[papertyger]

Because the ingestion of human flesh and any blood is a direct offense against the Law - Had Yeshua encouraged such a thing, he would have broken the law, and His sacrifice would have been impure (and unable to save anyone), not to mention that he would be a false teacher, and false prophet. Certainly, a different interpretation is called for.

Then you have "went back, and walked no more with him." (John 6:66...how fitting)

[roamer_1]

Then you have "went back, and walked no more with him." (John 6:66...how fitting)

LOL! Certainly not. Those were folks who turned away from him because they would not think a little further to the spiritual truths He espoused in His statement.

In order to be the Kinsman Redeemer for the Abrahamic Covenant, He has to do what Abraham and no other human being has been able to do, Else He could not fulfill the role. If He were to break the Law (or the prophets), His sacrifice would be nullified. So breaking the Law (which includes changing the law) cannot have occurred, and any interpretation that supposes He did must be false, or our Christ is not Christ.

In my mind, that premise is undeniable - and the resulting conclusion must follow. It is a simple thing.