If Transubstantiation Were Real Then Catholics Don't Get Eternal Life

Catholics have this deep belief in the dogma of transubstantiation. Since it's Maundy Thursday then this blog entry is written in hopes of any Catholic stumbling on this entry will wake up. Transubstantiation is defined as where the bread and the wine become the body and blood of Christ. Transubstantiation is defined where the bread and wine still look like such but have already shared the properties of the literal body and blood of Christ. Catholics have also quoted John 6:53-58 saying:

53 Jesus said to them, “I am telling you the truth: if you do not eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you will not have life in yourselves. 54 Those who eat My flesh and drink My blood have eternal life, and I will raise them to life on the last day. 55 For My flesh is the real food; My blood is the real drink. 56 Those who eat My flesh and drink My blood live in Me, and I live in them. 57 The living Father sent Me, and because of Him I live also. In the same way whoever eats Me will live because of Me. 58 This, then, is the bread that came down from heaven; it is not like the bread that your ancestors ate, but then later died. Those who eat this bread will live forever.”

The Catholic is quick to point out that transubstantiation is true and the priest is supposedly entrusted with the power of the eucharist. However, you may want to observe the Catholic mass. The Catholic faithful is not drinking the wine at all. An excuse that was said is for supposedly sanitary reasons. However, the early church always had the bread and the wine together. 1 Corinthians 11:26-32 says the following:

26 This means that every time you eat this bread and drink from this cup you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes. 27 It follows that if one of you eats the Lord's bread or drinks from His cup in a way that dishonors Him, you are guilty of sin against the Lord's body and blood. 28 So then, you should each examine yourself first, and then eat the bread and drink from the cup. 29 For if you do not recognize the meaning of the Lord's body when you eat the bread and drink from the cup, you bring judgment on yourself as you eat and drink. 30 That is why many of you are sick and weak, and several have died. 31 If we would examine ourselves first, we would not come under God's judgment. 32 But we are judged and punished by the Lord, so that we shall not be condemned together with the world.

It's really obvious that the Lord's supper actually requires both the bread and the wine. Jesus instituted the Lord's supper and made the bread and wine as important symbols of His body and blood. The bread and wine are not literally Jesus' flesh and blood but it's a sin to participate in living disrespectfully. It always commanded the bread and the wine. It didn't say, "Okay as often as you eat this bread and the priest drinks from this cup." The doctrine of exempting the Catholic laity from drinking the wine was ordained only in 1414 A.D. Yet, the apostles' tradition handed over by Jesus had both the bread and the wine. Not just the bread or the wine.

How does the born-again Christian version of the Lord's supper actually differ?

Being a born-again Christian or a Protestant means sticking to what the Bible says. The Baptists came before the Reformation then the Protestant Christians came in. The sacrament of the Lord's supper for the born-again Christian means to celebrate it as an evening affair. Supper is obviously eaten in the evening. Yet, Catholics have been having it as Lord's breakfast or Lord's snacks depending on what time the mass is served. Born-again Christians have managed to obey the Lord's supper's ordinance by having both the unleavened bread and the unfermented wine or grape juice. In many cases, this wine was not the heavily alcoholic wine we have today. The Greek word used for wine is tirosh or fruit of the vine. Wine back in Jesus' day had a very low content of alcohol in contrast to what's used today. I heard that back then, even children could drink that wine without the risk of getting drunk, unlike what's commonly known as today's wine.

Why do born-again Christians actually insist on having both the unleavened bread and the unfermented wine? It's because Jesus instituted the Lord's supper with both elements to represent both the body and the blood He was to offer the next day. The unleavened bread is broken into pieces prior to serving and the unfermented wine is now put into little cups to be distributed. This allows the church members to eat this bread and drink of this cup (in a way) that's not even done in a Catholic parish. The method is done to save time and for hygienic purposes. Catholics have been lining up to get their communion bread but why don't they get the wine? Didn't they just say that we must literally eat the flesh and drink the blood? Yet, only the Catholic priest manages to drink the transubstantiated wine. Catholics are really missing a lot and condemning themselves when they cite John 6:53-58. 

If it were real then born-again Christians are now the ones truly getting the flesh and blood if transubstantiation were real. However, for the born-again Christian, the Lord's supper is not about salvation but their sanctification. It's all about one's growth in the Christian life. They still believe that the spiritual presence of Jesus is there in the Lord's supper (sometimes referred to as the doctrine of consubstantiation) but not to idolize the bread and the wine as if it were the literal body and blood of Christ.  True, the Lord's supper is an important function but it's not the food for the soul.  The real food of the soul is the preaching of the Word of God, not the eucharistic bread.