Review of “Magda Revealed” Ursula Werner

Score: 86/100 (8.6 out of 10)

Magda Revealed is an ambitious historical speculative fiction novel by Ursula Werner.

It reimagines the events of the biblical gospels and their aftermath with a heavy New Age, feminist leaning, challenging the biblical accounts of events in favor of alternative accounts like those found in the Coptic, apocryphal, non-canonical, and Gnostic gospels. More specifically, it draws heavy inspiration from the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, a fragmentary text presenting Mary Magdalene as a prominent disciple of Jesus, with secret teachings revealed to her.

Despite us having a mostly negative experience reading this book, Magda Revealed does have a few redeeming aspects. It's daring. It tries a few different angles to the story of Jesus and his followers. Furthermore, it creates quite a bit of intrigue and mystery, particularly treating the death of Jesus like a detective mystery exploring who was more or less responsible for it. So, villainous or antagonistic characters like Judas, Herod Antipas, and Pilate get a bit more attention and fleshing-out than they had in The Bible.

Magda Revealed seeks to give us a different perspective on characters like Peter, Paul, Mary Magdalene, and even Jesus, often in a way that seems sharply contrarian in nature. Peter and Paul are actually treated like antagonistic or even villainous forces in the book, fueled by old-fashioned ideals of patriarchy (and being portrayed as misogynists). Meanwhile, Mary Magdalene is portrayed as misunderstood. She is mislabeled by the Christian patriarchs (primarily Peter and Paul) as a “prostitute” when she was actually (according to this book) a healer (or, perhaps, some sort of massage therapist with a pseudo-magical healing touch similar to Celesse's from The Healer Cat by Tuula Pere).

On the surface, it sounds like a fascinating concept. However, what about the execution?

Quite frankly, we found this book to be painfully offensive, especially with the huge reveal/conclusion made at the ending of this book. There was little to no justification for that. It was out of left field. It really made no sense.

We've dipped our feet in gematria (Hebrew numerology). We're pretty darn familiar with Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism). We know the biblical scriptures and quite a bit about the Coptic & Gnostic gospels. All of that just doesn't add up to what this book concludes about Mary Magdalene in the end. There is no factual basis for the profound conclusion this book comes to.

In fact, there is a lot more evidence against the main premises and arguments in this book than for them.

To be blunt, this is not a novel we particularly enjoyed. That does not mean that you won't enjoy it. That does not mean that other readers won't enjoy it—maybe secular readers and those who just want a decent feminist or New Age story without thinking too deeply about it. However, as readers from Abrahamic religious backgrounds who love the source material and have studied the alternative gospels, gematria, and Kabbalah, this was pretty painful. We even asked our office atheist about what they thought about the conclusion in the end, and even they found it offensive. Think about that: even someone who is decidedly non-religious found the ending to be sacrilegious.

However, religious and spiritual sensibilities isn't the only way in which this book suffers. There's a really strange tonal and immersion problem, particularly in the way that Magda/Mary Magdalene talks and reveals information to the audience as if she's a 21st century hipster in a Hallmark movie, not a believable historical figure or someone other than the author.

In other words, in an effort to give Mary Magdalene a voice, the author ironically may have used her as a mouthpiece, overwriting whatever voice the person or character may have had. This ultimately comes across as disingenuous. It's hard to buy into a character who seems to just be an intercom at a drive-thru.

Get this...

Magda describes Yeshua's (Jesus') display of light as resembling “midnight fireworks at Disneyworld.” Disney World opened in the 1970s. Mary Magdalene lived in the 1st century AD. So, how does she magically know what Disney World is?

When discussing Yeshua’s ministry, Magda compares it to "modern televangelists" and jokes about their envy over Yeshua’s door-to-door evangelism methods, almost as if she's aware of what Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons will be doing 2,000 years later.

She compares the walking habits of her time to modern fitness trends, mentioning plastic bracelets tracking steps and jokes about painting toenails with names like "cha-ching cherry."

