The contexts in which the alleged body/blood transformation is described, render that an unacceptable interpretation to Protestants and evangelicals. It's a doctrine that was not described as such in other words until the Jewish constituency of the church's leadership had dwindled to near nothing. Jews would automatically think of a Passover seder and its ancient prescribed ritual language declaring, e.g., a piece of recently baked matzo as "this is the bread of affliction which our fathers ate in Egypt" (when clearly they hadn't actually preserved a sample of that). Also, anything smacking of idolatry wouldn't normally come into a Jewish mind. Gentiles -- Katy bar the door.
If the bible provides a window into the creation sequence that makes it plausible to call many creation events one, Genesis ain't it.
The contexts in which the alleged body/blood transformation is described, render that an unacceptable interpretation to Protestants and evangelicals.The Passover/Seder meal wasn't an historical accident doomed to muddy preceptions of Christs words. The Passover became the Eucharist. All Jewish history and custom pointed forward to the Messiah, and prefigured His Coming.
What I mean is: Christ didn't have to awkwardly work around the Passover meal. He fulfilled it.