In the Eucharist, the bread and wine become Christ's literal body and blood.

Good luck to him, as well. The traditional Catholic view of Transubstantiation is that the bread and wine offered during Communion, despite the fact that they still taste like unleavened bread and wine, changes essence and becomes the body and blood of Jesus Christ, who died on the cross to save us all from our sins. There are several problems with this interpretation of the Eucharist. The actual Last Supper is found in Matthew 26:26-30, Mark 14:22-26, and Luke 22:14-23. Luke's the most detailed account of the three. [1] Notice what Jesus says after He breaks the bread, "do this in remembrance of me. " Look also in 1 Corinthians 11:24-26, in which Paul is describing the Last Supper and recounts that Christ said as often as you do these things (eat the bread and drink the wine), do them in remembrance of Him. [2] Communion was instituted as a memorial of Christ's death on the cross. By taking Communion, we proclaim the Lord's death until He comes. That is the purpose of Communion.1. Christ often spoke figuratively of Himself and His ministry. Jesus taught the people using parables, which are fictional stories to express a spiritual truth (the possible exception being Lazarus and the rich man, which some believe was not a fictional story). Jesus often spoke in metaphor about Himself. He has said, "I am the vine" (John 15:5), "I am the door" (John 10:7, 9), etc. Are we to conclude that Jesus believed Himself to be a vine or door? Of course not. They were metaphors. Christ is the true vine because we, as His followers, are the branches. We must remain attached to Christ in order to prosper. Christ is the door because He is the only way to get to Heaven. So when Christ said during the last supper, "this is my body" for the bread and "this is my blood" for the wine, there is no reason to take Him literally, especially since He didn't cut a piece of His flesh off and pour His blood into a chalice.2. When God institutes a change, it is always outward. Consider the wedding in Cana in John 2:1-12. The hosts ran out of wine, and Mary told Jesus. So He changed the water into wine. He didn't just give it the "essence" of wine but leave the appearance and taste of water. He literally changed it, at the molecular level, into wine. We see this because of what the master of the feast said to the bridegroom: "Every man at the beginning sets out the good wine and when the guests have well drunk, then the inferior. You have kept the good wine until now! " Not only did Jesus literally change the water into wine, He changed into the good stuff. Additionally, when someone devotes their life to Christ and He changes them, it's never just an inward change. The change is always outward. What good is it to say you're a believer if your actions don't back up your claims? (James 2). God wouldn't just change the "essence" of the bread and wine, leaving the appearance of bread and wine and the taste of bread and wine, if they did change they would change completely.3. Cannibalism and consumption of blood were condemned in the Law. Jesus said, "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came not to destroy but to fulfill" (Matthew 5:17). Jesus came to fulfill the law, not to abolish it. Under Jewish law, consumption of blood was forbidden (Leviticus 7:26-27), as was cannibalism (Genesis 9:1-6, John 6:52). Jesus would not have condoned consuming His own flesh and blood because these were forbidden under the Law. In fact, why was consuming blood forbidden? "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement" (Leviticus 17:11). ConclusionI believe I have conclusively shown why the Communion should only be taken as a memorial and that there is no change in the elements when believers take Communion. I look forward to Pro's response. [1] . http://www.biblegateway.com...;[2] . http://www.biblegateway.com...;