Jesus was 'prophet, priest and king'; one can hardly deny that He was a prophet, given that He prophesied, which is pretty much the definition of being a prophet!
But yes, I believe He is one of the members of the Trinity; ie, God. Jesus referring to Himself as a prophet in no way implies that He couldn't be more than a prophet; any more than Jesus referring to Himself as a shepherd meant that He was only
a shepherd. Certainly, some of His contemporaries referred to Him as a prophet, not as God; which is to be expected, given that even the disciples didn't have a very clear idea about who Jesus was, until the Resurrection. But one can't say 'His contemporaries called Him X, therefore He was X'--after all, His contemporaries called him all sorts of things--Moses, Elijah, a man with a demon, a good teacher, you name it.
L&IsMama: I'd be curious to know what exactly you find illogical about the Trinity? I had a discussion once with someone who said that the Trinity violated the law of non-contradiction (not true), but apart from that I've never heard anyone say it was illogical per se; just difficult to understand. I have heard complex analogies involving 3-in-1 shampoo, though.
|God is omnisicient. Jesus is not.
"Mark 13:32: "No one knows the day or hour, not even the angels in Heaven nor the Son, but ONLY the Father.""
"Luke 8:45: "Jesus then asked, ‘Who touched me?"" Jesus if Omniscient, would know.
God, the three persons of the Trinity, can be omniscient without each of the Persons of the Godhead having to exercise that attribute, surely? As for the latter instance, we don't actually know Jesus didn't know who touched Him--He may have been asking simply to get her to 'fess up. But anyway, during His incarnation Jesus limited many of His divine attributes--He wasn't omnipresent, for example, given that He was 'trapped' within the confines of a human body. So I don't think it's a theological problem if He chose to give up some of His Divine knowledge in order to more fully experience humanity.