She discusses being labeled a prostitute by Pope Gregory I (who lived hundreds of years after she did) in a tone filled with modern feminist outrage, referring to him as "not the brightest bulb" and critiquing the patriarchal consolidation of female figures into stereotypes. Wait a minute, how does she know what a light bulb is? They were invented like 1,800+ years later.

She even jokes about the lack of "social media or billboards" to advertise Jesus' events.

She also talks about films like she's seen a bunch of them. Lady, you're from the 1st century AD, when did you find a TV or a movie projector? Was Pilate hiding them in his back room next to his cassette player and credit cards?

Like, read her talking about Wonder Woman: “I felt empowered and magical, like your comic heroine Wonder Woman, the Amazon lady who summons lightning bolts of energy by knocking her golden bracelets against each other.”

Does this sound like Mary Magdalene or anyone who lived 2,000 years ago?

These anachronism—if you want to call them that—are seemingly supposed to make Magda seem cool, hip, in-the-know, and relatable. They're supposed to make the characters and story seem more modern. It's supposed to be entertaining, like those cutaways in The Office or Deadpool breaking the fourth wall and telling us, “You must be wondering how I got in this situation...”

Instead, these anachronisms just completely ruin the immersion, in our opinion. Imagine reading a book about Julius Caesar and he starts telling you about thermonuclear weapons, drones, iPhones, and Amazon. Wouldn't that just seem weird and out of place?

The only way in which this would work is if Mary Magdalene were immortal and omniscient. Sorry, we hate to break it to you, but she's not. She's dead and awaiting the resurrection just like everyone not named Jesus, Enoch, and possibly Elijah. Mary Magdalene is not a vampire. She's not God. She's not the Messiah either. If she were, she would have fulfilled the Isaiah 53 prophecy:

“...he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed.”

She also:

- Was born in Magdala and not in Bethlehem, King David's town, as the prophecy of the Messiah requires. We see no evidence in the book that she's descended from David or his line.

- She didn't die, defeat death, and rise from the dead

- She didn't start a universal faith (the largest religion in the world)

And, you could argue: “The Gospel of John appears to have been altered by a scribe” or “The Gospel of Mary Magdalene exists.” Well—putting aside the fact that The Gospel of Mary Magdalene is 100% not a first-hand account of events as it was written well over a hundred years after the described events by a different individual (and the surviving fragments we have are from 3rd century Coptic manuscripts, not originals)—where in The Gospel of Mary Magdalene or even the allegedly-altered Gospel of John does it say that Mary Magdalene is the Messiah? Where?

Even in the parts that are alleged to have been altered, what support is there for that claim?

There are none.

There is no precedence to support that claim.

Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be a book crafted with a genuine love for a religion that means a lot to billions of people around the globe. It reads more like an attempt to use the source material to further a personal bias and agenda, which we found troubling. The narrative often reads as a projection of the author’s views rather than an authentic reinterpretation of historical facts or religious traditions. This really weakens the credibility of the arguments in this book.

Here are some of the passages in the book that feel like the author using these sacred characters/historical figures as mouthpieces for their own agenda and message:

- Jesus advocating for “many paths to truths”:

“Yeshua would never have excluded anyone who wanted to follow Him. Nor would he have insisted that there was only one way to believe. He knew... there were many paths to the truth.”

This directly conflicts with John 14:6- "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

- Jesus advocating "radical equality":

“Everyone on Earth is equal. No one is better or worse than anyone else.”

While Jesus' teachings emphasized love and humility, the idea of "radical equality" as described in this book leans heavily on modern egalitarian concepts rather than first-century Jewish or Christian teachings.

Jesus literally said that “it is the one who is least among you all who is the greatest” (Luke 9:48).

- Reference to environmental issues:

“Yeshua says the truth will make a difference. This is our last chance... pointing to your greenhouse gases and melting glaciers.”

This is anachronistic, projecting modern environmental concerns onto a first-century figure. Doesn't that quote just make you cringe? Like, can you imagine Mary Magdalene or Jesus actually talking about climate change or global warming? Like, seriously. We had to read that twice. Then, we needed to wash our faces and read that again.

