The Holey Trinity - Does Jesus Claim to be the "I AM"? John 8:58

One of the more absurd "proofs" that Jesus is God is this connection between 2 scriptures, that in reality, have absolutely no connection with each other.

"Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am." - John 8:58 (ASV)

"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." - Exodus 3:14 (ASV)

The interpretation of these verses being connected also requires us to ignore context and be ignorant of the original Hebrew along with rules of grammar. Are you noticing a reoccurring theme with all of these verses Trinitarians claim prove their doctrine?

First thing, Trinitarians claim that Jesus is making a statement about his identity. The reality? He is answering a question about how old he is, not who he is!

"The Jews therefore said unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?" - John 8:57 (ASV)

Why in the world would Jesus answer a question about how old he is by saying who he is? It doesn't make sense, it's ludicrous. It shows the extent in which people need to reach for this doctrine to appear in the Bible. What is even worse is in the King James Version they spuriously capitalize the words "I am" to give the effect that there is a connection to Exodus 3:14. There is no reason for those words to be capitalized and is why most modern translations do not follow suit. The context must be completely ignored for this interpretation of this verse.

Secondly, the translation at John 8:58 of "am" is not a grammatically accurate rendering. For example, (Greek word) EIMI is rendered as "have been" or "have I been" at John 14:9 and 2 Corinthians 12:11. This more accurate rendering was avoided at John 8:58 to support their doctrine. More evidence of the King James bias.

""Jesus answered, `I tell you the truth. I already was before Abraham was born."" - Worldwide English (New Testament)

""The absolute truth is that I was in existence before Abraham was ever born!"" - Living Bible

Goodspeed's, the New American Standard Bible's marginal note, Beck's, Williams, and Moffatt's translations also render John 8:58 like the Living Bible.

"The translation ‘I am' is doubly false: the tense is wrong, being present; and the idea is wrong... All those interpretations which proceed upon the supposition that the name is a name of God...must be set aside...the nature of the verb and the tense pre-emptorily forbid them." - A.B. Davidson; The Theology of the OT

When the correct construction is used there is no indication of an identification of Jesus with Jehovah. He was just answering the question in which he was asked, saying that He existed before Abraham.

When addressing John 8:58, it is also necesarry to address the verse in which Trinitarians spuriously connect it too - Exodus 3:14. The popular rendering of this verse was quoted above. However, this is not completely accurate. The similarity between the Tetragrammaton, the word denoting the Divine Name, is very similar to the Hebrew verb (hâyâh) that means "to become".

""I will be that I will be" (Geddes) is more literal, but less idiomatic, since the Hebrew was the simplest possible form of the verb substantive." - Pulpit Commentary

"I will be that I will be...The rendering given appears to the present writer, as it appeared to W. R. Smith, and A. B. Davidson, to give the true meaning of the Heb. ’Ehyeh ’ăsher ’ehyeh: Jehovah promises that He will be, to Moses and His people, what He will be...The following are the reasons which lead the present writer to agree with W. R. Smith and A. B. Davidson in adopting the rend. I will be that I will be for ’Ehyeh ’ăsher ’ehyeh. In the first place the verb hâyâh expresses not to be essentially, but to be phaenomenally; it corresponds to γίγνομαι not εἶναι; it denotes, in Delitzsch’s words, not the idea of inactive, abstract existence, but the active manifestation of existence. Secondly the imperfect tense used expresses not a fixed, present state (‘I am’), but action, either reiterated (habitual) or future..." - Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

The more accurate rendering is how the New World Translation reads:

"So God said to Moses: "I Will Become What I Choose to Become."And he added: “This is what you are to say to the Israelites, ‘I Will Become has sent me to you.’"

Essentially, the reason is "I am" expressed a fixed and strictly present state. The rendering "I Will Become" shows that Jehovah will "Become" whatever He needs to in the future, continually, forever. This accurate rendering of Exodus 3:14 again separates any connection to Jesus' words at John 8:58. 

"The writer of Exodus 3:14-15 ... explains it [the meaning of God's name] by the phrase EHYEH asher EHYEH (Ex. iii., 14); this can be translated `I am that I am' or more exactly `I am wont to be that which I am wont to be' or `I will be that which I will be.'" - Encyclopedia Britannica

All 3 of these facts prove it is completely erroneous for Trinitarians to force Jesus to claim that he is Jehovah. This information can be found with the slightest bit of research and really, common sense. I encourage you all to keep returning every week. I consistently add 1 or 2 entries that address head-on all of the Trinitarian false interpretations of scripture. Revealing the truth to you brings me genuine enjoyment, I hope that learning the truth does the same for you.

Some Trinitarians point to the Sahidic Coptic version to prove a connection with these 2 verses, this website addresses that error.