Jesus himself says that the father is the only true God, that means that he himself isn't.
I'm not sure if you can grasp this, but what you just said is a rationalization. An 'if/then' that isn't demonstrably true. It isn't a horrible assumptions but it IS an assumption. RATHER we need to read all of scripture and not pit one scripture against another. Clearly, John 20:28 says Jesus Christ is the "Lord of me (Thomas)" and "God of me (Thomas)." IF you are going to hold to scriptures, then hold to all of them. That is all a Trinitarian insists: that it is Biblically responsible. Thomas called Jesus, his God.
And Jesus also said the father is his God and that he is greater than he. If the father is the only true God according to Jesus, and he is the God of Jesus and greater than him then Jesus can't be God!
Notice 'Father' in your discussion? Nobody is arguing that Jesus isn't subordinate to the Father. Being literally the "Only" begotten son would make that one what? (God, unlike any other being, ever as an "Only") Next? How many 'gods' are there? (One "There will never be another")
What does this demand? It demands an orthodox scripture-honoring position that recognizes these truths of scripture. We call such people "Trinitarian."
And yes God is in Christ but Christ isn't God.
Not what Thomas said, though, is it?
"Marhig MUST be incorrect" right?
It says in the Bible that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself.
Fine with the first line, the other is 'leading' in rationalization that really does do damage to scripture, especially John 20:28. We have to suggest that Marhig has been careless with his rationalization. He 'assumed' something that cannot be true, scripturally.
But that's totally different to Christ is God
So is John 1:1 Was 'with' God AND 'was' God. But scripture literally says that. Shouldn't men try to stop rationalizing what they think and thumping their 'rationale' as if it were true?
And Paul says that the head of Christ is God. So Christ Jesus isn't God.
Not in the sense that He is the Father but Thomas does call Christ the 'God of me.' Reread John 1:1: Contextually it isn't easy to grasp a being that is 'with' Himself and 'is' Himself at the same time, but that is exactly what that scripture says. It really doesn't matter if Unitarians try to say the "Word" wasn't Jesus or was 'an idea' though both are truly stretches in rationalizations that don't fit the text: what they actually fail to grasp is that whatever such is, it is BOTH with AND the identity of God at the same time. There is no way to get around that, scripture says it explicitly. No Unitarians/Arian rationalization is capable when you grasp that grammatically structured truth: It forces a Trinitarian position. Scripture does.