Nonsense. Look at those verses you cited and compare them to John 6 again. If you have a Greek NT even better. In John 6, Christ says “my flesh is true (Gr. alethes) food, my blood is true (Gr. alethes) drink.”
That’s a very specific Greek word there. Alethes means “true, genuine, real” as it refers to the substance of a thing. Does Christ say anything similar in John 10 about the door? No He does not. Does He say anything similar in John 15 about the vine? Well, that passage is interesting, because He does say “I am the true vine”. BUT note that it’s a slightly different Greek adjective there. Not alethes but alethine....not true according to substance but rather true according to analogy.
Plus of course, the contexts of the passages are totally different. Do you see people reacting in shock and horror to the specific sayings “I am the door” or “I am the vine”? No evidence of that in the Bible. His audience apparently took those figuratively. But they most certainly did NOT take John 6 figuratively—because He didn’t give them that option. He hammered the point over and over and refused to back down even when they questioned Him on it.
Your exegesis needs some serious work.
“Alethes means “true, genuine, real”
Of course, you are correct here. However, what you have considered real is the mere physical aspect of it. It is spiritual food and drink, not only more real that physical, but also effective to secure our eternal salvation.
This is very easily proven looking at John 6:32, which has the same Greek word as John 15:1. Thus we see, just comparing scripture with scripture, the “true” bread and the “true” vine are spiritual, not metaphorical and not physical. This is not an argument of metaphorical versus physical. There is another aspect you did not consider and that is the spiritual.
I have yet to see the sacrament the Catholic church performs to change Jesus Christ into a physical vine.
That’s enough of the Greek game though. Comparing scripture with scripture, the obvious meaning of the passage throughout John 6 is that it is speaking of the spiritual effect of the body and blood of Christ, not literal cannibalism. The people were shocked that the man Jesus would claim to be the exclusive way to the Father (due to the fact they were expecting the conquering Christ the first time around). That was a direct slap at the false religion the Jewish faith had become by that time.
It really is not that hard unless you look at scripture through the goggles of men who lived hundreds of years after Christ and put tradition on the same level as scripture in terms of authority.
By the way:
“BUT note that it’s a slightly different Greek adjective there. Not alethes but alethine....not true according to substance but rather true according to analogy.”
John 6 disproves this view in its own text. If the first “true” is mentioned it meant true in substance, Christ changed it to “true according to analogy” in verse 32.