquake

shaking ancient Jerusalem

is not as bizarre as it may sound.

In the last thousand years,

this region has been hit by 12 major quakes.

The reason that this is an earthquake country

is that this particular place

is a boundary between two tectonic plates.

Here on the west, we have the Sinai plate,

and on the east we have the Arabian plates.

They are held together at the boundary by the friction.

And any time that the forces overcome the friction,

we see a jump.

And this is an earthquake.

[Eric] When an earthquake strikes,

it permanently changes the geology of the seabed.

When the bottom of the lake shakes,

the very fine layers are distorted and disturbed

and, and we see this disturbance,

uh, in the sediments and we identify earthquakes.

[Eric] Normally, these historic records

are hidden beneath the waves.

Yet over the last half century,

the Dead Sea has been slowly receding,

giving up its secrets.

[Tony] As the Dead Sea has been receding,

some of the evidence for past earthquakes has been revealed.

[Eric] Astonishingly, layers of rock,

which made up the seabed when Jesus was crucified,

have been exposed again.

[Shmuel] So, uh, we can find layers

which correlate in time to the same period

that Jesus lived.

[Eric] The geological records of the Dead Sea

prove an earthquake occurred within five years

of the biblical account of the crucifixion.

And there was an earthquake

which was documented by the sediments of the Dead Sea.

It could very well be the earthquake,

which is, uh, described in the, in the Bible.

[Eric] For some, this is proof that at least a part of the story

lies, in fact, not fiction.

The stratification now being revealed

by the receding Dead Sea

proves that there was an earthquake

and that that fits in

with the story of Jesus's crucifixion.

From an archeological standpoint,

this sort of, uh, geological evidence is,

I would say, pretty much as good as we're gonna get

in terms of verifying the crucifixion.

[Eric] Yet some scholars are less convinced.

The earthquake theory, though, has to be put into context,

which is that there are regular earthquakes in that part of the world,

and the descriptions of the crucifixion in the Bible

are not history.

So the descriptions of the earthquake are symbolic.

They're about the destruction of the sacred edifice

of the holiness, a metaphor for Christ's body.

They're all sorts of things, but they're not a geological event.

I personally wouldn't invest too much into the earthquake,

uh, although it's, it's reported and it does seem

to have some scientific verification.

As a writer, the earth is quaking

because world history is about to change

because of this extinction level event,

uh, of the crucifixion of Jesus.

[Eric] Despite the skepticism,

the geology of the Dead Sea

does prove an earthquake struck

around the same time as the biblical story.

But while many scholars try to prove the events of the Holy Book,

there are tales of Christ surviving the crucifixion,

which even include a cold war conspiracy

to hide the truth behind his death.

The idea of Jesus being crucified on the cross

is a heavily debated topic.

But what if he narrowly avoided death

and actually escaped?

Inevitably with a story as big as the story of Jesus,

there have always been multiple versions of it.

And one strand that has emerged is the idea

that Jesus didn't die at the crucifixion

and that he survived.

[Karen] There have been a lot of speculators

as to alternative outcomes for Jesus,

um, saying that he had survived the crucifixion.

One called the Jesus Scroll, postulated that

Jesus actually retreated to this mountainside retreat

above the Dead Sea.

The Jesus Scroll story involves a claim

that one of the Dead Sea Scrolls

proved that Jesus survived

the crucifixion living to old age.

[Eric] The Dead Sea Scrolls are a set of ancient texts,

with some providing an alternate theory

on the beginnings of Christianity.

Some claim one of these manuscripts,

known as the Jesus Scroll,

was never released to the public.

A proclamation first made

by Australian journalist, Donovan Joyce.

The astonishing claim made by Donovan Joyce

is that he was at Tel Aviv airport in 1964

and an archeologist begged him to take this scroll,

which proved that Jesus had survived the crucifixion.

Take it to the West and share the story.

Now, Donovan Joyce refused to do this.

What Joyce claims is that this archeologist,

disgruntled, then flew to Moscow

and tried to sell it to the Soviet Union

so that they could prove to the world

that Christianity was a lie.

[Eric] If Joyce's story is to be believed,

the scroll, signed by Jesus himself,

fell into the hands of the Soviets.

To this day, the country has not released

any details of what the scroll described.

Apparently, it tells of Jesus living to the age of 80

and fighting the Romans at the legendary battle of Masada.

The siege of Masada is one of the great tales

that we have in Western civilization.

And this idea that Jesus was present at Masada,

that's a, a really titillating tale.

[Eric] Masada, Israel.

Nearly 40 miles southeast of Jerusalem,

it's one of the ancient world's greatest forts.

[Bena] So the year is 73 A.D.

and the final place of refuge for the last

of the Jewish rebels is down by the Dead Sea

in the Judean Desert on a mountain called Masada.

[Eric] Local historian, Gideon Hadas,

is investigating the claim that this is where Jesus died.

[Gideon] We are on top of Masada.

Masada is very high from the surroundings,

as you can see it all around.

It's a cliff by itself,

and it's very impressive.

Ten thousand Roman soldier were around Masada

and there was a, about 900 Jews on the mountain.

If Jesus was here...

he died here.

[Eric] Legend says that after laying siege

to the mountain fortress for over four months,

the Romans were finally at a point of breakthrough.

Knowing their time was up,

the Jewish Zealots, and maybe Jesus, made a pact.

The commander of the fortress gave two speeches...

to encourage the people to kill themselves,

to be... To, to, to stay free,

not to enslave by the Romans.

And they, they decided to kill themselves.

[Eric] If the Jesus Scroll is to be believed,

this is where Christ died having ended his own life.

If proven, this story would cause

shockwaves around the world.

But some believe the Jesus Scroll

suggests much more.

If the Jesus Scroll is true,

then Jesus wasn't crucified,

he wasn't resurrected.

Therefore, he wasn't the Son of God.

Therefore, Christianity rests on a lie,

because Jesus lived to an old age

and took his own life.

[Eric] Today, the Jesus Scroll is one of the many stories

of Christ surviving the crucifixion.

Unless one theory is proven to be true,

scholars are left debating the credibility

of the event at the heart of Christianity.

If something would come about today

in our day and age, that will actually suggest that,

uh, Jesus never died on the cross,

that will be a game changer.

[Eric] While the Church remains adamant

that Jesus was crucified,

skeptics still question the truth behind the cross.

As much as the cross means to people,

and as much as it informs

ancient and modern Christian iconography,

it's entirely possible

that our portrayal of the cross

may be something which has been informed

by something other than verifiable fact.

[Eric] For some, the truth is lost forever.

Historically, there is very rarely smoke without fire.

It is likely that in the early first century A.D.,

a Jewish man called Jesus was crucified by the Romans.

But why he was executed

and the way in which he was executed

will probably forever be lost to us.

Even if we did find evidence

that Jesus did not die on the cross,

there are far too many people

who would not engage with that possibility,

who would feel that the evidence was planted,

it's misinterpreted, misunderstood.

[Eric] But for the Christian Church,

perhaps the stakes are too high.

[JJ] It's doubtful that we'll ever know the truth

about the death of Jesus,

because a lot of very powerful people

seem to want to keep this information from us,

particularly those around the Vatican.

It's certainly not in the interest of the Vatican

to open up a debate on the crucifixion,

to think about other alternatives.

There is no other alternative

as far as the Vatican is concerned.

[Eric] Yet the faithful hold fast to their beliefs.

So do I believe in the crucifixion?

I do because I am a priest.

It doesn't matter exactly the way Jesus died.

The important thing was that Jesus died.

He gave his life for me.

That's the message of the Church.