So, this gospel really confused me because it was just talking for like a larger time frame that about the actual texts. It honestly frustrated me because by the time I had gotten to the text/important part of the story than I was already done with reading it. I understand getting the context is import I wish it would’ve either sped up the process or worked through it quicker. I also liked how it talked about women, shocker as the Gospel is named “Mary of Magdala”. I think its important to talk about how this isn’t really credible but it could be, we don’t really know when, how or who wrote this but I think its cool that people believe it to be Mary. Like I brought up in class I do think she gets a bad reputation, I mean i’m not religious, this much is very clear, but I think since she is the “other Mary” in the Bible she has to be bad, as many people where threatened by the idea of women being impressive or strong. I think it’s also important to note that this text is translated by 3 whole different languages and some even translated twice. This is more impactful for the texts than the actual finding of it I would argue. As the translations could have warped the texts and only like two people in the world would know it wasn’t supposed to say that. Like I don’t know about everyone else’s language knowledge but I would trust someone if they said they could translate something over my own knowledge; especially a language that has been dead or non-popular for years. Mary of Magdala was a great idea starter for this class but I do wish it was something that you didn’t need to have a religious knowledge for, as I feel it starts us with a disadvantage.