Upvote:1
The argument seems to be based on grammar of the target translation language, not on that of the source text. The original Greek of John 3 does not echo this "two distinct He" mentioned in the question:
In all cases the Greek Ὁ is the same inflection: "he" is not represented by a 3rd person singular pronoun, but by first person singular nominative (translated as "the one").
Nor does John 8:23:
Where ἐγὼ in both cases is also the same inflection.
If this would be referring to two distinctive "me" or "he", one would expect one (the one above) to be in Nominative and the second (the testifier) in either Accusative or Dative case, depending on whether the association is meant to be direct or indirect respectively, if the argument is to be inferred into the original Greek.
Upvote:1
[First] In the very direct comparison of John 3:31-32, How is it that 3rd person singular can refer to person-hood in "he who is from the earth" but not person-hood in "he who is from above"?
In the Greek text, "he who is from above" is not expressed with the Indicative Present (as in English) but with the Present Participle (ho anothen erchōmenos), something like "the one coming from above". Similarly, "he who is from the earth" is, literally, "the one being from the earth" (ho ōn ek tēs gēs). The real question is not about grammar, but about meaning: what does "coming from above", referred to Jesus, mean? Jesus comes from above because ... he is the incarnation of God's eternal logos.
Secondarily, How can "he from above" have seen and heard that which "he" later testifies if "he" had no person-hood prior to earthly existence? Can a plan see, hear, and remember in order to later testify?
I surmise that Jesus, "the one coming from above" has "seen and heard" what he testifies to because God, the Father Almighty, his Father, has disclosed it to him.