If you're new here, you may want to get regular updates via如果你是新这里，你可能想通过定期更新 RSS feed RSS提要 . 。 Thank you for visiting!谢谢您的访问！
The missionary Sam Shamoun under the banner of the infamous missionary website,传教士萨姆萨姆下，臭名昭著的传教士网站的旗帜， Answering Islam回答伊斯兰教 , have claimed in his series of articles [ ，声称在他的[系列文章 1一 ][ ] [ 2 2 ][ ] [ 3 3 ][ ] [ 4 4 ] that he has “refuted” our analysis of John 8:28 regarding the usage of the Greek 'ego eimi' (egw eimi). ]说他是“破”我们8:28分析有关eimi约翰使用的希腊'自我'（egw eimi）。 Unfortunately, to achieve that ambition, he had to resort to writing tons of text which is not only full of ad hominem attacks against us, but is also wholly unrelated to the issue of the Greek, thus committing the logical fallacies of strawman and red herring.遗憾的是，要实现这个抱负，他不得不诉诸文字书写吨，不仅是我们全面人身攻击的攻击广告 ，而且是完全无关的问题，希腊，因而犯了红鲱鱼的逻辑谬误的strawman 。 We surmise that only 10% from his above presentation actually deals with the Greek and it is this portion that we shall seek to address extensively in our observation.我们推测，他仅10％以上的介绍与实际交易的希腊，这是这一部分，我们将在我们寻求解决广泛的观察。 Any other unrelated parts of his article shall either be ignored or addressed only in brief.他的文章的任何其他无关的部分应被忽略或只要么简单处理。
Evaluating The Missionary's Writings 评价传教士的著作
The missionary has made the following claim in the传教士已经在以下索赔 first part第一部分 of his paper:他的论文：
The main claim of the authors is, that since Exodus 3:14 refers to God and since the Greek translation there is Ho On, then John 8:58 doesn't prove that 在提交索赔的主要是，既然出埃及记15:14提到了上帝，自希腊翻译有何开，然后约翰8:58并不证明 Jesus 耶稣 is Yahweh because of the slightly different wording in that verse. 雅威是因为在这一诗句的措辞略有不同。
It is not hard to see why it is so.不难看出为什么它是如此。 Throughout the various English translations of the纵观各种英语翻译 Bible圣经 , the translators have translated 'ego eimi' in several ways and has not stuck to merely translating it to “I am”, as the missionary would like us to believe. ，翻译有翻译'自我eimi'在几个方面，并没有坚持只翻译为“我”，因为传教士希望我们相信。 This we have already shown in our original article.这一点我们已经显示在我们原来的文章。 But our missionary seems to have a problem with the fact that 'ego eimi' does not neccessarily translate into “I am” and so he says that但是，我们的传教士，似乎与事实'自我eimi'的问题并不一定转化为“我”，所以他说，
First, the reason why different translations of John 8:58 have different renderings has nothing to do with the Septuagint's rendering of Exodus 3:14. 首先，约翰8:58的原因不同译本有不同的透视图无关，与七十的3:14渲染出埃及记。 Rather, it has to do with the context of John 8:58. 相反，它必须在8:58范围内与约翰。 Scholars have noted that the use of ego eimi in the context of John 8:58 is to highlight past existence that continues to the present moment. 学者们指出，8:58使用自我eimi在约翰的范围内是要突出过去的存在，一直持续到现在。 This is known as PPA, or present of past action still in progress, or simply as EP, extension of past idiom. 这就是所谓的苯丙醇胺，过去或现在的行动仍在进行中，或仅仅作为欧洲议会，成语延伸过去。
The missionary then proceeds to cite a number of quotes from a couple of missionaries, not Greek scholars.传教士然后继续举出一个传教士夫妇的报价数，而不是希腊的学者。 He obviously wants to try to impress us with his knowledge of Greek grammar, but the truth is that he and his “scholars” have no idea of the Greek usage of 'ego eimi' in the above passage.他显然想尝试与他留下深刻印象的希腊语法知识我们，但事实是，他和他的“学者”有没有对'自我eimi在希腊使用上述通道'的想法。
