Transubstantiation Debunked

By -
Transubstantiation is the Roman Catholic doctrine that the bread and the wine used during the Mass will actually become the literal body and blood of Jesus Christ.  Here are the verses used to justify their claims:
  • Matthew 26:26-28- "And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."
  • John 6:51-57- "I am the Living Bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.  The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us His flesh to eat?  Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, ye have no life in you.  Whoso eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.  For My flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed.  He that eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, dwelleth in Me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent Me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth Me, even He shall live by Me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this Bread shall live for ever."
  • 1 Corinthians 11:27- "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord."

First looking at it, it seems that the verses suggest that the dogma of transubstantiation is real.  Some Catholics have gone as far as to say, "If the doctrine of transubstantiation isn't true then it's a violation."  Wait a minute!  It's time to really prove that these are merely symbolical to the death of Jesus, not even associated with it.  

Here are some things we have to consider:
  • Jesus did not always talk literally.  When He said, "I am the Door." He meant He was the Way to the Father.  When He said, "I am the Vine." He was not a literal vine but a picture of how a person through Him bears fruit.  If He meant His statement of eating His flesh and drinking His blood literally, why didn't the apostles eat His body and drink His blood when He was dead?
  • No indication whatsoever that the elements were worshiped.
  • The supper was instituted BEFORE the crucifixion of Jesus.  Remember that when the bread was broken, Jesus was not yet even crucified.  It would make no sense if the bread because His sacrificial body.  Common sense really.
  • The Bible prohibits blood drinking and it was instituted during the Old Testament covenant, which Leviticus 17:14, it is a strong prohibition.  Plus to eat human flesh and drink human blood is cannibalism.  Micah 3:3 is a direct condemnation of cannibalism as God uses it as a metaphor to the corruption that was happening in the days of Micah.
  • It would be a violation of the incarnation.  Nowhere in the Bible directly or indirectly is bread incarnated to be Jesus.
  • It is not a sacrifice for sins.  Jesus did not intend the Lord's supper by any means to be a sacrifice for sins but rather a REMINDER of the sacrifice of sins when He said, "Do this in REMEMBRANCE of Me." meaning it's symbolic.  Funny how those words are said during a mass yet they believe it to be an ongoing sacrifice.   The real sacrifice for sins happened 
  • It belittles Jesus to a piece of unleavened bread.  Notice that during a mass that the priest holds the host and says, "Behold this is the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world, happy are we who are called to his supper." and the people respond, "Lord I am not worthy to receive you but only say the word and I shall be healed."  Some instances even had it that some nuns who were trying to escape a burning building, one said, "Where is Jesus?" and they tried to rescue a piece of bread that was just... bread believing it to be holy.  Anybody can eat a LOT of these and still go to Hell without Jesus.  Also, if it's just meant to be digested and excreted, then that person goes hungry again but Jesus says they'll never go hungry.

Again, this is another series of errors that results from putting man's tradition above God's Word (Mark 7:8-13).