[rjsimmon]

If it is a symbol then why John 6:66? Previously when Jesus spoke figuratively he would follow up with a clarification, but then here he doubles down and many of his disciples leave because the teaching was too hard.

The Jews took the Master literally, rejecting His words as abhorent because cannibalism and drinking of blood were stricly forbidden. Do you honestly believe Christ would contradict Himself? He was the author of the Old Testament.

[Campion]

“The Blood of the Lord, indeed, is twofold. There is His corporeal Blood, by which we are redeemed from corruption; and His spiritual Blood, that with which we are anointed. That is to say, to drink the Blood of Jesus is to share in His immortality. The strength of the Word is the Spirit just as the blood is the strength of the body. Similarly, as wine is blended with water, so is the Spirit with man. The one, the Watered Wine, nourishes in faith, while the other, the Spirit, leads us on to immortality. The union of both, however, - of the drink and of the Word, - is called the Eucharist, a praiseworthy and excellent gift. Those who partake of it in faith are sanctified in body and in soul. By the will of the Father, the divine mixture, man, is mystically united to the Spirit and to the Word.” — St. Clement of Alexandria, before AD 202.

[agere_contra]

How could it be cannibalism to eat of the Living God?

How could eating and drinking of He who Is Uttermost Reality break a dietary code?

[verga]

He was the author of the Old Testament.

And the one that instituted the New Covenant, in His Blood.