>>826883
There are two doctrines at play here, real presence and necessity of observing sacraments for salvation. You can affirm one, both, or neither.
Repeating metaphors don't make them literal, nor does other's misunderstanding of metaphors make them literal.
This isn't an odd take, it's the majority opinion. Most Christians do not subscribe to real presence, that's why traditional roman catholicism emphasizes it so much as a point of zeal.
>Why would they leave if He had just explained to them that it was all a metaphor?
He didn't explain to them it's all a metaphor. He used cryptic mystery language like usual. He's deliberately driving them away.
<“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”
>Jesus could have said, “It’s just a metaphor"
He could have and he didn't for the above reason. Most metaphors go unidentified by the speaker, that defeats the purpose of metaphor.
>Then He explains why in v. 58: You will live forever.
Yes, because of the atoning sacrifice.
This is a very similar passage as John 4 "but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him shall never thirst; but the water that I will give him will become in him a well of water springing up to eternal life."
You read this one as a metaphor, don't you?
I believe this passage by itself does not teach a requirement to literally eat and/or drink in order to have eternal life, literally his body and blood or not, but I see why you and others read it that way. It gets even more clear in the context of the whole Bible when we read the relevant passages about salvation through faith not of works like Ephesians 2.