"Man" (2:5) is the *only* antecedent to "he" implied in the 3rd person verb at the beginning of 2:6. ...
Since "man" is negated in v.5, he cannot be the subject of v.6.
This is an interesting point, but is there any evidence to support such rule? ...
No it does not. 'ADAM is explicitly marked as the object in this verse with the marker 'ET.
Sure. But et refers to another phrase: God begot the man, pause, [then] he breathed. The formal antecedent to "breathed" is the man, though we cannot exclude that it was God. ...
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.