One final thing to look at in the article that Walid Shoebat wrote a while back. Read this article first before you proceed with this one: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/the-abomination-of-desolation-response.html
"To explain Clement’s allegoric interpretation and other church fathers we must understand the multiple facets on how they viewed the text. As Christians in these days, they did not only believe in the Trinity, but also had dual and trinitarian interpretation of the Scriptures pushing aside the “veil of the letter” (Origen, Homily on Numbers. 16.9). Church fathers interpreted such verses as John 6 with triple meanings; the literal, themoral and the mystical. Christ used three when He said His “I Am” adding “The Way,” “The Truth,” and “The Life,” while 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 Paul spoke of the “body” “soul” and “spirit”.
The early church, unlike today’s trickster, interpreted using allegorical andanthropological approaches. They were not the typical blog commenter of today who jots quick rebuke summing up the whole plan of God in an insulting and gymnastic approach to the Word of God."
Demonstrate how the method of interpretation that you put forward even proves Roman transubstantiation. It does not prove such.
Origen himself wouldn't affirm transubstantiation. Even in the context of that passage, Origen in his interpretation of John 6 doesn't imply transubstantiation. He does have a fascinating observation on the passage as well as pointing out that eating the flesh and drinking the blood of Christ.
Look at chapter 16 section 9 on Origen: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=P4pPyRXeWkUC&q=contentious#v=snippet&q=contentious&f=false
In the section itself, Origen makes a point on what blood is allowed to be consumed, what is the blood and who can eat it and Origen makes a point that is similar to a point I and others have made. eating is believing or receiving the word of Jesus' teaching. It has nothing to do with what a Catholic does everytime he participates in the Mass, especially since the same Origen that Shoebat quotes affirms that the consumption of blood is forbidden.
While Origen did have a fascinating interpretation of scripture, it does nothing to help Shoebat in the slightest.