Religion or Science - How do they compare?

One would expect that the accounts of the Resurrection would be pretty accurate, but there are significant differences. In Mark the women are afraid and tell no one; in Matthew they meet Jesus while running to tell the disciples; in Luke they inexplicably neglect to mention the highly significant fact of meeting Jesus, so even by the evening the ones going to Emmaus do not know, though they know of angels at the tomb; and in John Mary meets Jesus in the garden after seeing the disciples.The late additions to Mark only add to the contradictions.

Agreed. I was not aiming for completeness. It is said that the accounts are different because eyewitnesses to an event often give differing accounts. But at least two of the Gospel writers were not eyewitnesses - probably none were - and would the women have told of the empty tomb and angels and omitted the rather salient fact of seeing Jesus? Either Matthew or Luke (or both) has to be wrong.The birth accounts only agree on the parents and birth-place. They don't even agree on the time of birth, or the reason and time for going to Nazareth.