Well, no, I would not grant that. His is a true human body and, though glorified, is not ubiquitous (as Luther, I believe, stated it). The bread and the wine take on a different meaning in their consecration, but they do not take on a different substance. Analogously, a golden ring means something different if a vendor hands it to me in the market place, than it does when my wife hands it to me, along with vows, in a marriage ceremony. The context of the ring-giving, and the words of promise accompanying the ring-giving, and the person doing the giving of it, all change the meaning and import of that ring--but it remains a ring of gold.
Yes, Jesus said "this *is* my body," but--to riposte your parry--he also said, "this *is* bread" and "this *is* wine." Here's another perspective on the question, which I appreciate -- I came across this article ~5 years ago, and don't know much about the author or the site, but the article itself is thought-provoking: https://mereorthodoxy.com/real-presence-presence-reality-fresh-look-reformed-sacramentology Ironically, it was sent to me by a dear friend (my best man, in fact) who is *solidly* RCC.
The Westminster Confession is (in very large part) *my* confession - its edges can be rather sharp here and there, but, if you're interested in the historic Presbyterian view on this question - it can be found here: [WCF XXIX - Of the Lord's Supper](https://opc.org/wcf.html#Chapter_29).
🤙
