TRANSUBSTANTIATION?   BY STEVE FINNELL

The doctrine of transubstantiation is, that when a priest prays over the wine and bread at communion, that the wine turns into the literal blood of Jesus and the bread turns into the literal body of Christ. 

The proof text: Matthew 26:26-29 And as they were eating, Jesus took the bread, blessed it and broke it, gave it to the disciples and said, "Take eat; this is My body." 27 Then He took  the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it all of you. 28 "For this is My blood of which is shed for many for the remission of sins. 29 "But I say to you , I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom."

Does it seem logical that Jesus was eating His own blood and eating His own body. Jesus had not even shed His blood at that time. Jesus said He would be drinking the fruit of the vine with His disciples in His Father's kingdom. Jesus did not tell His disciples He would be drinking His own blood with them.

The body and blood were symbolic, they were metaphors, they were figurative, they were not literal.

Jesus said He was the door. It was symbolic, a metaphor, figurative, He was not a literal door. (John 10:7-9)

Jesus said He was the vine. He was not a literal vine, it was symbolic, figurative, a metaphor. (John 15:15)

Jesus said My sheep hear My voice. Jesus did not mean literal sheep. He was using a figure of speech, it was symbolic, it was a metaphor.(John 10:3)

Jesus shed His literal blood on the cross. His body was literally broken. When Jesus was talking about the Lord's Supper, the body and blood were symbolic, they were figurative, they were metaphors. The fruit of the vine and bread used in communion represent the body and blood of Christ. THEY ARE NOT THE LITERAL BODY AND BLOOD OF CHRIST.

(Scripture: NKJV)