Hi, Hajnalcsillag,
This is basically an incorrect statement.
There is more statements in the Gospels about Jesus having brothers and sisters than there are about eating flesh and drinking blood.
If your statement was to identify focus or emphasis on two unrelated topics (Real Presence vs Relatives of Jesus) let’s just take a look at this idea and how it was developed by God throught the Inspired Writers. The following few references are just a small sample of what can be given the Scripturally support the Real Presence. (If you are interested, here is a link that may be helpful and that I used as and edited as a reference:
scripturecatholic.com/the_eucharist.html )
For Real Presence there are the following statments in the NT:
1.) John 6:4,11-14 - on the eve of the Passover, Jesus performs the miracle of multiplying the loaves. This was prophesied in the Old Testament (e.g., 2 Kings4:43), and foreshadows the infinite heavenly bread which is Him.
2.) Matt. 14:19, 15:36; Mark 6:41, 8:6; Luke 9:16 - these passages are additional accounts of the multiplication miracles. This points to the Eucharist.
3.) Matt. 16:12 - in this verse, Jesus explains His metaphorical use of the term “bread.” In John 6, He eliminates any metaphorical possibilities.
4.) John 6:4 - Jesus is in Capernaum on the eve of Passover, and the lambs are gathered to be slaughtered and eaten. Look what He says.
5.) John 6:35,41,48,51 - Jesus says four times “I AM the bread from heaven.” It is He, Himself, the eternal bread from heaven.
6.) John 6:27,31,49 - there is a parallel between the manna in the desert which was physically consumed, and this “new” bread which must be consumed.
7.) John 6:51-52- then Jesus says that the bread He is referring to is His flesh. The Jews take Him literally and immediately question such a teaching. How can this man give us His flesh to eat?
8.) John 6:53 - 58 - Jesus does not correct their literal interpretation. Instead, Jesus eliminates any metaphorical interpretations by swearing an oath and being even more literal about eating His flesh. In fact, Jesus says four times we must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Catholics thus believe that Jesus makes present His body and blood in the sacrifice of the Mass.
9.) John 6:23-53 - however, a symbolic interpretation is not plausible. Throughout these verses, the Greek text uses the word “phago” nine times. “Phago” literally means “to eat” or “physically consume.” Like the Protestants of our day, the disciples take issue with Jesus’ literal usage of “eat.” So Jesus does what?
10.) John 6:54, 56, 57, 58 - He uses an even more literal verb, translated as “trogo,” which means to gnaw or chew or crunch.
The better question is this. Why does Rome treat the statements regarding the brothers of Jesus as symbolic but accept the statements of flesh and blood as absolutely literal?
This too is a a misstatement. A symbol is something that stands for somethign else. For example, Protestants believe that Christ is symbolically present in the Eucharist while Catholics - supported by Scripture and Tradition believe that Christ is litterally present: Body, Blood Soul and Divinity.
Here is another reference:
scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html#the_bvm-V
1.) Mark 6:3 - Jesus was always referred to as “the” son of Mary, not “a” son of Mary. Also “brothers” could have theoretically been Joseph’s children from a former marriage that was dissolved by death. However, it is most likely, perhaps most certainly, that Joseph was a virgin, just as were Jesus and Mary. As such, they embodied the true Holy Family, fully consecrated to God.
2.) Luke 1:31,34 - the angel tells Mary that you “will” conceive (using the future tense). Mary responds by saying, “How shall this be?” Mary’s response demonstrates that she had taken a vow of lifelong virginity by having no intention to have relations with a man. If Mary did not take such a vow of lifelong virginity, her question would make no sense at all (for we can assume she knew how a child is conceived). She was a consecrated Temple virgin as was an acceptable custom of the times.
3.) Luke 2:41-51 - in searching for Jesus and finding Him in the temple, there is never any mention of other siblings.
4.) John 7:3-4; Mark 3:21 - we see that younger “brothers” were advising Jesus. But this would have been extremely disrespectful for devout Jews if these were Jesus’ biological brothers.
5.) John 19:26-27 - it would have been unthinkable for Jesus to commit the care of his mother to a friend if he had brothers.
6.) John 19:25 - the following verses prove that James and Joseph are Jesus’ cousins and not his brothers: Mary the wife of Clopas is the sister of the Virgin Mary.
7.) Matt. 27:61, 28:1 - Matthew even refers to Mary the wife of Clopas as “the other Mary.”
8.) Matt. 27:56; Mark 15:47 - Mary the wife of Clopas is the mother of James and Joseph.
M 9.) ark 6:3 - James and Joseph are called the “brothers” of Jesus. So James and Joseph are Jesus’ cousins.
10.) Matt. 10:3 - James is also called the son of “Alpheus.” This does not disprove that James is the son of Clopas. The name Alpheus may be Aramaic for Clopas, or James took a Greek name like Saul (Paul), or Mary remarried a man named Alpheus.
I hope this helps. Basically, the Catholic Church is totally focused on Jesus Christ and His Word. Christ said “This is my Body…” and this is what we believe. In my opinion, items such as ‘cousin’ and ‘brother’ are red-herrings intended to leading the curious away for what really matters: Christ present on the altar - Christ Alive in His Church.
God bless
But, Jesus actually did said that we must " Eat His Body" . He personally said it 12 times! Others repeated it many more times! Seems like it is “important” that it be done, doesn’t it? He mention obtaining eternal life by doing that didn’t He? “. . . Whoever eats (Greek word : trogon) me will live because of me. . . Also the one who feeds (Same word: trogon) on my flesh will have life . . .” John 6 :48-58
There would be a big problem with interpretating eating Jesus Body as a metaphor. As Fr. John A. O’Brien explains, "The phrase ‘to eat the flesh and drink the blood,’ when used figuratively among the Jews, as among the Arabs of today, meant to inflict upon a person some serious injury, especially by calumny or by false accusation. As Benedictus2 stated to interpret the phrase figuratively would make it read in English something like: “Whoever does serious injury to me and do me all sort of calumny and make false accustions against me, you will have have eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day.”* Now I ask you does verse in the English Language Bible you read read that way? Does it? * Seriously, does that sound like something Jesus would actually say? If you hurt him or lie about Him you would have eternal life! *Or would you think He would say " Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." Which ones sounds logical to you? Yes, this is an IQ test! I hope you don’t fail!
As St. Ambrose said: “If the word of the Lord Jesus is so powerful as to bring into existence things which were not, then *a fortiori *those things which already exist can be changed into something else” (De Sacramentis, IV, 5-16).
But I pretend to be by not making ‘stupid’ statements. That’s just a hint, buddy!
ignorance isn’t excusable, you have a bible read it! You would claim to believe something that is said only four times over something is said dozens of times and then lie about it? They you want to use that lie to prove your point? You really are “special”! :whacky: **
Jesus actually did said that we must " Eat His Body". He personally said it a dozen times! Others repeated it many more times! That makes it seem like it is “important” that it be done, doesn’t it? He mention obtaining eternal life by doing that didn’t He? “. . . Whoever eats (Greek word : trogon) me will live because of me. . . Also the one who feeds (Same word: trogon) on my flesh will have life . . .” John 6 :48-58 The normal word in Greek for “eat” is Phagon but in this passage the word Trogon which ‘literally’ means to crunch or gnaw. is used. Why? Only one possible reason, to insure that it wasn’t mistaken as being only symbolic. Another interesting fact is that the verb tense of Trogon also implies continuous consumption in this case of the body & blood of Christ. So we must eat His Body and Drink His Blood often. That nurishes our souls!
