Some people refer to Atwill's theory as a "Fringe Theory" which is defined as an idea or viewpoint that fundamentally differs from the accepted scholarship of the time within that field. But this theory fails on so many levels, of which perhaps the most important one is that Alwill is no religious scholar at all. This is nothing but a wild fantasy from a deluded man without any historical evidence. Secondly; apart from raising a theory based on historical misrepresentation, he bases his entire theory on a toxic mix of conjecture, hyperbole and vivid imagination. Even 2nd year history students at university are able to pick his reasoning to pieces.

It is certainly a provocative "theory" (if you stretch the definition of the word) but in relation to REAL historic theory and the research that has been done (by real scholars) on both the historic Jesus as well as the religious origin of Christianity, Atwill's theory squarely land in the same category as Big Foot, The Loch Ness Monster and little green aliens from Mars - and to give Atwill or his theory any more credence than that would be ludicrous.

It is far too easy today for anyone to publish a "documentary" on any topic they want; no matter how biased the issue or how unscientific the approach or the analysis is. Some of these pseudo-science documentaries should come with sanity warning labels.