(JD Hall – Pulpit & Pen) In my previous post on this subject, I entitled it A Brief Condescension to James White and explained that his defenses for Rosaria Butterfield are so embarrassingly bad the man is hardly worth responding to at all.
White claimed that Butterfield’s positive referencing of heretics was merely part of a “bibliography.” When I pointed out that Butterfield drew from these books her perspectives on Same-Sex Attraction in the body of the book and that list they were later mentioned in it was not a bibliography but a list of “recommended reading.”…
James went on to mock and deride me for not knowing what a bibliography is, saying that “recommended reading is just a less-scholarly, nicer way of saying “bibliography.” He then asked me in front of his foam-mouthed, frenzied Facebook toadies who lather him up with daily adoration and praise if I had noticed that the Recommended Reading list was nothing but a list of works cited in the book.
Of course, James was wrong. Most of the books in Butterfield’s Recommended Reading list are not mentioned in the book. That’s because it’s matter-of-factly not a bibliography. This is a list of toxic, profane, sodomite books and authors recommended by Butterfield both in the list and inside the book itself. She credits them with helping to shape her thought.