Sea breeze:
numerous titles are reused - again you omit important information
also might be worth looking at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NikVdhp0YFs
you can go down a massive rabbit hole - your fallacy has come rather unstuck, but ill let you figure that out or sit in denial (Im more inclined to believe scholars, who are not only qualified to talk on this subject but who also can provide actaul proof of what they are saying, Daniel Wallace being a not very good example admittedly)
you fail to include where God said he was the only savior - Jesus is also a savior, yet savior is also used of humans (same word)
Jesus is called "the light of the world" (remember Jesus is God) but so are his apostles, are they God too?)
e.g we can find a clause where Father is used in 2 different sense in John 8
The Jews say both of these things:
John 8:39: “. . .Our father is Abraham. . .”
John 8:41: “. . .we have one Father, God.”
notice just 2 verses apart the Jews have declared Abraham to be their father, yet there one Father is God.. Is Abraham God? no this is obviously being used in 2 different senses..
One possibly being idiomatic for teacher or forefather
and the other because thats what they see God as
However this does not identify Abraham and God as one and the same.
(consequently this is a direct parallel to: Acts 5:3,4 - Where the HS is claimed to be called God)
you can research about the parallels between God and holy spirit - they are used interchangeably a lot of the time because the spirit comes from God (The Father) doesnt make "it" God though
"I thought Satan ruled all the kings of the earth. Whew, somebody needs to tell JW’s that there was a change in administration after Jesus took back what Satan stole."
Is Satan God or is Jesus, Satan? - they are called "kings of the earth" in different senses
The likelyhood the spirit itself raised Jesus from the is weak due to grammatical weaknesses in both Romans 8:11 and the parables clause found in John - in which the holy spirit is never made exempt
the "of him" clause in Romans 8:11 would not be nessacary - if we take who him refers too we get "spirit of [God]" which adds another logical problem, if the spirit is called why is it being said to be "of [God]" makes "God" sound like a physical location..