In the other thread, there are some “ad hominem” arguments about fundamentalists. I don’t side with them or against them – I probably don’t know enough to jump into that sort of a discussion.
I would like to know, myself, where Catholic scholars anytime in the church history, have refuted even the most obvious problems in scripture, such as the details surrounding the Resurrection in the four gospels. It seems you’d end up with a length book itself, going verse by verse, to explain objections that have been put forth against it.
I’ve read Jewish commentaries in the last couple years and they review the thoughts about real and perceived problems in scripture, but they don’t deny that these problems exist.
For example, in one place there is a directive that the Passover lamb be boiled and in another place it says that the lamb is to be cooked (roasted). Their general approach is to observe all the things that happen and are said in scripture, and to try to harmonize them, no matter what the difficulty. Sometimes they just leave them standing for later analysis.
The Jewish Publication Society has published at least two books in the last couple years that deal with this subject. One is The Divine Symphony which treats the various voices and opinions in scripture, as it says, as a symphony. Another book has a title something like Subversive Sequels in the [Jewish] Bible. The latter book is not merely shining a light on what might superficially be called a contradiction, but is showing that there is a development of thought in scripture, where something said earlier is revised, to put it one way.
One of the curiosities (or, a subversive sequel) occurs in Genesis. Adam is expelled from Eden and condemned to make a living from the soil. But, in the next generation, Abel comes along and he is a herder of animals.
