The doctrine of the Real Presence is necessarily contained in the doctrine of transubstantiation, but the doctrine of transubstantiation is not necessarily contained in the Real Presence. Christ could become really present without transubstantiation taking place, but we know that this is not what happened because of Christ’s own words at the Last Supper. He did not say, “This bread is my body,” but simply, “This is my body.” Those words indicated a complete change of the entire substance of bread into the entire substance of Christ. The word “this” indicated the whole of what Christ held in his hand. His words were so phrased as to indicate that the subject of the sentence, “this,” and the predicate, “my body,” are identical. As soon as the sentence was complete, the substance of the bread was no longer present. Christ’s body was present under the outward appearances of bread. The words of institution at the Last Supper were at the same time the words of transubstantiation. If Christ had wished the bread to be a kind of sacramental receptacle of his body, he would surely have used other words, for example, “This bread is my body” or “This contains my body.”
Rather, what Christ did not say was This has become/is turned into my body," and to be truly literal in the Biblical sense then it would have to be wholly consistent with the incarnated flesh of Christ that would be crucified. For "this" refers to "my body which is given for you..Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you." (Luke 22:20)
And which flesh and blood looked like, and would taste and scientifically test as real corporeal flesh and blood, and felt pain, versus a Christ that looked like and would taste and scientifically test as real bread and wine, and feels no pain, but is said to be "real" flesh and blood by employing neoplatonic thought and Aristotelian philosophy.
And if you want to be consistently literal, then you should hold that David referred to transubstantiation, for he plainly called water the blood of men, and thus (being consistent with the Law, unlike Catholicism) would not drink it but poured it out as a sacrifice to the Lord.
And the three mighty men brake through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, and took it, and brought it to David: nevertheless he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord. And he said, Be it far from me, O Lord, that I should do this: is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? therefore he would not drink it. (2 Samuel 23:16-17)
To which could be added:
God clearly states that the Canaanites were “bread: “Only rebel not ye against the LORD, neither fear ye the people of the land; for they are bread for us” (Num. 14:9)
Other examples of the use of figurative language for eating and drinking include,
The Promised Land was “a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof.” (Num. 13:32)
David said that his enemies came to “eat up my flesh.” (Ps. 27:2)
And complained that workers of iniquity ”eat up my people as they eat bread , and call not upon the Lord.” (Psalms 14:4)
And the Lord also said, “I will consume man and beast; I will consume the fowls of the heaven, and the fishes of the sea, and the stumblingblocks with the wicked; and I will cut off man from off the land, saith the Lord.” (Zephaniah 1:3)
While even arrows can drink: “I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh ; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon the enemy.' (Deuteronomy 32:42)
But David says the word of God (the Law) was “sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb. (Psalms 19:10)
Another psalmist also declared the word as “sweet:” “How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth!” (Psalms 119:103)
Jeremiah likewise proclaimed, “Your words were found. and I ate them. and your word was to me the joy and rejoicing of my heart” (Jer. 15:16)
Ezekiel was told to eat the words, “open thy mouth, and eat that I give thee...” “eat that thou findest; eat this scroll, and go, speak to the house of Israel.” (Ezek. 2:8; 3:1)
John is also commanded, “Take the scroll ... Take it and eat it.” (Rev. 10:8-9 )
And Scripture refers to Christ being spiritual food and drink which even OT believers consumed: And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ." (1 Corinthians 10:3-4) And Christ's word in Jn. 6, "I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst," (John 6:35) are correspondent to, "Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness. Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David." (Isaiah 55:2-3) Moreover, like as bread is broken, Is. 53:10 states that "it pleased the Lord to bruise him," and the word for "bruise" (da^ka^') means to crumble, to break..., (Strong's). And like as wine is poured out, so Is. 53:12 also states of Christ, "he hath poured out his soul unto death," both of which are correspondent to the words of the Last Supper regarding bread and wine. And which use of figurative language for Christ and spiritual things abounds in John, using the physical to refer to the spiritual: • In John 1:29, Jesus is called “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” — but he does not have hoofs and literal physical wool. • In John 2:19 Jesus is the temple of God: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up” — but He is not made of literal stone. • In John 3:14,15, Jesus is the likened to the serpent in the wilderness (Num. 21) who must “be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal” (vs. 14, 15) — but He is not made of literal bronze. • In John 4:14, Jesus provides living water, that “whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life,” — but which was not literally consumed by mouth. • In John 7:37 Jesus is the One who promises “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water” — but believers were not water fountains, but He spoke ”of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive.” (John 7:38) • In Jn. 9:5 Jesus is “the Light of the world” — but who is not blocked by an umbrella. • In John 10, Jesus is “the door of the sheep,” and “the good shepherd [who] giveth his life for the sheep”, “that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly” vs. 7, 10, 11) — but who again, is not literally an animal with cloven hoofs. • In John 15, Jesus is the true vine — but who does not physically grow from the ground nor whose fruit is literally physically consumed. If Christ had wished the bread to be a kind of sacramental receptacle of his body, he would surely have used other words, for example, “This bread is my body” As in "This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you." (Luke 22:20) or “This contains my body.” Which reasoning supports rejecting the example of David and water being blood, and many others as being figurative. See here by the grace of God for more refutation of sophistry for Rome.
Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them.
Acts 17:24-25 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything.
Ephesians 3:14-19 For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith-that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.
Colossians 1:27 To them God chose to make known how great among the Gentiles are the riches of the glory of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.
Colossians 3:3 For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.
Christ IN me, the hope of glory.
Christ dwelling in our HEARTS through FAITH, not passing through our digestive tract by ingestion, in our presence when we gather together as Christians.
God does not live in temples made by human hands.
Those days are gone.
“He did not say, ‘This bread is my body,’ but simply, ‘This is my body.’ Those words indicated a complete change of the entire substance of bread into the entire substance of Christ.”
I’d say that’s a distinction without a difference. He was either holding bread or had immediately prior given it out, It’s clear he was talking about the bread. There’s a napkin on the table next to me right now. There’s no difference in me saying “this napkin is white” and “this is white.”
Furthermore, I don’t agree that just because the word “is” is used necessarily equates the words. “This napkin is white” doesn’t mean “white” and “napkin” are identical. Whiteness is a characteristic of the napkin. And if the change was such that no bread/wine remained, then Paul wasn’t correct when he referred to the bread being a communion in Christ’s body, and Jesus himself referred to the “fruit of the vine” after consecration.
Finally, I would argue that had Jesus wished to indicate that there was no bread/wine, but only their appearance, He would have used other language, such as “take eat, this bread has become my body.” Rather, he said that the bread was his body and the wine was his blood. We say the same.