The Eucharist is primarily a word used by Catholics to describe communion. The difference between the Eucharist and the communion I described earlier is that the Eucharist isn’t viewed as symbolic. When Catholics and certain other denominations take the Eucharist they believe that they are eating the physical body of Christ and drinking the literal blood of Jesus. This is called transubstantiation. The way that I’ve heard this described is that they believe that the “substance” changes, but things such as color, shape, and appearance stay the same. In addition, most believe that you must be saved to take the Eucharist since they believe that when you take communion you are receiving Christ into your heart.
So is the Eucharist Biblical? The answer to this is more complicated than I originally thought. In the aspect that the presence of God is there during the Eucharist, I agree. But as for the bread and wine being the physical body of Christ, I disagree. Jesus often speaks in metaphors and there is more evidence towards communion being a metaphorical practice than a literal one.
The first problem with transubstantiation is that it has Jesus being repeatedly sacrificed. This directly contradicts the Bible. The entirety of Hebrew speaks a lot on Christ’s sacrifice, but Hebrew 7:27 says it really well. “Unlike the other high priests, He does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when He offered Himself.” I would also recommend reading Hebrews 10 for more on the idea of Christ only being sacrificed once. Transubstantiation implies that Jesus’ one sacrifice was not enough, so it is repeated each time they take the eucharist.
There is much more to be said about transubstantiation, but the last thing I would like to touch on is cannibalism. I know this can be a touchy subject for some people who believe in transubstantiation, and is often not considered a real argument, but hear me out. If during the last supper Jesus performed the miracle of mass, then the disciples would be drinking blood while the old testament laws are still in effect. Jesus hadn’t performed His final sacrifice yet, so the disciples would have still had to follow laws such as in Leviticus 17:14. “Because the life of every creature is its blood. That is why I have said to the Israelites ‘You must not eat the blood of any creature, because the life of every creature is its blood; anyone who eats it must be cut off’” Now there’s also the argument that Jesus often turned Old Testament laws upside down, but in Acts 15:29 it is addressing the gentiles (non-Jews) after Jesus’ sacrifice and it says this; “You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.” So the disciples partaking in a physical eucharist would have been a pretty big problem.