I believe God exists, So the story of the Christ is un-necessary

Thank you Firstly I will begin by stating for the sake of the argument, that we both accept God exists. That being said I will bring up further points in relation to this statement a little bit further down. What my dispute is, Why should a human being be elevated and be made to be equal to God's status. The Christ I intended to dispute has been acknowledged by my opponent as Jesus Christ the Biblical Character, I was confused as to why my opponent stated she would argue that a figure LIKE Christ is necessary, I was dubious as to how she would try and swing the debate. Because I never made it clear enough that I intend to debate the character of the Biblical Christ in my opening round, I just said the Christ. it seems my opponent has created a loophole and would like to argue for the Biblical Christ and any figure LIKE Christ. Therefore confirming that God already exists, I will contend that no human figure in the history of mankind is necessary or moreover are they worthy enough to be promoted to the status as being on equal level and terms with a character such as God. I will now look at my opponents argument for the Biblical Christ being on an equal level with God. Opponents argument 1 Anyone familiar with Christianity is familiar with the concept of the Trinity to some degree. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all God, yet for some reason we seek to create separate distinctions for them. Rebuttal 1, Being familiar with a concept does not make the concept any truer. You are saying, Because it is a familiar concept it has some validity. I offer an answer as to why you can distinguish between Jesus and God below. Opponents argument 2, In math terms, this makes complete sense, as if you divide infinity by three, you still get infinity. Rebuttal 2 God alone is infinite, that is a characteristic of God, First you have to prove Jesus was also infinite. This is what my whole argument rests on, God has certain attributes that make God, God. If God did not have these attributes then he would simply not be God. For example God must be in the very least, Supreme. Allow me to repeat on this. God simply must posses certain attributes otherwise he simply would not be God. In the very least God must be called Supreme, otherwise he would not be worthy of the title of God. A definition of Supreme su"preme (s-prm) adj. 1. Greatest in power, authority, or rank; paramount or dominant. 2. Greatest in importance, degree, significance, character, or achievement. 3. Ultimate; final If God is not any of the above, he would not be God, Someone else would be worthy of the title. No one can be equal to God or surpass God. You have to offer more proof of Jesus having the qualities and attributes such as God would have by definition. Jesus does not carry these attributes by definition. Logically God has to posses these attributes. ............... No one can be equal to God or surpass God. You have to offer more proof of Jesus necessarily having the qualities and attributes like infinity such as God would have. ......................................... My opponent further points out that God has asked for sacrifices from his people according to the Biblical story and points to the story of Job and Abraham as examples of US having to offer a sacrifice to God, but states that God has never sacrificed anything for us. ..... Rebuttal 3 My opponent only refers to Biblical scripture, as evidence for an authoritative source for this claim. As my opponent accepts the use of eastern philosophy into the debate by building his own case, I will use a little eastern philosophy of my own to rebuttal the claim that God does not sacrifice for his people. Indeed I will show below how in the Indian Vedic Literature God himself is the supreme sacrifice. ....................... But it is I who am the ritual, I the sacrifice, the offering to the ancestors, the healing herb, the transcendental chant. I am the butter and the fire and the offering. Chapter 9. The Most Confidential Knowledge TEXT 16 http://www.asitis.com... Theories on the date of composition of the Gita vary considerably. Scholars accept dates from fifth century to second century BCE as the probable range. Professor Jeaneane Fowler, in her commentary on the Gita, considers second century BCE to be the likely date of composition.[4] Kashi Nath Upadhyaya, a Gita scholar, on the basis of the estimated dates of Mahabharata, http://en.wikipedia.org... The date of God as the sacrifice dated back before Jesus had to be sacrificed, In Hinduism God is the actual sacrifice, Everything is actually contained inside God and is non separate from God, meaning nothing is apart from God, He is the source of all creation, The moment God decided to begin creation, was already the ultimate sacrifice. As stated above God is everything, nothing is separate from God. But at the same time it doesn't mean that everything is God. And here we can make the distinction. Just because everything exists within God does not make everything as God. For example Plato quoted. Therefore, we may consequently state that: this world is indeed a living being endowed with a soul and intelligence ... a single visible living entity containing all other living entities, which by their nature are all related. Plato... http://en.wikipedia.org... Further more the universe is a living entity containing all other living entities, which by their nature are all related..... So just because we exist inside God or Gods energy and share this chemical attribute, it doesn't make us one as God. Just because people exist on earth and are made of earth, it doesn't qualify anybody to call themselves the whole planet. Which is what the Character Jesus tries to do, elevate himself to God status. ....... Just like a drop of water from an ocean shares the same chemical atributes, the drop of water can not call itself the whole ocean I will also continue to say that my opponent argues the case of the Buddha being a figure that is necessary for reaching the divine. and defines divinity as God throughout the debate. Buddhists do not concern themselves wit ideas of God and Buddha rejected the Vedas, I hope you concede this point. I also hope you realise that no figure is necessary to be elevated to Gods status for God to still keep his status. I hand the debate back over to my opponent and look forward to her response.