You'e written an apologetic piece, so you can do what you like.
As I understand PaulK and I prefer his viewpoint, if your piece was meant as scholarship you have failed to identify the specific scholars and the arguments you are criticising, what their textual arguments are and why yours are better.
I've no patience with the rhetoric of apologetics. And as you offer only a vague opponent of modern scholarship saying vague things I don't find this topic of interest or value.
I am curious if others will get involved in this topic though.
lfen