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…
(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…