I don't think that is evidence. Both mean a man, a certain man but nothing in it proves it's two different men.
No…. Both don’t mean a man… the whole reason we utilize “ha” article is so we know when we are speaking of a man.. singular, or man, plural. What you are saying is ha-adam and adam mean the same, this is not true.
In the Hebrew certain words are given characteristics by the use of the Article and the Particle. In English we use a system of Capitalization to render this character.
Observe:
Gen 2:21-23
21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;
22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. (KJV)
In the above, the words "
a woman" has an Article. For this woman above is
la'ishaah but a woman in general is simply
ishaah. In other words this particular woman was made by God out of Adam, not that all women are made this way. This is further strength to the argument that the sixth day and eight day creations were different, for in the sixth day we see that "...male and female created he them" (Gen 1:27)but here in the eighth day we see that "...the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman...." (Gen 2:22).
And with the Articles and Particles shown, which are not visible in the English languages, we have:
- "...the [the (particle)] rib, which the LORD God had taken from [the (Article)] man, made he a [the (Article)] woman...." (Gen 2:22).
- Or, for more clarity it can be read in the English as: '...this rib, which the LORD God had taken from that man, made he this woman.'