Do you believe the night our Lord Jesus was with His disciples giving instructions on the breaking of the bread and the drinking of the cup that it actually changed into His body and blood? It's clearer that Christ message of the Last Supper was more symbolic then actual. Christ was willing to share the Last Supper with Judas (Luke 22). John 6 should be looked at in light of the Matthew 26.
We know that +Ignatius of Antioch believed in the Real Presence.
Yes, many of the early fathers believed in the Real Presence. There are some that did not. Up until the 9th century there seems to have been an undercurrent of this. Ratramnus wrote a treatise on this under Charles the Bald (love that). It wasn't until 1215 that the Church settle the matter but by then the seeds of the Reformation was already being planted.
HD-"The early fathers also believed our Lord paid the penalty for sin to appease the Father's wrath for us.
The Fathers did, HD? Which ones?
Well, John and Paul for starters...
1Th 5:9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, "
All of the Fathers believed in the Real Presence. There were none who did not. +Ignatius tells us of heretics who didn't, but we have no names. Do you?
"Ratramnus...."
Ratramnus said that the bread and wine on the altar table were "vere corpus et sanguis Christi". Sounds like the Real presence to me, HD. What he denied, heretically in the opinion of Rome and, I suspect given the fact that Rome had yet to break with the rest of The Church, in that of the other Patriarchates as well if they ever gave him any thought, was that Christ on the altar table was the "same Christ" as He who was born of the Theotokos, lived, suffered, rose from the dead and ascended to the Father; an odd teaching indeed but not, apparently, a denial of the Real Presence.
HD, the denial of the Real Presence as a doctrine for Christians was an innovation of some Protestants after Luther. It is not even remotely patristic, let alone a teaching found in the consensus patrum.
"Well, John and Paul for starters...
Joh 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.
1Th 5:9 For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,"
Oh, HD, I'm disappointed. You know that while +Paul and John are considered among the greatest Evangelists and Apostles, neither are considered, even by the Reformers, as "Fathers". Beyond that, neither of the quotes you cite stand for any form of the atonement theory of salvation all of which, other than the "ransom" theory, were virtually unknown in The Church until Anselm of Canterbury's innovations in the 11th century which, as expanded on by Aquinas, your folks later picked up and ran with.