Roman Catholics Contradict Themselves Further If Transubstantiation Were Real
It would be very self-contradictory for Roman Catholics to say that born again Christians play down the Lord's supper, they claim that participation in the sacraments is part of maintaining salvation. But it would be time to think about how Roman Catholics are already condemning themselves when they claim that transubstantiation is real. The doctrine says that even if the bread and wine still taste like bread and wine, still look like it but the substance has become the literal body and blood of Jesus.
The Roman Catholics insist that you must participate in the sacraments to attain eternal life. But there's the problem behind their argument. If you participate in the Roman Catholic Sunday Mass then you can see the cup has been forbidden from the laity. They misquote 1 Corinthians 11:27 to say that they don't need to partake of the wine because it says "or". But if you put it into context, you can read these instructions in 1 Corinthians 11:23-27 which says you eat the bread and the drink the blood and the celebration was done in the evening. The Bible commands that it's both the bread and the wine that are partook and not just the bread alone.
Worse, they have even condemned themselves further. If the bread and wine truly became the flesh and blood of Jesus in substance then they miss out a lot. Many of them don't even take the Lord's supper seriously. It's supper not breakfast. The only time they really serve it is during an evening worship service. Many of them also partake in it unworthily or disrespectfully. They are living dirty lives, go to confession, go to mass and repeat the same cycle all over again. If the bread and wine have become Jesus' flesh and blood in its substance then they would be struck down dead for approaching the holy without reverence.
The Roman Catholics insist that you must participate in the sacraments to attain eternal life. But there's the problem behind their argument. If you participate in the Roman Catholic Sunday Mass then you can see the cup has been forbidden from the laity. They misquote 1 Corinthians 11:27 to say that they don't need to partake of the wine because it says "or". But if you put it into context, you can read these instructions in 1 Corinthians 11:23-27 which says you eat the bread and the drink the blood and the celebration was done in the evening. The Bible commands that it's both the bread and the wine that are partook and not just the bread alone.
Since they said that you must drink the blood then how can they drink the blood if they don't even drink any wine during the service? You don't drink by chewing unleavened bread or wafer. Again, by misquoting 1 Corinthians 11:27 they are chewing themselves because the rest of the passages require both the bread and the wine. Jesus already even said that you do in memory of Him to have both the bread and the wine. Roman Catholics only have the priest drinking the wine so how can they drink the wine if only the priests drink the wine during their worship service?
On the other hand, the Lord's supper celebrated by born again Christians has both the bread and the wine present during the service. If the doctrine of transubstantiation were real then born again Christians are the beneficiary and not Roman Catholics. Both the unleavened bread and the fruit of of the vine are there. The born again Christians first partake of the bread and the wine. First, the bread is given, the pastor reads the words of Jesus spoke of His Body then everyone eats the bread together. Second, the wine is given, the pastor reads the words Jesus spoke of His blood then everyone drinks the wine together. Born again Christians end up eating both the flesh and blood as ordered while Roman Catholics only fulfill half of the requirement.
With that in mind, the Roman Catholic institution has been very contradictory. Whether it'd be Peter's so-called primacy (misreading Matthew 16:16-18) or even insist that Mary mediates (misreading John 2:5) the religion couldn't be the true Church founded in 33 A.D. The doctrine of transubstantiation will always remain a doctrine of clear contradiction and confusion.
Worse, they have even condemned themselves further. If the bread and wine truly became the flesh and blood of Jesus in substance then they miss out a lot. Many of them don't even take the Lord's supper seriously. It's supper not breakfast. The only time they really serve it is during an evening worship service. Many of them also partake in it unworthily or disrespectfully. They are living dirty lives, go to confession, go to mass and repeat the same cycle all over again. If the bread and wine have become Jesus' flesh and blood in its substance then they would be struck down dead for approaching the holy without reverence.
See also: