The "I AM"

Trinity on Trial : Act V continued...

One of the arguments devised to support the doctrine of the Trinity is that when Jesus said the words translated as I am he was almost always identifying himself with the Hebrew God YHVH. Evidence adduced from both Old and New Testaments will demonstrate the falsity of this claim.

Old Testament
Support for the claim is most often drawn from the 'burning bush' incident in Exodus Chapter 3:

"And the angel (messenger, ambassador) of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.

"Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers, hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What is his name? what shall I say unto them?

"And God said unto Moses, I am that I am: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I am hath sent me unto you.

"Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, the Lord (YHVH) God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations". [verses 2, 13-15]

I am that I am  - Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh

Ehyeh [1st person singular imperfect form of the verb "to be"] Asher [relative pronoun] Ehyeh [1st person singular imperfect form of the verb "to be"].

No simple comparison can be made between Hebrew and English tenses. Present tense forms of the verb "to be" - am; are; is; - are not included in Hebrew texts but merely implied! [Hebrew tenses are based on whether or not an action has been completed. The 'perfect' tense denotes a past, present or future action that is regarded as being completed: the 'imperfect' tense denotes action which may have begun in the past, is continuing in the present, but has not yet been completed.]

The verbs here are in the 'imperfect' meaning that the action may have begun in the past but will be completed in the future, or will continue in the future. I am that I am as a translation is inadequate. I will be what I will be is also inadequate. The full meaning of Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh is given to us in the New Testament : "I am the Alpha and the Omega, saith the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." (Rev. 1:8)

New Testament
It has been conclusively demonstrated by Claude Tresmontant* that the Greek gospels were originally composed from Hebrew originals or from Hebrew notes. It makes no difference whether Jesus spoke in Aramaic or Hebrew - his words were originally recorded in Hebrew, the 'sacred' language.  I am is a translation of the Greek ego eimi which, in turn, is based on the Hebrew ani hou (I, he).

As already stated, the simple copulative forms of present tense "to be" are not written into Hebrew texts but merely implied e.g. I (am) sick; she (is) pretty; we (are) happy. The appropriate form, in this case AM, has been simply added, first to the Greek and then to the English, to conform with linguistic demands. The original words which Jesus uttered were simply "I, he" or, as we would say, "it's me!"

The New Testament also clarifies the burning bush incident - we discover that it was indeed an angel that appeared to Moses:

"This Moses whom they refused, saying, who made thee a ruler and a judge? the same did God send to be a ruler and a deliverer by the hand of the angel which appeared to him in the bush." (Acts 7:35).

Even if we ignore linguistic demands and pretend that Jesus could have said the words "I am," the claim that he was identifying with YHVH by repeating a messenger's explanation of the timeless "being" of YHVH is still exposed to the ridicule it so richly deserves. We can only hope that all the other teachings and doctrines which subvert the message of the New Testament will eventually be exposed to similar ridicule.

** Claude Tresmontant, The Hebrew Christ: Language in the age of the Gospels, Franciscan Herald Press, Chicago, 1989.