Debunking Transubstantiation

 

There are multiple evidences we can see that directly contradict Transubstantiation, this article will focus on verses that directly contradict the doctrine, and answer some verses used to support the doctrine. This article secondarily also will argue against pneumatic real presence, consubstantiation and sacramental union.

"Abstain from blood"

Acts 15:20

20 but that we write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from [a]sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood.

The book of Acts records a meeting between the apostles over certain doctrinal issues, the creed ends up prohibiting the drinking of blood, which is in harmony with Old Testament passages on blood. Now if the Supper is Christ's literal blood, how can it be prohibited to drink? It should also be noted that the apostles, who were Jews, would unlikely teach a doctrine like transubstantiation, and no Jews would have believed in Christianity if such doctrine was the apostolic view.

Passover

The Lord's Supper is associated with Jewish Passover, as is clear from Matthew, where the meal is instituted during passover (or an anticipatory Passover meal one day early). However, the Passover meal was a symbolic meal that looked towards Christ, the Passover thus had multiple symbols that represented Christ and the Exodus (which itself was a type of Christ), but there was no change of substance, in the same way the Lord's Supper looks by symbols to Christ, who brought the "New Exodus", by saving us from our sins. 

"Do this in remembrance of me"

When Christ instituted the Supper, he did not say "Do this for the forgiveness of sin", nor "Do this for your sanctification", instead he said "in remembrance of me". These words imply symbolism, that are meant to look back to what He did, however it also implies the symbolic nature of the Passover would continue, the Passover being a symbolic memorial of the Exodus and the Supper a symbolic memorial of what Christ did.

Debunking passages to support Transubstantiation

John 6:56: He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him.

Jesus earlier defined the "drinking" and "eating" to refer to believing, as verse 35 says: "And Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst". 
We must let context define the meaning of words, Jesus clearly defined this "eating" and "drinking" as synonyms for believing, we receive the blood of Christ by faith, as Paul declares: "Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;".

1 Corinthians 10:16

The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans and Presbyterians assume "communion of the body of Christ" refers to the flesh of Christ, however the next verse says that the "body" refers to the church: "For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.". Thus the verse means that the Supper is communion or "fellowship" with the church.

Alternatively, if it refers to the flesh of Christ, it may be interpreted as "symbolic" communion.