Only your inerrantist agenda could induce this absurd statement. Mark says, "The women said nothing to ANYONE, for they were afraid," and then Mark's Gospel ends. What is it about the all-inclusive term "anyone" that you don't understand? It obviously includes the disciples, especially since the Gospel ends there. No one would expect the women to delay their race to the disciples to explain to perfect strangers passing by what they have just heard. So no academic commentary on Mark even entertains such a trivial suggestion!
Derf: "Bit it introduces a more serious contradiction...that Matthew's gospel has inaccuracies. As long as you're willing to say that one or more of the gospels has inaccurate information, you are admitting that some of the gospel accounts are not trustworthy, in which case there's no need to iron out inconsistencies."
Duh! In other words, find one error and you can conclude the Resurrection never happened! Besides, Matthew and Luke report angels at the tomb greeting the women on their arrival. That already contradicts John in which the women find the tomb empty. The original circulation of detached resurrection stories in oral tradition inviters honest seekers who believe in the Resurrection to search for ways to integrate these stories into a credible sequence.
The whole reason people try to find inconsistencies is because they want to discredit the story of Jesus's death and resurrection. You're doing that job for them
The issue is not whether the Gospels are inerrant, but (1) the extent to which the Gospels are credible witnesses and (2) the extent to which they support Paul's list of appearances in 1 Cor. 15, which we know from Galatians Paul confirmed with the eyewitnesses. Bibliolatry is the enemy of honest and open inquiry into the Truth, especially the Truth of the Resurrection.
