Wolf:
“On the broader argument which you mention, however, I still maintain my point… that a statement made in contravention to an open gemara* is not necessarily apikorsus. Stating that 2+2=7 is not apikorsus (despite the fact that it goes against an open gemara). It’s just plain wrong, period. Being incorrect != stating apikorsus.”
I never said disagreeing with a Gemara constitutes apikorsus. I don’t believe the OP did either. We both are simply referring to the Gemara in Sanhedrin as per above post that calls somebody that says ‘ Mai Ahanu lan Rabanan’ an Apikorus.
“In addition, I find your attitude disturbing. Your advocating the complete abandomnent of mitzvos for someone who disagrees with an open gemara (whether they are an apikorus or not) is simply wrong.
Obviously I would not advocate that anybody abandons Torah and Mitzvos. My sentiments were just a stark way of stating that as believing orthodox Jews you cannot pick and choose which Chazal you agree with and which you don’t like the Reform and Conservative do.
“Please cite me where an apikorus is no longer obligated to do mitzvos (that you so casually tell him not to do so anymore)”
Ok, here are 2 similar examples of this way of stating things in Tanach:
1) Yehoshua Perek 24 – the words of Yehoshua – ‘ And if you do not see fit to serve Hashem, choose for yourselves today who you will serve, either Hashem that your fathers over the river served, or the gods of the Emori in whose land you are dwelling, while I and my household will serve Hashem’
2)Melachim 1 Perek 18 – the words of Eliyahu – ‘ How long will you jump between 2 opinions? If Hashem is the G-d follow Him and if the Baal, follow him.’