Dear Joseph,
I already told you several times that it appears there is a conflict in the events with Mary Magdalene because you don't realize there were three different Mary Magdalenes and that the gospels were simply covering each incident since these three Marys were well-known in the context of that small community. So the error is not Biblical but in lack of understanding how the gospels were written to include hidden facts, often by parallel accounts, so that only when paying strict attention to the details do you find hidden references.
Another critical example of this, of how you must harmonize parallel events that seem to hide specific facts was the report that Peter would deny Christ 3 times before a rooster crowed once and before a rooster crowed twice. But that is precisely what a close comparison of the gospels tell us. That is, when Peter was claiming he would not deny Jesus, Jesus told him he would deny him that very night before a cock crowd once. Peter must have insisted that was not true at which point Jesus told him additionally, he would then deny him another three times again before a cock crowed twice, which is a very short period of time. Thus when you combine the gospel accounts you realize Jesus is talking about two times when Peter would deny Jesus at least three times.
When you then closely compare the accounts, however, you get the same sense of confusion as you might with the Mary Magdalenes which seem to give similar, parallel, but technically contradictory accounts. In the case of the denials, it shows where Peter denied Jesus specifically to various men and women starting with when he first entered the house of the high priest, he had to deny Jesus just to get into the place. He denied him another 3 times right up to the point where the high priest's servant identified him and Jesus was standing right there looking at him in the courtyard at which point a cock crowed once the first time. Peter then recalled this and felt bad and immediately began to rush outside. But the homes back there had several areas of hallways and porches and a "gate house" that one had to go through before actually getting outside, so that as he left the courtyard and moved into various passageways to leave where other groups of persons were standing around, a girl was following him and trying to claim he was one of the disciples which necessitated Peter continually denying Jesus as he worked his way through the crowd of people there trying to get outside. The result was that it took him as long to get outside as it would for a cock to crow a second time, but by now, Peter had again denied Jesus in rapid succession another three times.
That's the beauty of the literary nature of the gospels. It hides references via similarly parallel accounts which by the casual reader one misses the fine points or are thrown off by this literary complexity. As Jesus told his disciples, though, he often spoke in parables so that those on the outside would not understand what he was talking about but his own followers would understand the application of secret meanings.
The same thing is going on with the three Mary Magdalenes. That is, the Bible simply implies there are three Mary Magdalenes, all coming to the tomb at different times and different circumstances but without any of the gospel writers just coming right out and saying, "Oh by the way, there were three Marys who called themselves Magdalene who were in the personal attendance of Jesus." Had that statement been there, then all the Christian Bible scholars would be busy matching up which Mary came when.
But as it is, we find persons like yourself, without the prophetic or spiritual background attempting to criticize a spiritual writing without the expertise or competence needed to do so, in addition to your own biases, resulting in your rather embarrassing error with respect to this account.
Now you can choose what you wish to believe regarding these accounts, but please note that I have given you a response that solves the issue. That is, there is no conflict if there were three Mary Magdalenes, which is not impossible with so many Marys being such a common name in that culture. There is no conflict in that case.
Your not fully understanding that the gospels use duplicate almost parallel accounts as part of it's "style" in hiding secrets is something you've missed.
But I'll give you a hint. When you find a parallel account, it's reasonable to presume that in one of the accounts is some secret detail that is being hidden. The gospels writers, true to ther master, did want to keep certain thing to themselves while confounding the gentile outsiders who culturally tended to expect the overstatement in logical order, whether correct or not, whereas the Jewish culture was just the opposite, shunning any redundancy or overstatement, expecting the "intellectual" listener to figure out by the bacground of two sometimes opposing statements a hidden message.
So anyway, just wanted to say the Biblical spiritualists and prophets are not swayed by this particular criticism and are only laughing at your lack of competence in criticizing the gospel writers or understanding what is really going on.
But, if it is any consolation to you, the confusion you're experiencing was intentional. The gospel writers could have made it simpler for the unbelievers but instead they put "stumbling blocks" in their writings to trip you up, which apparently is still working even though I've explained to you the hidden meaning of these references.
So, all I can do is laugh and keep on believing...that's the end of it.
Have a nice day, Joseph. I suggest you try to criticize another literary work and leave the Bible to us prophets (smile).
L.G.