There are those who argue that perhaps we should teach that the Torah is allegorical for the purposes of kiruv. Wouldn’t a non-affiliated Jew be more receptive to the Torah if he didn’t have to believe in a worldwide flood? This is not a new approach, and Rabbi Meiselman felt that this was the wrong approach.
This same argument was made in the past when Torah was confronted by a challenge from a different culture and/or discipline. Some felt that Torah is in an intellectually inferior position when confronting modern intellectual theories and discussion. Hence, these people developed a need to reinterpret Torah concepts to fit an intellectual worldview to which they accorded respect and veneration. This is being done today to accommodate modern academia.
For years, people looked the other way when kiruv workers and others expounded theories about Torah and science that were unacceptable to the world of talmidei chachamim. Some looked away because they did not want to interfere with otherwise important work. Some were not sufficiently sophisticated in the various disciplines to navigate properly and give the proper Torah response. However, this silence should not be interpreted as acquiescence or agreement to these positions. Some talmidei chachamim who had not sufficiently understood these areas and were expert elsewhere may even have consented. What changed recently is the attempt by some contemporary authors to make these accommodating theories mainstream. While in the past some have looked the other way, this can now no longer be continued. Torah can defend itself. The most potent kiruv tool is to expose the uninitiated to the depth and sweep of authentic Torah.