How can one reconcile the idea of the Eucharist with the Jewish custom of never consuming any animal blood?

Jewish & Christians never would consume blood--the Bible says to "ABSTAIN from things strangled and from BLOOD!

It's a good point because if you ever have a meaningul conversation with a religious Jew they will almost certainly throw at you two things... 1) God never changes 2) He tells you to avoid drinking blood.

It's just one good reason why the literal interpretation of the Lord's supper or transubstantion is wrong... and is supported by the fact that there isn't even a hint of surprise in the first supper.

Frankly, to my mind the problem doesn't exist if the practice is symobolic... and from personal experience it completely flaws the Jewish accusation on the matter.

It does not need to be reconciled because red wine was used every time Christians remembered Jesus' death.

I take the biblical ban on eating or drinking any kind of blood to make a literal interpretation of Jesus' words on the wine impossible. No Jew would ever drink wine that he or she believed had been turned into any kind of blood. Jesus and all the disciples at that Lord's Supper the night before He died drank wine from a cup on the understanding that that represented them entering into the new covenant in Christ's shed blood - which had not, at that time, yet been shed. They ate unleavened bread that had been broken on the same understanding; it represented the broken body of Christ - which had not, at that time yet been broken. Yet He told them to do that in remembrance of Him. I don't believe that the disciples thought they were actually drinking Jesus' blood. They believed they were drinking wine that represented Jesus' blood.

It's up to Catholics to offer their reconciliation of how Jews would never consume blood (Leviticus 17:12 & Genesis 9:4). It wouldn't surprise me if hardly any Catholics even knew of God's prohibition on consuming blood for all of Noah's descendants (which includes the Jews, but everyone else too!)