On The Trail Of NT Wrong

I have several theories about the identity of NT Wrong. All of them are bunk. I will post them anyway.

Be that as it may, in the course of my extensive investigations (= reading NT Wrong’s blog posts from time to time), I have uncovered a few clues that may help us deduce the true identity of this anonymous biblioblogger-bishop.

Clue #1: NT Wrong is no younger than in his 30s. This can be deduced from the fact that he remembers Magnum P.I. People in their 20s and younger have only seen Tom Selleck in reruns of Friends.

Clue #2: NT Wrong attended ETS this year. This can be deduced from the fact that he just blogged about a post that he is aware included material presented at ETS. I realize this is a shocking revelation, since it probably also suggests he may have a book by Don Carson on his bookshelf as well.

Clue #3: NT Wrong is British. This is not news to anyone, I’m sure, since no one can be that sarcastic and get away with it for an extended period of time unless, when people read their blog posts, they hear them in a British accent. But just to be clear, no one from the United States would believe that the resurrected saints are in Barnsley, South Yorkshire.

If I had to guess the identity of NT Wrong right now, I suppose I’d have to go with…Mark Goodacre. The evidence for this is as follows:

(1) In the list of sources on NT Wrong’s blog, Q is absent. None but Mark would dare make such an omission. Indeed, I can’t think of an instance when the letter Q has ever appeared on NT Wrong’s blog…

(2) Mark Goodacre is the right age to remember Magnum P.I. (he went to the Cheers bar, for crying out loud).

(3) Bishop Wrong shares a common first letter with Dr. Who. Coincidence?

(4) When NT Wrong’s blog began, Mark Goodacre’s blogging hit an all-time lull. Coincidence? I

(5) Mark’s blog has been number three and number two in NT Wrong’s Top 50, even though Mark has been a pioneer in the biblioblogging realm. The only explanation is his humility prevents him from giving himself the top spot.

(6) I didn’t see Mark at all at SBL, which surely proves that he knew I suspected him and was avoiding me.

(7) Finally, if you paste the head from Mark’s home page onto the body at the top of the NT Wrong blog, you will find it fits perfectly.

An 8th point, which is clearly the clincher, is the fact that I have seven arguments, a round Biblical number. I might also add the fact that neither blog is searchable, preventing the sorts of poking around that might prove common authorship. That’s the same reason Matthew and Luke didn’t put search bars on their Gospels…

I rest my case! Tune in tomorrow to learn why Jim West is really NT Wrong. In the mean time, do go over to Roland Boer’s blog and commiserate him for not having cracked the case first.

Jared

Maybe…I’m toying around with N.T. Wrong being a woman.
Jared

I would also go with more Hebrew Bible / Ancient Near Eastern interests than Mark Goodacre.
N T Wrong

And I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren’t for you meddling kids!
patmccullough.com

I don’t see Mark as NT Wrong at all. Though you did miss the fact that both blogs start with the same two first letters (“NT”). By the way, you can search any specific site through Google by adding “link:website.com” into the search.For instance, try these out:-“N.T. Wrong” on Goodacre’s site–“Goodacre” on N.T. Wrong’s siteIn those searches, you find that they have interacted with on one another’s blogs: here, here, here, here, here, and here (this is a discussion on Q!).Also, N.T. Wrong changes his category of Goodacre from “liberal” to “fairly conservative” in the comments here. N.T. Wrong labels him/herself as “very liberal.” Seems like more than misdirection to me. I second Jared’s comment on the ANE stuff.On Wrong’s comment… add Scooby Doo to the list! Perhaps he/she was either a kid during Scooby Doo years or was a parent of a kid during those years. Who else would think to say that? By the way, I remember Magnum PI and Cheers and I am 28.It’s at least fun to have a hypothesis to test 🙂
Ken Schenck

Has anyone considered the possibility that N.T. Wrong is more than one person?
David Ker

This is brave and important work you’re doing. Persevere despite certain threat of persecution.
Tom Verenna

Ken, not only have I considered that, but I tend to hold that there is no “historical” NT Wrong; rather, somebody or a group of somebodies may be taking on the moniker for the good of scholarship! We should read NT Wrong as we would read Tobit – the character (of NT Wrong) is satisfyingly edified. Perhaps I should get involved in the historical quest for the figure of NT Wrong…In any event, I wouldn’t be surprised if NT Wrong were really several witty, intelligent scholars with insight. (I wouldn’t be against it being ne witty, intelligent scholar either – after all..how many people can you get to identify with 80’s music?) James, great post, btw!
Phil Harland

I would say that a group of people could not be consistently funny, witty, and sarcastic in the way that NT Wrong is. Now the thing would be to compare Mark Goodacare’s NTGateway humour to the humour of Wrong. Mark is funny, but in a different way. Let’s hope the next installment, with Jim West as the “winner”, is more on track (I think not, again based on the type of humour, or in this case the lack thereof;) PhilPS Sarcasm, yes. But humour…
Mike Beidler

:::stands up on his desk and shouts:::I … am NT Wrong!
Spartacus

I am NT Wrong!
Anonymous

NT Wrong is Maurice Casey

Trending Now

Pastors and Church Leaders Resource Center

On The Trail Of NT Wrong