trinity is controversial?

You"said" but you gave no explanation at all.

please give a specific example of what you are objecting to.

Nothing man made is mentioned in the Bible but men still hold to the traditions even though Jesus commanded not to.

But nowhere did ever say God was not triune by Nature.

I just said how the Church Fathers described compared to the Nicene Creed and to the Modern Day terminology are different.

Define "eucharist" please.

Yes it is!

Man coined and created "agape" as the type of Love God has for mankind. It was created by New Testament believers and used in writing the scriptures we have now. "Christian" was a term created by the Heathen as an insult to Jesus followers.

No one objects to these "man made" created terms whatsoever.

Have you ever read John 3:16 and the specific usage how John uses ἠγάπησεν?

No human is capable of loving that way.

Where I agree that no human is capable of loving the way that God is capable...it really is not precisely what Jesus said because the word was invented AFTER Jesus ascended into Heaven. Where I don't disagree with the usage of agapenoel....it is not likely that Jesus said this latinized word. He likely spoke Hebrew or Aramaic to Nicodemus. Early Latin didn't start appearing until AFTER Jesus ascended...
And "Agapenoel" is not Koine Greek...it's Early Latin and usually confused with Koine Greek. (Very very similar)

I like what you've posted

Unfortunately I know wayyyy toooo much stuff concerning scriptures. Stuff I only occasionally use.
I've actually forgotten more than most people usually know. It often makes listening to sermons every Sunday rather boring. Especially when I usually know what he is going to say before he says it.
(But there is no accounting for creativity)

Currently,
My wife (school teacher competent in teaching teachers how to teach) and I are working on a curriculum that we want reproduced for others to teach hermeneutics skills to others. (So I ain't gotta do it....besides I'm not that popular a person)

But...hopefully this will get some sort of traction and make the circuit. Dunno....

But to the point of this OP....Jesus was ALWAYS God. He is the Light Spoken of by God on the first day of creation according to John....and the Word became Flesh in John 1:14.

Meaning....Jesus is the living model that we need to emulate in order to please God. Mankind's best idea was to kill him for doing so. And since they really can't kill Jesus...best other idea they have is to discredit/dethrone Jesus into being just another angel, prophet or simple man.

7 different "I Am" statements in John by Jesus. I don't think John wrote it that way for no reason.

I never thought this was a thing, but I guess for some it is, Why is it? I always thought it was a simple explanation for verses like "Anyone who has seen me has seen the father"?

7 different "I Am" statements in John by Jesus. I don't think John wrote it that way for no reason.

I said modern day use God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit but none of the Church Fathers wrote down that way nor is it anywhere listed that way in the Bible.

Some say eight .

1. And Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst” (John 6:35).
2. Then Jesus spoke to them again, saying, “I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life” (John 8:12).
3. “I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture” (John 10:9).
4. “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep” (John 10:11).
5. Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live” (John 11:25).
6. Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6).
7. “I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser” (John 15:1).
8. “Truly, truly, I tell you,” Jesus declared, “before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:58)

It’s not if you’re saved. If you’re not (which is more than half of the posters on the forum) then it is.

Even the apostate unbelieving Jew agrees that Yah is God, the Angel of Yah is God, and the Spirit of Yah is God, and there is only one God.

888

This puzzles me. As a Jew who comes from a lineage of Rabbi's now Evangelist/Preachers who interweaves with Jewish districts from the West Coast to East Coast USA to Israel, I don't know any Jew who believes this. What I have discovered from the minds of the Leaders who take the time to look at the New Testament is one common theme. They will use Colossians, Yeshua's words, and Book of Hebrews and they point out

3 who, being the effulgence of his glory and the exact image of his substance
15 who is the image of the invisible God
John 14 "Another Comforter - Jesus being a Comforter Himself" - the Comforter will confirm the words and works of Jesus


So many believe, if...to them that is IF...Yeshua is God/came as Son of God/Holy Spirit is God...etc....

They believe that ALL [Father/Son (WORD)/Holy Spirit] being the same Substance means more than just being the Same God but Just the One God acting in 3 Roles. I don't know any Jew who thinks there's 3 Persons, just 3 ways God works. They even say for the WORD to be made flesh means He's Spirit before becoming flesh (same Substance).
^
This is what I have concluded from listening to them.


But you claim there are. I would love to meet these Jews who think that. I think it's more like some preachers on Trinity Broadcast like TD Jakes, Rod Parsley, Others who claim Trinity but preach Jesus could only be with so many people at one time. But as the Holy Spirit He can be His true Omnipresent Self and is in everyone and everywhere at once. And they preach Jesus said You see Me you see the Father. You see the Father you see Me.

That is what I think they actually believe.

When I ask the meaning of Elohim?
They say ONE God.
In English Language it's plural but they say it's always been used to describe Yehova as ONE in Hebrew.

When I attended the Church of the Holy Cross on the campus of Notre Dame (I am not Catholic) but the term Eucharist was used for Communion.

And that word did not exist until after 200 A.D. so the Apostles never used that word but the RCC uses it all of the time.

I didn't read the entire thread, so I am perhaps missing some important context here, but the verb "εὐχαριστήσας" is in 1 Corinthians 11:24 in a passage that is specifically about Lord's supper (it's used when mentioning that Jesus had given thanks). It also occurs in various forms in the New Testament in different contexts. Sure, it just means giving thanks, but you kind of made it sound (perhaps without intending to) that the whole word was unknown.

I'm thinking about this and it almost seems like "modalism".

To me,
God revealed Himself in three different distinct and separate ways to us...
But that doesn't make God a pantheon or make God wear three different hats.

God is all three at the same time while being one at the same time. Time being a confining of God to begin with that He is in and outside of at the same time....so to speak. Very confusing topic that we can apprehend but not comprehend due to our lack of infiniteness in our present state.
We we reach our Glorified state it will be comprehensible to some greater degree than we can now. But not until...and even then the likelihood of complete comprehension is rather slim to none.