Because Jesus said that "the Father and I are one" at John 10:30, does this mean that he is God ? Consider this: After God had just made Eve, God then said: "That is why a man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife and they must become one flesh."(Gen 2:24) Jesus quoted from this verse, telling the Pharisees: "Did you not read that he who created them from [the] beginning made them male and female and said, For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh? So that they are no longer two, but one flesh."(Matt 19:4-6)
Does this mean that every married couple literally becomes "one flesh" ? Anyone who is reasonable, recognizes that a married couple of husband and wife, works together as "one flesh", one unit, working in harmony, just as any automobile engine with all it's various components is to work seamlessly together as "one". When an engine's internal component, such as a rod "decides to leave", then there is usually a hole in the side of the block, having "jumped ship." No longer are they working as "one."
Later, on the night before his death, Jesus said in prayer concerning his disciples: "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:"(John 17:22, King James Bible) Hence, if it is to be accepted that Jesus and God are literally one, then so also must his disciples be literally "one".
Thus, to say that Jesus is God because of the wording at John 10:30 is distorting the real meaning of Jesus words.
So what was Jesus saying ? That they were in harmony, unity, for a modern English translation reads at John 17:20, 21: "I make request, not concerning these only, but also concerning those putting faith in me through their word; in order that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, in order that the world may believe that you sent me forth."(New World Translation)
The reading of the King James Bible at John 10:33 gives the impression that Jesus had said that he was God. But is this correct ? In Koine Greek, there is a definite article "the" (Greek ho) that is used to identify someone specifically, such as "the God", "the Lord". However, Koine Greek does not have an indefinite article such as "a" or "an". This lack of having an indefinite article has caused many to wrongly read into a Scripture that which is not there, such as the King James reading that the Jews felt that Jesus was ' making himself God."
Had John wanted to ensure that verse 33 should read as "God", he would have inserted ho (the in English) into the sentence, just as he did at John 1:1, 2, whereby it says literally "the God" in two of the three instances where the word "god" is used. (the use of "god" in the latter part of verse 1 without the definite article changes it from "the God" to "a god".)
There are two examples in the King James Bible, whereby "god" without a definite article was rendered as "a god", instead of "God, " at Acts 12:22 and Acts 28:6. Why did the translators of the King James Bible render these verses as "a god" instead of "God", since John 10:33 is also without the definite article ho just as these were ? Because of context, whereby there is no definite article, but there is a definite article at Acts 12:23 and is rendered as "God".
However, due to the strangle hold of the trinity in so many people's minds, that there has been a conscious effort made to twist the real meaning of who Jesus is, that, instead of God, that he is "the (definite article) Christ, the (definite article) Son of the (definite article) living God." (Matt 16:16)