There are even lines claiming that Jesus doesn't understand or know what is happening around him or about prophecy. There's even a line that goes something like: “Just because I'm dead doesn't mean I can see the future” (attributed to Yeshua/Jesus). Wait a minute... so you're implying that Jesus, a Jewish man raised as a Jew in a rigidly Jewish society, wouldn't know about any of the future predictions made in Old Testament works like the Book of Daniel? Seriously. We're supposed to believe that?

But Mary Magdalene can know all about light bulbs, Wonder Woman, Disney, and climate change.
Of course.

You can definitely incorporate aspects of a religion into your work in a way that still shows respect and regard for it. C.S. Lewis did it with Christian references in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. Jeffrey Pears did it with The Adamantine Jewel, which drew heavily on Tibetan Buddhism.

There's a difference between using religious beliefs and traditions in a tactful manner, then completely warping them to fit a personal agenda or message. This book seems to be the latter. And it just seems so forced, heavy-handed, and didactic. It doesn't fit. It doesn't seem to respect the source material—material that means so much to billions of people around the globe.

And that's not even talking about the edgy, romantic aspect of this novel between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, which is sure to upset a large portion of the audience. However, strangely enough, this really got overshadowed by the other things that upset and offended us, which is why we're mentioning it last.

A shipping of Jesus and Mary Magdalene really isn't that groundbreaking of an idea. It was already a plot feature in The Da Vinci Code, Jesus Christ Superstar, and The Last Temptation of Christ, all very well-known works of fiction.

All of that is based on speculation and evidence that has since been debunked or outright exposed as a hoax.

Let's cut to the chase:

The main argument for a Jesus-Mary Magdalene pairing comes from a Coptic gospel that has been called “The Gospel of Jesus' Wife.” It is a fragmentary text written in Coptic that includes the phrase: “Jesus said to them, 'My wife...'” This was touted as evidence of Jesus having a wife, possibly Mary Magdalene. It was brought to the public's attention in 2012 via a Harvard professor named Karen King, having learned of the fragment via a then-anonymous artifacts collector who was later discovered to be Walter Fritz, a fraudster.

In 2016, scholars determined that the text was a modern forgery. The “collector” who provided the fragment, Fritz, was discovered to have fabricated credentials (including a fake Master's in Egyptology degree) and had links to other questionable artifacts. He also purchased the domain name “GospelofJesusWife.com” suggesting premeditation to market the artifact.

Radiocarbon dating was performed on the fragment, finding the papyrus to possibly date to the 7th to 8th century AD (seven or more centuries after the life of Jesus & Mary Magdalene), but the ink was strongly believed by the experts who analyzed it to have been added much more recently.

Even Karen King, the Harvard professor who initially promoted the text, acknowledged it was no longer credible.

So, the evidence against this premise is overwhelming.

Anyway, so what about this book just being a work of fiction and being read as such?

Well, beside the immersion issues we talked about earlier, this book does have some redeeming qualities. Like we alluded to, the murder-mystery aspect of this book is intriguing. Magda herself is, at least, a kind, caring, loving, and devoted character.

Something particularly intriguing is how the motivations of the antagonists are explored, especially Judas, Pilate, and Herod Antipas. In fact, one of our favorite scenes in this book is when Judas is clearly trying to tempt fate by getting Jesus persecuted and killed. He wants to see Jesus perform a great miracle in the sight of the Roman overlords. The look and feeling of shock that Magda feels in that moment is palpable, and we could feel it through the page.

The writing is also pretty good, aside from the anachronisms. We get a great yet somewhat ironic quote: “Those who are dishonest in little are dishonest in much.” Considering what we said about Walter Fritz, that speaks volumes.

We also get uses of alliteration like:

“We laughed together, a sound that carried us over the sea of seriousness that so often surrounded us.”

This book had a lot of potential. It would probably have scored higher if the ending/conclusion weren't what it was and if the anachronisms were removed or fixed to be more immersive.

This has been one of the most difficult reviews we've ever had to write.

You can check it out on Amazon if you're curious!