On the other hand, Harris seems to be saying that QEOS is not a simple adjective, which is a commonsense observation. Those who are claiming QEOS has a qualitative dimension are not arguing that it should be considered an adjective.
Reference is irrelevant for a linguistic analysis.
For the record, my last name is Jordan. But also, you seem to be assuming that any given lexeme will inevitably be a count noun or not, regardless of context and without consideration of multiple meanings. You also seem to be assuming that any noun with a definite article must be a count noun, which is not the case. I have similar reservations about your understanding of Hebrew elohim, which is often understood as a plural abstract noun, conveying not plurality but futher abstraction, and used as a proper epithet for YHWH, while the same lexeme could be a simple plural of a concrete noun, etc.