Since discovering My News 24, and reading the articles, I have encountered and interacted with a creature known variously as Hermann Bohmer or Sharkster.
As he has mentioned on this forum, he was invited to debate on theist/atheist facebook groups, first the Agora, then the Rubicon and an American group called “Does God Exist.”
On the Agora, he exhibited an extremely unusual debating technique, involving incomplete sentences, illogical sentence structure and a general inability to communicate coherently. On enquiry, he informed us that he was not proficient in English, and that his bizarre writing style was partly due to him having to look up the meaning of words while commenting. The problem was exacerbated by his habit of commenting on multiple threads simultaneously.
Unfortunately for all involved, this behavior was continued in the other two groups. He left the American group after an angry reaction by me to his refusal to condemn either slavery or apartheid. He also left the Rubicon recently and, despite his inability to debate cogently in that group, he seems to have an extreme sense of hubris at his performance. This arrogance appears to be based on the mistaken belief that one wins a debate by:
a). repeating one’s point of view despite evidence to the contrary
b). ignoring all such evidence and
c). disregarding all uncomfortable questions.
It appears his obnoxious behavior extends to the Nuwe Hervormings Netwerk, where he is on a warning. The likelihood is that here, too, he will follow the pattern of turning tail and proclaiming victory over the persecution he endures in the name of the Lord. He is a true legend in his own mind.
To cut to the chase, in the course of our debates, we discovered that Hermann “cherry – picks.” He accepts those parts of the bible (Old and New Testament) which support his world view and his actions, and he rejects, or, more often, revises or “interprets” the rest. In short, he is the sole arbiter of what is literal and what is figurative. His holy book is thus subject to his whim.
His worldview is shaped by the denialist god – of –the gaps hodge – podge which is Young Earth Creationism, though even here his opportunist vacillation leads to contradictions.
He has asked (in a particularly arrogant manner, I may add) to be supplied with a set of questions he previously evaded on the Rubicon. At the risk of pandering further to his overweening ego, I have decided to do so publicly,
So, for the attention of Hermann Bohmer and his committee, here is a cut and paste of the questions:
These questions are a verbatim copy of the original, but in hindsight, points 7 and 8 should reflect him as offering tacit approval, rather than being non – committal.
?Hermann , I've gleaned some knowledge of your stance on certain issues raised in the bible - what you accept, what you don't accept and where you have not committed.
I'm not into debating whether you hold these positions, as your posts are on record.
Rather, I'd like you to explain why you reject the listed items, and to clarify your position on the areas where you have not committed.
1. Creation - accept.
2. The flood - accept.
3. Divorce - don't accept.
4. Clothing - don't accept.(assumption.)
5.Farming methods - don't accept.(assumption.)
6. Homosexuality - don't accept.
7. Slavery – non committal.
8. Child punishment - non committal.
9. Tattoos - unknown.
10. Adultery - unknown.
Please answer logically and honestly.