The action expressed in John 8:58 started “before Abraham came into existence” and is still in progress.在约翰福音8:58开始的行动表示“之前亚伯拉罕诞生”，是仍在进行中。 In such a situation, 'eimi' (eimi) which is the first-person singular present indicative, is properly translated by the perfect indicative.在这种情况下，'eimi'（eimi）这是第一人称单数现在的指示，以完善的正确指示翻译。 Examples of the same syntax can be found in Luke 2:28; 13:7; 15:29; John 5:6; 14:9; 15:27; Acts 15:21; 2 Corinthians 12:19; John 3:8.相同的语法的例子可以发现在路加福音2:28; 13:7; 15:29;约翰5:6，14:9，15:27，使徒15时21分;哥林多后书12:19;约翰3:8 。
Concerning the construction, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament by GB Winer, 7th ed., Andover, 1897, p.关于建设， 一个语法第七版的成语威纳， 新约中的国标。，安多佛，1897年，第 267 says: 267说：
Sometimes the Present includes also a past tense (Mdv. 108), viz.有时还包括当前的过去时态（Mdv. 108），即。 when the verb expresses a state which commenced at an earlier period but still continues – a state in its duration; as Jno.动词时，表达了它在较早时期开始，但仍继续 - 在其持续时间一国的国家;作为Jno。 xv 27 ap archrV met emou este (ap' ar-khes met e-mou e-ste), vii.十五美联社27日会见了emou archrV埃斯特（AP的氩口湖满足电子谋电子科技教育），第七章。 58 prin Abraam genesai egw eimi [prin A-bra-am ge-nesthai ego eimi] 58首席Abraam genesai egw eimi [首席的A -胸罩，我革nesthai自我eimi]
Likewise, A Grammar of New Testament Greek by JH Moulton, Vol III by Nigel Turner, Edinburgh, 1963, p.同样，JH莫尔顿，第三卷新约希腊文文法由奈杰尔特纳，爱丁堡，1963年，第 62 says 62说
The present which indicates the continuance of an action during the past and up to the moment of speaking is virually the same as Perfective, the only difference being that the action is conceived as still in progress…It is frequent in the N[ew]T[estament]: Luke 2:48; 13:7…15:29….John 5:6; 8:58…目前这表明在过去，到现在讲的是一个行动的延续virually作为完成式相同，唯一不同的是构想的行动是在进步还是...这是在N [频繁的电子战] Ŧ [estament]：路加福音2:48; 13:7 ... 15:29 ...。约翰5:6; 8:58 ...
In short, one can easily get the impression that the usage of 'ego eimi' is certainly not uncommon throughout the Greek New Testament, and thus cannot be used as evidence for the claim that Jesus is God.总之，人们可以很容易得到的印象是，'使用自我eimi'当然不是整个新约希腊并不常见，因此不能被用来作为索赔的证据，耶稣是神。
Other Side Issues 其他的枝节问题
Though this is not related wholly to the topic, we would still like to comment on this obvious tendency of the missionary.虽然这是完全不相关的话题，我们仍想评论这个传教士明显趋势。 In his response to our article, the missionary had often cited the early Trinitarian Church fathers such as Origen, Hippolytus and Justin Martyr and had even cited a part of Justin Martyr's Dialogue of Justin Philosopher and Maryr, With Trypho the Jew, in order to support his original argument that the Holy Spirit is the same with Jesus.在回应我们的文章，传教士经常提到的早期三位一体的教会，如奥利，西波吕和Justin烈士父亲和甚至列举了贾斯汀烈士的贾斯汀哲学家和Maryr，随着Trypho犹太人对话的一部分，以支持他原来的论点，即圣灵是与耶稣一样的。 What the missionary did not inform us, however, is that both these Church fathers have very different conceptions of not only what the Holy Spirit really is, they also had a very different idea with what the Trinity really is when compared with the definition in the mindset of the missionary!什么传教士没有通知我们，然而，就是这两个教会的父亲有什么不只是圣灵真的，他们也有一个非常不同的想法非常不同的概念什么是真正的三位一体，与在定义比较心态的传教士！ On Origen's conception of the Trinity and the Holy Spirit, we read that:论渊源的三位一体和圣灵的概念，我们读到：
Origen (died c250 CE) insisted that Father and Son were two separate essences, and that the son was inferior to the father…Origen became head of the Alexandria College, and was ordained priest in 230 CE, in Palestine.奥利（死于c250 CE认证）坚持认为，父亲和儿子是两个独立的本质，而儿子不如父亲...奥利成为亚历山大书院院长，并在230个行政长官祝圣司铎在巴勒斯坦。 Bishop Demetrius deposed and exiled him, so he started a new school in Caesarea.德米特里主教废黜并流放他，于是他开始了一个新的学校在该撒利亚。 He was condemned in 250 CE by the Council of Alexandria for rejecting the doctrine of Trinity.他谴责安理会的亚历山大拒绝了三位一体的教义250行政长官。 ( The Mysteries of Jesus , p. 195) （ 在耶稣之谜 ，第195页）
