The Emblems. Mark relates concerning the bread used by Jesus when instituting the Lord’s Evening Meal: “As they continued eating, he took a loaf, said a blessing, broke it and gave it to them, and said: ‘Take it, this means my body.’” (Mr 14:22) The loaf of bread was the kind on hand for the Passover meal that Jesus and his disciples had already concluded. This was unleavened bread, as no leaven was permitted in Jewish homes during the Passover and the associated Festival of Unfermented Cakes. (Ex 13:6-10) Leaven is used Scripturally to denote sinfulness. The unleavened quality of the bread is appropriate because it represents Jesus’ sinless fleshly body. (Heb 7:26; 9:14; 1Pe 2:22, 24) The unleavened loaf was flat and brittle; so it was broken, as was customary at meals in those days. (Lu 24:30; Ac 27:35) Earlier, when Jesus miraculously multiplied bread for thousands of persons, he broke it in order to distribute it to them. (Mt 14:19; 15:36) Consequently, the breaking of the Memorial bread apparently had no spiritual significance.

No Transubstantiation or Consubstantiation. Jesus still had his fleshly body when offering the bread. This body, whole and entire, was to be offered as a perfect, unblemished sacrifice for sins the next afternoon (of the same day of the Hebrew calendar, Nisan 14). He also retained all his blood for that perfect sacrifice. “He poured out his soul [which is in the blood] to the very death.” (Isa 53:12; Le 17:11) Consequently, during the evening meal he did not perform a miracle of transubstantiation, changing the bread into his literal flesh and the wine into his literal blood. For the same reasons, it cannot be truly said that he miraculously caused his flesh and his blood to be present or combined with the bread and wine, as is claimed by those who adhere to the doctrine of consubstantiation.

This is not contradicted by Jesus’ words at John 6:51-57. Jesus was not there discussing the Lord’s Evening Meal; such an arrangement was not instituted until a year later. The ‘eating’ and ‘drinking’ mentioned in this account are done in a figurative sense by exercising faith in Jesus Christ, as is indicated by verses 35 and 40.

Furthermore, eating actual human flesh and blood would be cannibalism. Therefore, Jews who were not exercising faith and who did not properly understand Jesus’ statement about eating his flesh and drinking his blood were shocked. This indicated the Jewish view on eating human flesh and blood, as inculcated by the Law.​—Joh 6:60.

Additionally, drinking blood was a violation of God’s law to Noah, prior to the Law covenant. (Ge 9:4; Le 17:10) The Lord Jesus Christ would never instruct others to violate God’s law. (Compare Mt 5:19.) Furthermore, Jesus commanded: “Keep doing this in remembrance of me,” not in sacrifice of me.​—1Co 11:23-25.

The bread and the wine are, therefore, emblems, representing Christ’s flesh and blood in a symbolic way, just as were his words about eating his flesh and drinking his blood. Jesus had said to those offended by his words: “For a fact, the bread that I shall give is my flesh in behalf of the life of the world.” (Joh 6:51) This was given at his death as a sacrifice on the torture stake. His body was buried and was disposed of by his Father before it could see corruption. (Ac 2:31) No one ever ate any of his flesh or blood, literally.