The more probable interpretation
of εγω ειμι in 8.24 and 8.28 is to understand
it as the absolute εγω ειμι and a reference to the name of
God. The expression points back to the name God told to Moses from the burning
bush (Exod 3.14 εγω ειμι), and it is used by God to speak
of himself in LXX Isaiah (41.4; 43.10, 25; 45.18, 19; 46.4; 51.12; 52.6).
Isaiah 43, especially v. 10, provides the closest parallel to John 8.24 and
8.28 and is most likely alluded to by John.
Isa 43.10: γένεσθέ μοι μάρτυρες κἀγὼ
μάρτυς λέγει κύριος ὁ θεός καὶ ὁ παῖς ὃν ἐξελεξάμην ἵνα γνῶτε καὶ πιστεύσητε καὶ
συνῆτε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι . . .
John 8.24: ἐὰν γὰρ μὴ πιστεύσητε ὅτι
ἐγώ εἰμι, ἀποθανεῖσθε ἐν ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ὑμῶν
John 8.28: ὅταν ὑψώσητε τὸν υἱὸν
τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, τότε γνώσεσθε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι . . .
Not only do these verses share
similar wording, but there are similar themes within the context. In Isa 43.10,
God speaks of himself as witness and Israel as the servant he has chosen, and
in John 8 Jesus speaks of his role as witness and of God’s testimony on his
behalf (8.14, 18; cf. 5.32, 37). In Isa 43.25, God again calls himself εγω ειμι and reminds Israel that he
removes their iniquity (ανομια). Jesus, in 8.21, 24, has told the ‘Jews’ that they
will die in their sin(s). A further parallel is that both Isaiah 43 and John 8
narrate judicial controversies. In Isaiah 43.8-13, God brings the nations to
judgment with Israel serving as witness. In John 8, Jesus acts as a judge and
witnesses against the ‘Jews’ who will die in their sin, while the Father witnesses
to Jesus.
Thus, the absolute εγω ειμι of John 8.28 (and 8.24) and the
allusion to Isa 43.10 (cf. 52.6) suggest that the Johannine Son of Man shares
the same name as God (Exod 3.14; Deut 32.39) and hints at his unity with him.
Jesus’ identity is clarified
further, and at the least, the statement indicates that the Son of Man has
characteristics in common with God. The shared name may also imply the Son of
Man’s identification with the father. On the other hand, the language of
identification is not entirely accurate here since the two figures are not
equated. As with OG Dan 7.13 where the ‘one like a son of man’ appears ‘like
the Ancient of days’ yet is not identical to the Ancient of Days, both the Son
of Man and the Father appear as two distinct figures, but at the same time, the
Son of Man is described with similar characteristics as God. For example, even
though the Son of Man can be described as εγω ειμι, he can do nothing on his own but
only what the Father teaches him (8.28). The same tension is noticeable in John
5 where Jesus is given the authority to carry out the two divine prerogatives
of giving life and executing judgment, but this authority is given to him by
God (John 5.21-23). Andrew Lincoln states: ‘ . . . Jesus’ identity with God,
and yet his distinctiveness from God as the Son dependent on the Father, is the
paradox that is characteristic of the whole Gospel, beginning with its prologue
(Lincoln, Truth, 89). (Benjamin E. Reynolds, The Apocalyptic Son of
Man in the Gospel of John [Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen
Testament 2 Reihe 249; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007], 166-68)