Academic Fail

[kılıç_mehmet]

I would expect someone with a degree in history to know the basics of analysing manuscripts and knowing what to keep in mind when analysing them for historical content and reliability.

And you can tell me that you have mastered these basics?
To be honest, friend, it's not him that you ought to hold accountable for these. Whomever declared today's four gospels to be the ones that describe Christ's life and deeds best, they are your targets.
But they're all dead, and they've been through a few more gospels before deciding on these four only.

If at my level of historical knowledge he had to resort to moving the goal posts then there's something fundamentally wrong with his justification for why the Gospels are reliable, even if he's not a Biblical scholar.

Well, the reliability of the Gospels are in direct conjunction with whether you believe in them or not. The Moslems and Jews rejected the Gospels for hundreds of years, all the while having no real historical proof of it. I don't think that history can obviously prove or disprove their reliability now. And of course, there is the question, on which merit do you judge the reliability of the gospels?

Answering your question: I don't know for sure, but my lecturer wasn't the best person to test my hypothesis with.

I still don't know what exactly is your hypothesis. Whether an academian can be christian or not?
I don't know how this is any of your business at the first place anyways.