However, given your understanding of the Chazon Ish and given the choice between the Netziv and the Chazon Ish, most of the current Yeshivah world will opt for the Chazon Ish. Hence my comments.

On a side note, I have heard that the interpretation of the Chazon Ish is that there are NO apikorsim today, precisely, because we don’t know when we provided the appropriate chinuch, love and support.

“The Tanna precisely explains which apikorus we are allowed and instructed to hate – those who “pronounce Your Name for wicked schemes,” i.e. [arguing] G-d has abandoned the world; there is no Judge and no judgment. ”

The more well-known Netziv in the preface to Bereshis is also relevant to tolerance among different groups vis-à-vis the Charedi world. The Netziv, there, writes that :

A) Hashem can not tolerate even tzaddikim, who believe that others with slightly different way of life are apikorsim, and that this was a problem in the Bayis Sheini era.

B)the Avos were referred to as “Yesharim”, upright, because even when they interacted with those whose conduct they abhorred, they still had a concern for them, as they were part of Hashem’s world.

Within Orthodoxy, there are groups who share similar Torah values with the charedi world. Even within the charedi world there are those who are more insular, and some who are less so. If all of these three groups do not endeavor to see what they have in common as far as Avodas Hashem and confer some degree of legitimacy on each other’s path, then this would appears to be an application of tzadikim suspecting that the next person is an apikores.

On the other hand, there are ideologies both within and without Orthodoxy concerning which Torah Jews can not simply say “elu v’elu”, and minimize the differences. Here, it is relevant the second part of the Netziv, that “yashrus” means having a certain decency in relating to even those whose ideology one feels is beyond the pale. It is also within the charedi world’s self-interest to bear this Netziv in mind, because experience has shown that today, attacks which are perceived as intemperate and overly-polemical, often are taken the wrong way and are not very productive.

However, not all apikorsim are trolls. Apikorsut is defined by beliefs, not my a lack of civility.

Bob (#2) We spoke to several halachic figures when we started up CC. The bottom line was that we do not publish direct attacks on foundations of faith. Anything else can get a fair hearing so that the flaws and deficiencies in certain other points of view can be exposed. Most of the time, the process works well. I’m not sure that anyone is converted to the cause, but it usually becomes apparent that the certainty of other positions is in no way a sign of certitude. (Yes, in the process weaknesses in our own thinking are sometimes exposed, but the assumption is that blog readers are living a somewhat more open lifestyle, and can live with questions.)

B. (#3) - I hope that you are wrong. Many people listen to two (or more) sides of an issue, even regarding Torah matters, both in halacha and in deos (weltanschauung). Some issues are beyond an individual’s own competence, and must be brought to someone higher up on the pecking order. Other issues, however - especially in Litvishe circles, among people who have considerable background in learning - we do our own research, and come to our own conclusions. I will bet that there are many people out there who, if faced with two definitions of a halachic construct, one from the Netziv and the other from the neighbor of the brother-in-law of the gabbai of the Minchas Pinchas, who is pretty sure he heard him say something under his breath while walking out of the Boro Park Mikvah, will opt for the Netziv.

Steve (#8) -
I dunno. But do look at the Chazon Ish, not too far down from the place I cited, where he argues that halachically, a kofer must reject the entirety of the proper Jewish life style. If kefirah in Torah She-B’al Peh (the Oral Law) - a pretty important principle, I would think - would be sufficient to make one a kofer, then the avodah in the Second Temple would have been invalid for the decades that it was performed by Saducee kohanim, who completely rejected the Oral Law. ע”ש

Trolling is pretty common. The many doctrinaire trollers will never be persuaded by a mere blog to give Judaism a fair hearing.

However, if you want to do kiruv, which is one of the purposes of Project Genesis, those are the Jews you need to discuss things with. If you start the discussion with: “I’ll talk to you and tell you what I think, as long as you won’t try to convince me that you are right”, you’ll get nowhere. I assume that is the reason the moderators allow us apikorsim to post here.

I am one of those apikorsim. I am also a lot more observant than I was when I started discussing things on forums.torah.org and then here. I guess that means the moderators know what they are doing .

For those that don’t realize it, I am being sarcastic. But, still, does it make a difference? Will this article change anyones opinion? I think not!