Perhaps this has something to do with it...
Posted on 04/08/2006 6:48:37 PM PDT by SirLinksalot
Da Vinci film faces ban in Korea
A religious group in Korea has applied for a provisional injunction to stop the release of the movie version of the novel The Da Vinci Code.
The Christian Council of Korea (CCK) filed its application in Seoul against the film's distributor Sony Pictures, according to Screen International.
Dan Brown's bestselling book suggests Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a child.
CCK said the film was "an insult and defamation" of the holiness of Jesus Christ and the Bible.
The group added that they were "concerned about the damage that would be caused to individuals' faith" because of the film's content.
The film stars Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou and is directed by Ron Howard.
It is currently scheduled to open in Korea next month after its Cannes world premiere on 17 May.
Until Friday, the film was threatened with not opening at all as the publisher's of Brown's book were being sued for breach of copyright of an earlier book.
But the judge at London's High Court ruled that Brown had not copied the "central theme" of the book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail written by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh.
Mr Justice Peter Smith, said The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail did not have a central theme in the way its authors suggested.
"It was an artificial creation for the purposes of the litigation working back from the Da Vinci Code," he ruled.
Both books explore the theory that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a child and the bloodline survives to this day.
The Da Vinci Code is still in the UK top 10 book sales chart, while The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail is back in the top 40 thanks to the controversy.
1) It will only generate more curiosity and thus, more viewers.
2) The best way to fight falsehood is not censorship but to show the TRUTH.
I wonder what this group is afraid of ....The truth is on their side.
it's fiction
bump
and so do dozens of other books pre-Brown - and for hundreds of years. There are dozens in print today.
IN addition, Mary Magdalene has been painted more than any other person other than Jesus - her story is hidden in plain sight in the art of the Masters - who, as did writers, during the Inquisition years in particular, if they didn't want to be marshmallowed on the stake, told their story in allegory.
But Brown wrote his book as fiction - and as such, entwines fact with fiction. But he can hardly be credited with the theory that Jesus and MM were married... Europe, esp France, Germany and England abound in legends and festivals of Mary Magdalene and the Royal bloodline - and many of the great Cathedrals in Europe were originally dedicated to "Our Lady" Mary Magdalene.
Like or not, this is hardly a new theory or story. Good grief, it isn't like one has to travel the world to research anymore - The Internet dumps the libraries and museums of the world in our laps at home.
Brown and Random House won, by the way. As the judge said: "You can't steal ideas or facts."
Do a little research - Dan Brown was first with this theory like Columbus was first (after a dozen others) to discover America.
Here's one that will frost some folks - a church window in Europe - wont tell you where - do the research :O) 
A Christian has no business seeing this movie or contributing money to it's success. The drive-by media is ecstatic about it though..they are going to hype it even more than the hyped the homo sheepherder movie.
Do you have any idea as to how little sense that makes?
I am an artist and a writer have studied this for decades - have you?
And a few years later, another ancestor was hauled in, by the Church of England, for hiding a Catholic priests - and so it goes
True. The Gnostic gospels of the 2nd, and 3rd centuries A.D. were written by enemies of Christianity to try to destroy it. And one of the Gnostic gospels did mention the marriage. However,none of the Gnostic gospels hold up under scrutiny otherwise the modern-day enemies of the Christianity would be having a field day with them.
They have recently attempted to foist the gospel of Judas on us but somehow the logic in that scenario escapes me: Namely, Jesus asked Judas to betray him so that Jesus would be scourged and crucified, then Judas loyally followed through and hanged himself in the potters field as prophesied.
I for one will stick with the account given in Matthew, Luke, John, and Mark.
"Mary Magdalele has been painted more than any other person other than Jesus Christ." It seems that you are confusing Mary Magdalene with Mary, the mother of Jesus, who has been painted more than any person other than Jesus Christ. The Dan Brown novel is based on a fraud perpetrated in France that has been fully exposed.