In other words, Origen clearly believed that Jesus was a much “lesser god”.换句话说，奥利明确认为，耶稣是一个大的“小神”。 On Hippolytus, we read that关于希波吕托斯，我们读到，
Hippolytus (died c235CE) said 'God is One God, the first and Only One, the Maker and Lord of all [...] who had nothing of equal age with Him; Who, willing it, called into being that which had no being before.'希波吕托斯（死于c235CE）说：'上帝是一个上帝，第一个也是唯一一个，所有的设备和[...]谁与他有同样的年龄无关耶和华是谁，但另一方面，这将是那些没有要求被前。 (ibid, p. 195) （同上，第195页）
In other words, Hippolytus believed that Jesus was non-existent prior to the existence of God the Father.换句话说，西波吕相信耶稣是不存在的前向父上帝的存在。 That certainly does not bode well for the beliefs of the missionary regarding the Trinity!这当然不是一个好兆头的信念的传教士关于三位一体！
And finally, we read the following information on Justin Martyr:最后，我们读了圣贾斯汀烈士以下信息：
Justin, who pleaded the Christian case apparently accepted the Ebionite doctrine of Adoptionism, that the Divine Grace could fall upon a person at any moment of God's choosing, thus elevating that person to the position of being an 'adopted' son of God.贾斯汀，谁承认基督教本案显然接受了Adoptionism Ebionite学说，即圣恩可以根据一个人跌倒在神所选择的时刻，从而提高该人在被一个'通过'神的儿子的地位。 In Jesus' case, he believed that this happened at his baptism.在耶稣的情况下，他相信这发生在他的洗礼。 The notion of God impregnating a virgin was pagan and abhorrent to him, and quite unneccessary to his scheme…Justim maintained that John really had been Elijah, and that Jesus became the Christ at the moment of his baptism, when the 'Godhead' came upon him.神的概念浸渍处女是异教徒和憎恶他，完全没有必要对他的计划... Justim认为，约翰真的已经以利亚，耶稣成了他的洗礼，时刻基督当'神性'来到他。 (ibid, p. 118) （同上，第118页）
All this reveals that Justin Martyr was certainly not a Trinitarian in the definition known to us today, and therefore we find it hillarious to see the missionary appealing to someone who would be considered a 'heretic' today.这一切表明，圣贾斯汀烈士绝不是我们今天所知的三位一体的定义，所以我们觉得hillarious看到别人谁传教士呼吁将被视为'异端'今天。
This concludes our observation of this missionary tendency.我们就此结束本传教士的趋势观察。 Any further treatment of how the early Church fathers had various (conflicting) views of the Trinity with the modern-day Trinitarians would be excellent material which would be more suitably addressed in a future paper, insha'allah.任何进一步的治疗，如何早期教会的父亲有各种各样的（冲突）的与现代的三位一体三位一体的意见将是很好的材料，会更适合在未来的文件，insha'allah处理。
Conclusions 结论
It is clear that the missionary arguments are not only mostly out of topic concerning the Greek usage 'ego eimi' in John 8:58, he has also failed to convince us that this phrase can indeed be used, without a shadow of doubt, as evidence for the deity of Jesus.很显然，传教士的论点不仅出题目大多涉及希腊用法自我eimi在约翰8:58'，他也没能说服我们，这句话确实可以使用，没有一个怀疑的阴影，因为证据耶稣的神。 This is not surprising, as we can easily see in the gospels how Jesus actually denied that he is God, much to the chagrin of the pseudo-monotheists.这并不奇怪，因为我们可以很容易地在耶稣的福音如何实际上否认他是神，多向的伪神论懊恼。 Moreover, the missionary has appealed to early Trinitarian fathers who had very different conceptions of the Trinity from what the missionary himself believes about it!此外，传教士呼吁早日谁从什么传教士关于它认为自己是非常不同的概念三位一体三位一体的父亲！
And certainly, only God knows best!当然，最好的只有天晓得！ 
