So one can have no life in himself unless he physically consumes the Lord's literal flesh, otherwise he remains dead? Or is this open to interpretation?
Furthermore, every serious Christian believed this for 1500+ years, until Luther decided that scandals & corruption in the church empowered him to toss aside a vow of celibacy and somehow gave him license to remove books from the Bible and personally interpret scripture. It’s logically laughable in the face of history.
Your statement is not laughable in the face of history, but distressing, as you have manifested an ignorance of history, as dissent on the inclusion of apocryphal books or doubt of them continued among scholars remained for centuries, right into Trent. And thus Trent was the first infallible, indisputable decree on the entire Roman canon, occurring over 1400 years after the last book was penned. See here .
Moreover, titling bishops/elders "priests" in distinction to the priesthood of all believers is something the Holy Spirit never did in Scripture, as well as require celibacy of them (with rare exceptions).
Meanwhile, division exists and disagreements abound within Catholicism, and under its model for unity, that of the church being supreme and with assured veracity, versus Scriptural substantiation being the basis for establishment of truth, which Rome does not require.
Well does Jesus say his words in John 6 are subject to interpretation? Does the inspired author label his words as a parable, as they are elsewhere in scripture?
Sola Scriptura is one of your standards, how does it work with your assumptions here?