text: <<Biblical scholarship values the older witness more than that of later witness, and original witness more than edited witnesses.>>
  Really? All scholars? In every instance? Biblical scholarship is more sophisticated and nuanced than you allow here.
  You seem to be devaluing the biblical witness about the role of women in announcing the Resurrection. The absence of women in Paul and Mk is not sufficient reason to do that. The doubt of the apostles concerning their reports reflects the deficit of the apostles' faith, not the veracity of the women's reports.
  Neither Jn nor Mk reports the birth of Jesus. Mt and Lk both report it, but disagree on the details. The absence of infancy narratives in Jn and Mk would not be advanced to argue against the fact of Jesus' birth.
  Jesus' absolute prohibition on divorce (Mk) is modified by an exception (Mt) and privileges (Paul and Peter.) The church reflects on the entire biblical witness and derives teaching and pastoral practice from the whole of it.