All language subtitles for Forbidden.History.S07E01.Secrets.of.the.Crucifixion.1080p.DSCP.WEB-DL.AAC2.0.H.264-BTN_track3_[eng]

[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.