So...how exactly does yeast be an accurate symbolization of the flesh?

And since when accuracy is parallel to symbolization? The word symbolization means that objects/symbols do not carry any meaning of their own, except for the meaning we give to them. As long as the partake o the orange juice is done with the intentions and in the spirit of communion, how will it be considered be wrong?

Since when superficial accuracy is parallel to symbolization?

But Jesus did not use the unleavened bread and wine because it is a must. He uses it because He used them with the intention to symbolize His communion with His disciples. There was no other written account that it must be explicitly the aforementioned bread and wine must be used for such symbolization, because symbolization is what symbolization is, it does not have a meaning, except for the ones we give to it.

Take your example of the wine vs. the grape juice for example. Just simply because there is a cost factor, why would it be permissible to use grape juice instead of authentic wine? If the symbolization is indeed as you have said, mandatory and explicitly to unleavened bread and wine, then wouldn't the use of grape juice contradicts this? A simple explanation will be the one I have given, that is as long as the meaning is given to any objects as a form of symbolization, it will fit the symbolization.

Because that's what symbolization really means.

Unless you're practising Judaism, I don't see where in the scripture it says the ingredient has to be "proper"
As you said it yourself, it's not just about costing matter (it will definitely cost a bomb for huge mega churches to use wine), what if a church is opened in some deep ULU place where there's no way you can get unleavened ingredient or wine? Then what you're going to do?

You see the point or not? Deadlock is right, If you agree it's symbolic, then it is symbolic. We cannot be fickle minded to say it's symbolic and yet insist on proper sacrament practises. No point to make an issue out of a non issue matter.

Because one thing will lead to another. We will have Church Clothing Dress Code issues, then we will have what type of lady's make up allowed, excessive or not,
It will turn into Religion which Jesus came to remove which IMO is going back to square one.

And Yes I understand what is the proper ingredient, it's just bread without yeast, in fact Tosai also qualify if want to use. Radio Channel tak rosak la bro.

Wow your parents are german?

Then you got Euro citizenship?

Hmm, reason you want to work in Malaysia is because you want to be in the 40-80 window where got abundant ministry to help the poor?

Dad is German. Mum is Chinese.

Of course.

40-80 window?

Oh because I want to be independent and choose Malaysia because I got so many relatives here.

I do go back during the summer, Oktoberfest, and Christmas.

Dunno.

Can talk casual also ma....here not only talk about christian debate..

The Catholic Church and other ancient Eastern Churches do believe that it is more than just a symbol, the bread and wine is transformed into the Body and Blood of Christ.

But didn't Roman Catholics interpret the Lord's Supper message literally?

Jesus specifically stated that His words are “spirit.” Jesus was using physical concepts, eating and drinking, to teach spiritual truth. Just as consuming physical food and drink sustains our physical bodies, so are our spiritual lives saved and built up by spiritually receiving Him, by grace through faith. Eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking His blood are symbols of fully and completely receiving Him in our lives.

http://www.gotquestions.org/transubstantiation.html