[af_vet_1981]

The word for "the" before "the women" was not shown in the KJV text ...

Surely that is a typo from your post, correct ?

"the woman" is correct and the Hebrew definite article is there, which is why the original comment in your post made no sense. The Hebrew is simple and obvious. Perhaps there was a different point in view and that comment (which I pointed out) slipped in by accident ?

[daniel1212]

Surely that is a typo from your post, correct ?

No: of typos i have in every sentence due to my arthritic fingers (must move hand for every letter), but this was because, as said, "The word for "the" before "the women" was not shown in the KJV text i had with Strong's numbers [E-sword], but as a result of your query i have found it."

So thanks for questioning that because it led me to investigate the issue and be able to correct it, for i do want to be accurate, and as my investigation revealed that your source was not transliterating the Hebrew precisely into English, then you benefited from that also.

But as explained, my correction is not contrary to "the women" meaning it can include women in general.