וַיָּ֛קׇם וַיֵּ֥לֶךְ מָנ֖וֹחַ אַחֲרֵ֣י אִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וַיָּבֹא֙ אֶל־הָאִ֔ישׁ וַיֹּ֣אמֶר ל֗וֹ הַאַתָּ֥ה הָאִ֛ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־דִּבַּ֥רְתָּ אֶל־הָאִשָּׁ֖ה וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אָֽנִי׃
Manoah promptly followed his wife. He came to that figure and asked him: “Are you the one who spoke to my wife?” “Yes,” he answered.
(The above rendering comes from the RJPS translation, an adaptation of the NJPS translation. Before accounting for this rendering, I will analyze the plain sense of the Hebrew term containing אִישׁ.)
On the application of אִישׁ to supernatural beings, as here, see my comment at Josh 5:13. The narrator uses the situating noun conventionally, for the sake of efficient communication, in order to refer to a discourse-active character in terms of the existing situation. Because conventional usage is cognitively favored over other explanations, it is incorrect for scholars to infer from this label that the narrator is claiming either that the figure in question is an adult male person, or that the point of view of Manoah and his wife has suddenly been adopted by the narrator.
As for rendering into English, the NJPS ‘the man’ relies upon an obsolete sense of man; see further my comment at Josh 5:13 and for the substituted term. (Here, a demonstrative pronoun is more idiomatic with figure than the definite article would be.)