Robittybob1

That is one of the drawbacks of referring to an hour long YT video. The author did mention the darkness that came over the land at the time of the crucifixion and says this is not recorded anywhere else. A lunar eclipse is said to have happened the night before so you can't say it was a solar eclipse the day after (that combination doesn't happen). It was obviously "like a solar eclipse" but it wasn't. What was the cause and how extensive it was I have real no idea. Wikipedia covers "Crucifixion darkness" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion_darkness (does that link work for everyone?) I don't want to rewrite the entire Wikipedia page! A dust storm would be most likely, in that the dust could be at a higher altitude. I think if you are in a dust storm you know it, but if it passed over at a higher altitude it would give the appearance that it covered the entire land. I have had no real experience of dust storms (others might know). But in NZ from time to time bushfires in Australia affect the meteorological conditions here. As far as Nazareth goes, that wasn't covered in the YT but is a separate criticism leveled at the story of Jesus. In your reply you say "but the two are not inseparable in my opinion." I have a feeling from the context you mean the two are separable, but if you have time could you please re-explain yourself on this? The question is "was Jesus a real person", and I take that to mean historical rather than "truthful in every aspect of his teaching at the time" (I won't go there on a science forum. I might in a blog later). Does anyone doubt that Jesus existed at all? Some might. It was those I wonder what would make them change their minds for it is endlessly possible to deny any evidence as fake or irrelevant or something, so I feel it is really near impossible to satisfy everyone. But I challenge them to tell us what they really want.

I listened to the video in the OP and found it very rushed and extremely biased. OK I am Christian by nature so my life seems to be based on the fact (by faith) that Jesus was real. OK I do wish there was more proof that would prove it. I find it frustrating that there isn't this perfect rock solid proof. Would we all be Christians if this proof was there? If Jesus had thrust his hand into a rock and wrote his name on the stone would we all be believers then? Would there be no room for faith to play a part then? I spent years trying to find proof and in the end I felt there was enough evidence and I will try and recall all that. (Now that was 24 years ago, and that was in the days prior to the internet, when information took weeks to arrive via library interloans.) What would be the proof that would be sufficient to substantiate the reality of Jesus? I know the fact that the darkness wasn't recorded all over the world goes as a negative, but had that darkness been recorded would that have been sufficient, or would it then just be classed as coincidental. I'd love to know what evidence would be beyond doubt? Even the existence of Nazareth has been brought into doubt. But finding a town that could be Nazareth would not be proof, so it seems easier to cast doubt than to find supporting evidence. Is that the problem? Tacitus on Christ is covered in Wikipedia and give extensive references to cross check. From memory the video in the OP refers to the same and makes the point about whether Pilate was prefect or a procurator. I can think it is quite likely that a person's rank changes over the years and really nothing can be made of any apparent discrepancy in title.

And if the screws haven't been moved since the photo was taken, it looks like it was screw head in the 5 o'clock position that left the imprint.