Well you believe in one but not the other, I believe in both, most people don't believe in either. What I mean by transubstantiation is comparable to what I mean by being born again, afterwards both the Bread and the person look like they did before even though they are changed. Therefore they are comparable, see, I just made the comparison.
There are one or two differences between transubstantiation and being “born again.”
When one is born again, one is still oneself, and retains one’s identity. One becomes a “new creation,” but Legatus is still Legatus and sitetest is still sitetest.
When the sacrament is confected, the elements of bread and wine cease to exist. What is on the altar is now the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. Only the accidents (the appearances, not the reality of the thing) remain bread and wine. Thus, bread is no longer bread and wine is no longer wine.
There is certainly an analogy here, but it's not quite the same.
sitetest
The comparison is in the word “transubstantiate” . If you understand what is meant by “substance” in this usage, it means it can change or transform without anything detectible by the senses.
Only a very diehard materialist would argue otherwise.
Yes, the Holy Eucharist is a great change is substance - a supernatural event. However I cannot imagine a religion in an sense of the word that does not believe in something supernatural.