Spare me the theatrics, please. I showed you that John misqouetd the Old Testament. If fact, he went a step further: he actually altered it for a purpose!
And you used that same altered verse to "prove" that Exoduse happened! LOL! And Forest Keeper couldn't get enough of it!
It's plain and obvious. But it's not to your taste, so the "spirit" will "lead" you to dismiss it. Right on!
John is not misquoting the Old Testament, he is quoting Jesus who takes a real physical miracle of healing in the wilderness and draws from it its spiritual reality, "believe and live" just as He applied the sacrificial lamb motif to Himself. Later in his Gospel John will say that "this is written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you might have life through His name". That the serpant healing was real is attested to some one thousand years later when Hezekiah in his revival destroys the bronze serpant because the people had come to worship it (2 Kings 18:4).
As to the "son of man" in Hebrew, the writer of Psalms 80:17-18 introduces one as seated on the right hand of God but the concept is brought into focus in the apocalyptic writings of Daniel 7 and the Similitudes of Eth. Enoch (chpts. 31-71). Jesus is just applying the apocalyptic messaniac title to Himself.
There is a writing (Urk. IV.1) from the period of Amenophis II, a Pharoah during the time the Hebrews were in Egypt (1450B.C.) that refers to the hapiru in its Egyptian form 'prw being present in Egypt. These hapiru were a nomadic tribe. Abraham was referred to as a Hebrew hapiru. Scholars like Albright, Bright, Noth, Pritchard and von Rad all attest to the accuracy of the Egyptian bondage, each from different theological positions.