When do you think Christians first believed that they were actually consuming the body and blood of Jesus Christ?
Measure yourselves, Catholics. Read what boatbums wrote explaining the establishing of the Communion of saints (the living Body of Christ here active on Earth).
That you refuse to comprehend what she so clearly explained is symptomatic of what spirit is in you if you believe you eat the body, blood, SOUL and DIVINITY of The Christ. The central tenant of the Catholic Mass is a demonic lie you've been fed.
IF one is a Christian, then that one is alive in their human spirit by the Real Presence of God's Holy Spirit Spark in their human spirit.
When you have God's Spirit in the human spirit, you are, during the Church Age, a part of The Mystical Body of Christ. You do not eat a portion of the body to which you belong as a Christian.
The father of lies, a murderer from the start is the only one who profits from a Catholic believing they can eat the real body and blood AND SOUL AND DIVINITY of GOD. Such blasphemy slides by Catholic radar, showing what Spirit is NoT in catholiciism.
And as a sacrifice for sin via the intercession of a class of believers distinctly titled "priests," that was progressively a later post apostolic development
In contrast to the Lord's supper being the Source and Summit of the Christian faith in which our redemption is accomplished, providing expiation for sin and the bread of life and of angels to the recipients, which the offering of such being the primary unique function of NT pastors;
the Lord's supper is only manifestly described in two letters in the life of the church , and in which it is a communal meal, not just a wafer, and the church as the body of Christ showing the death of the Lord for the body by effectually treating each other as members of that body is the focus;
and it is the hearing of the word of God that is what is said to provide faith, (Rm. 10:17) and thereby obtain spiritual life, (Acts 15:7-11; Eph. 1:13) and "nourish" believers, (1Tim. 4:6) and build them up, (Acts 20:32) and the preaching of which, and prayer, is the primary function of NT pastors, who are never distinctively titled "priests" as they do not engage in any unique sacerdotal function.
This is just
one of many contrasts btwn the NT church and the Roman deformation.
What we 'think' doesn't matter.
What does HISTORY record as being the first time that CATHOLICS were TOLD 'they were actually consuming the body and blood of Jesus Christ'?
I’d say it was a topic that garnered much discussion, arguments, disagreements and compromise from the start and it is still ongoing. The Apostles warned believers about those who would try to scatter the sheep and lead them astray. There were people who denied Jesus HAD a physical body or that He physically died(i.e.; Docetists, gnostics). Many of the writings of the early church fathers disputed them rather than teach what Catholicism claims today in “transubstantiation”. You can read about some of this here:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation
What troubles me the most on this topic is the claim of Catholicism that ONLY the Catholic priest has the authority to dispense the “Eucharist” and with it the means to salvation. It goes hand and hand with the contention that “outside the Catholic church there is no salvation”. This is counter to Scripture as well as the Christian faith Jesus taught and sacrificed to build his called out ones/his body and bride.
If I'm there and He says "take and eat of this, THIS IS MY BODY"....I'd take His word for it right there.