There are no contradictions in the Bible

"If he were omniscient, then why did he need to come down to see the tower in the first place if he knew what it was like (which would follow on the premise that he is omniscient). If the tower reached heaven, did he need to come a little closer to see it? No, it doesn't make any sense. If you are to posit that he is omniscient then it is incumbent upon you to show that there are no major contradictions surrounding his supposed omniscience, but clearly there are some." You ignored what i said about God taking manifestations. "Your reply to my presentation of when Jesus was crucified in the gospels of Luke and Mark, is not an adequate response as to why the emphasizes are so completely different in these two gospels. What do you mean when you say they are different events? They are the same events - Jesus crucifixion - portraying Jesus in two diametrically opposite state of minds. They don't fit together. How do you reckon he went from being absolute freaked out in Mark's gospel to being in a state of serenity while giving comfort to other people in Luke's gospel? Do you posit that the son of God has an extraordinary labile psyche?" Each Gospel speaks of the life of Jesus, but different events and retellings. Some events are omitted in some gospels. "Mathew 28:2,5. "Suddenly there was a great earthquake! For an angel of the Lord came down from heaven... Then the angel spoke to the women... ". The word "suddenly " followed by a description of what takes place at the tomb after his descent from heaven, suggests that this is an instantaneous event that the women are witnessing (then otherwise, how could we have possibly known all these specific details in such great detail). if it were, as you posit, that the women were not present at the time when the stone was rolled away, then it wouldn't make any sense to write "then the angel spoke to the women" without mentioning that some time passes by before they actually arrived at the tomb. Then it should have said "when they arrived at the tomb the angel spoke to them". I'll grant you that the story does not include much detail, but as far as what is discernible, it is much more logical to conclude that the event took place with the women being present to witness it." I don't know what version your reading, but the New King James version doesn't say "suddenly." Matt. 28:1-8 "Now after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week began to dawn, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb. 2 And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door,[a] and sat on it. 3 His countenance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. 4 And the guards shook for fear of him, and became like dead men. 5 But the angel answered and said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here; for He is risen, as He said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7 And go quickly and tell His disciples that He is risen from the dead, and indeed He is going before you into Galilee; there you will see Him. Behold, I have told you." 8 So they went out quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to bring His disciples word." "When they arrived at the tomb In Mark's gospel they asked "Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?". Why on earth would they ask each other something like that if there were an earthquake that had rolled away the stone just before they got there?" Your not being specific with your verses, so i don't really understand your point. "True, John doesn't say that Mary Magdalene went alone. If it were the case, that the purpose was to delineate the story from Mary Magdalene's perspective alone, then it would follow - if you posit that all the other accounts are both accurate representations of what took place and are reconcilable with each other - that the other accounts in the other gospels (in which the number of witnesses at the tomb differed from in each account) have chosen to focus on the perspectives of different persons for different reasons, maybe to accentuate certain aspects of the story, one could assume." Then it's reconciled. "If we, for the sake of argument, assume that John's gospel wanted to put emphasize on the meeting between Mary Magdalene and Jesus - since that is, undoubtedly, the most significant event in the story - then why was it important to mention that she went alone to the tomb? All that has accomplished is to have created even more confusion than has already been rendered by the three other conflicting gospels. Why didn't she enter the tomb (as in Mark and Luke) and, thus, didn't meet any angel inside the tomb whom - according to the other gospels - would have told her what had happened with Jesus? Since she didn't have a clue as to how the body had gone missing, she tells Simon Peter and the other disciple (and why didn't she meet the other disciples as was told in Luke and Matthew?) that the body had been STOLEN." John wanted to focus on her perspective. "For this reason she was crying outside the tomb in John 20:11 because she thought that someone had stolen the body? It was not until Jesus appeared to her and explained to her what had happened (John 20:11-13) that she managed to pull herself together to go down to explain to the disciples what had happened to Jesus and to instruct them were to meet him. However, in Mark 16:9, she has a personal encounter with the resurrected Jesus and there is no record of any emotional response at all (probably because she had already been told by the angels that he had risen from the dead.) How, then, can the encounter in Mark 16:9 be the same as in John 20:11-13 when, in fact, she knew that Jesus had resurrected in Mark's account while she was oblivious about this fact in John's gospel?" "what would be the point of given that Joanna and Salome doesn't actually say or do anything that is at all relevant to the story?" That sounds like a rhetorical question. "Matthew 28:8 is not reconcilable with Mark 16:8. "The women fled from the tomb, trembling and bewildered, and they said nothing to anyone because they were too frightened." is not equal to: "The women ran quickly from the tomb. They were very frightened but also filled with great joy, and they rushed to give the disciples the angel"s message." They were frightened but their joy was in the fact that Jesus resurrected from the dead. "However, in Luke he first meets with two of his followers, who later told the other disciples that they had seen Jesus face to face. At precisely that moment Jesus appears before all the disciples (In Jerusalem we can infer since that was where the followers were heading). However, Luke 24:37 describes their reaction as: "But the whole group was startled and frightened, thinking they were seeing a ghost!" To which Jesus responds "Why are you frightened?" he asked. "Why are your hearts filled with doubt?" Like i said, your not being specific with your verses, so i can't really respond accurately. I explained that it was both but at different times.