Explaining the previous post

A joke isn't so funny anymore once you have to explain it, but it seems from many of the comments on the previous post that I actually do have to explain it. The point of the previous post was this: the fact that Biblical Studies (DH etc) was able to ask all sorts of questions that hadn't been asked before in the Jewish world, and the fact that it is able to point out new intepretations and theories (even some non kefiradick ones), to the point that even fundies like Gil sit up and take notice and need to respond (albeit very lamely), yet these are just 'academics' whereas we've been learning the Torah in depth for three thousand years, yet we don't really have good alternative answers to any of this (except to say they're all just biased), tells you something. What does it tell you? Some people commented it tells you that the frum world doesn't really care about the DH, or is just ignorant. While of course that's true, that wasn't my point at all. What it tells you is that 3,000 years of learning Torah in depth will only produce bogus 'peshatim' if your fundamentally assumptions (e.g. Kugels 4 assumptions) are entirely flawed. And that Gil's beliefs that the traditional meforshim (and Chazal etc) got it all (or mostly)right (and were Gedolei Mesorah and Torah) is clearly bunk - and we have clear proof of that - 3,000 years of study produces incorrect results because the fundamental assumptions were entirely wrong, and some outsiders can come in armed with nothing much more than some different assumptions, and turn everything on its head. That process alone speaks volumes. And I was going to make that point explicitly, but then I thought it would be funnier to do it in a kind of chareidi style satire. And my line about MO dealing with evolution was of course satire. Duh.