So what if it didn't? Either you believe in God, or you don't.
I believe in God, and I also believe that Mary M married Jesus. What's the big deal?
Are folks so stuck on worhipping a man that a whole industry is based on, that they can't just let it go and worship God?
This medieval interpretation has a medieval motive. The purpose was to empower the monarchies at the expense of the Church. You must know who the Masters painted for. Medieval artists served their patrons.
Most likely it was a severely faulty translation, if this in fact happened. What was your ancentor's name, where did he live, and version of the Bible was it?
which is exactly why they put messages in with certain colors denoting certain people, specific flowers denoting others , etc...They painted to earn a living, but the Medicis and other such patrons didn't know the meanings - they only 'saw' the painting
I believe in God, and I also believe that Mary M married Jesus. What's the big deal?
Are folks so stuck on worhipping a man that a whole industry is based on, that they can't just let it go and worship God?
I have no way of knowing what faith you are but if you claim Christianity this is very pertinent to your questions:
John 14:6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 1 Corinthians 15:12-20 - Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; 14and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is empty, and your faith also is empty. 15Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we witnessed against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. 16For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; 17and if Christ has not been raised your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men. 20But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. When we turn to the New Testament, we find the full light of the truth of this doctrine. First, we find Christ and his resurrection. On the third day, he rose again from the dead. You can't be a Christian and deny that. Some do call themselves Christians and deny it. But the fact is so important that God himself says: "If Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins" (1 Cor. 15:17). The Holy Spirit says through the apostle that if Christ really wasn't raised from the dead, there is no salvation and there is no Christian religion.
Forgot to put the paragraphs in. Most profuse apologies!
the "official" Bibles were kept in Latin to make it hard for the laymen to read. The first English translation, that circulated widely for 150 years - all hand written and about 170 copies still exist - was by John Wycliff- who wrote it in the late 1300's "to put the Bible in the hands of the common people."
The first printed English version was by Gutenberg in 1455, from the Vulgate translation of about 400 A.D.
The next printed English version was by William Tyndale in 1536 - which became the basis for the King James version, printed in 1611.
Here's a bit of history for you - from the reign of Bloody Mary: "Catholic faith as the only lawful religion in England. Mary took the reestablishment of Catholicism seriously - indeed, hundreds of Protestants were hanged or burned to death - men, women and children - fifty-four in Kent alone. Even the dead were dug up, solemnly placed on trial,convicted of heresy, and burned at the stake. The leaders of the Protestant reform fled to the Continent,"
she, fortunately, only reigned 5 years before Elizabeth 1 lopped off her head in 1558? So I imagine that John Bradford would have had access to any of the translation before the King James...The leaders of the Protestant reform included his descendent, one of my 7th great-great grandfathers, Governor William Bradford, who, as a young boy, (his father long dead) was taken in, when his family objected to his association with the reformers at Scrooby Manor, by Elder William Brewster, Post Master and Bailiff of the manor.
They were both jailed many times, and later, Brewster - who published (the one that got him in the most trouble was "The Perth Assembly") and wrote treatises against the crown, was hunted for years from Holland to England and back again by the Crown who had a price on his head as a 'seditinist' - and when he came from Holland to embark on the Mayflower for New England, he had to be smuggled aboard to avoid capture. - well, enough - you had to ask ;o)
Amen - and I still believe that Jesus is the Christ - The question of whether He was married or not was never a problem until 3 or 4 hundred years later when the powers that be wanted to firmly establish the patriarchal system - and push women back behind the fence.
They decided to make Mary Magdalene out to be the harlot - even though there is NO WHERE in the Bible to support it. (They have finally apologized for this - in what, 1957 or thereabouts?)
It was Jewish custom for Jewish men to be married and law for rabbis to be...Jesus followed Jewish custom - I find it more disturbing that people react in horror, as something sacrilegious, to the thought that Jesus might have been married = as if marriage and human love were abhorrent.
I find it comforting and in no way diminishes His mission, His life, His message.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.