Replies

The wording in the Bible is clear.

I agree!

This is my Body; this is my Blood. DO THIS!

You can't get any clearer than that.

A "symbolic meaning" is a new doctrine to Christianity, less than 500 years old, which was held by nobody prior to the 16th century Reformation other than those the early Christians considered heterodox (heretics).

For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.

I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

I agree that "This is my body" means that it is his body, but the idea of transubstantiation denies the bread and denies the wine.

Consubstantiation admits to the real presence, but does not deny the presence of the wine or bread. Of course there is still bread and still wine. Do our senses lie? If it appears to be bread and taste like bread, how can we say that there is no bread and only body. It's a fools errand.

Within the LCMS say that the body and the blood is with, in, and under the bread and wine. We do not deny the body and blood and we do not deny the bread and the wine. How is this possible? We don't know and that's okay.

You can't get any clearer than that.

The RCC's OPIOS institutes the Lords Table (by claiming John 6 teaches it) years before Jesus did (which was on the night He was betrayed).

You can't get any clearer than that.