Subject "replaced" by descriptor (e.g. an adjectival noun)?

[Philitas]

I'm looking for instances in the Hebrew Bible where someone/something is described (e.g. as a recipient of action, etc.), and then subsequent references to them use only this descriptor, as an adjectival or verbal noun.

As a hypothetical example, "God will declare Israel guilty; and then the guilty one [=Israel] will be given to destruction."

Thanks a lot!

[Kirk Lowery]

Welcome to B-Hebrew, Philitas!

Just a note to let you know that it is forum policy to sign all posts with your full name. You can do this automatically by going to the "User Control Panel", and putting your name in the "Signature". You can put other information there (see my signature below), but your name is the only thing required.

Thanks!

The only practical way to answer your question (unless someone just happens to have an example in mind) is to use a search program. What makes your question difficult to answer is that it is fundamentally a syntactic question, and most Bible search programs only search Hebrew Bible morphology, not syntax. But you might get some hits by specifying your three element as occurring within a certain range of words.

BTW, what is the question you are trying to answer with this pattern?

[Philitas]

You can put other information there (see my signature below), but your name is the only thing required.

Thank you.

BTW, what is the question you are trying to answer with this pattern?

I was hoping to not tip my hand with what I'm after here (as I'm working on something for publication here), but I suppose it doesn't really matter: I'm after the identity of the "anointed" in Daniel 9:24-27. Meadowcroft (2001) argues that since 9:24 says that seventy weeks are "decreed" לִמְשֹׁחַ קֹדֶשׁ קָֽדָשִֽׁים, then subsequent mentions of מָשִׁיחַ in vv. 25 and 26 refer to the Holy of Holies. (Actually his argument is a little more complex than that, but that's the gist.)

[kwrandolph]

I'm after the identity of the "anointed" in Daniel 9:24-27.

There are two “anointeds” in this passage—one who is the ”anointed leader” and the second who goes by merely “anointed” in this passage.

The “anointed leader” comes on the scene seven sevens after the command to rebuild Jerusalem is issued. Other than that, he’s not mentioned again in this passage. Obviously he was someone important, other than that he wouldn’t have been mentioned. Assuming that each “seven” refers to seven years, that would make this “anointed leader” to appear 49 years after the command to rebuild Jerusalem was issued.

The “anointed” is “cut off” after 62 sevens after the command to rebuild Jerusalem is issued. With the same assumptions as above, that means that he is “cut off” from 433 to 439 years after the command was given.

With the two different dates, that means that there were two different individuals meant.

How did the grammatical question come into this?

Karl W. Randolph.

[Philitas]

There are two “anointeds” in this passage—one who is the ”anointed leader” and the second who goes by merely “anointed” in this passage.

Ahhh, right; my mistake.

How did the grammatical question come into this?

I'm trying to find other examples to support the proposal that this "anointed" in v. 26 may refer back to the anointed (Holy of Holies) in v. 24.

[kwrandolph]

How did the grammatical question come into this?

I'm trying to find other examples to support the proposal that this "anointed" in v. 26 may refer back to the anointed (Holy of Holies) in v. 24.

Why should it?

“Holy of Holies” is found in 23 verses, including this one. Only once can it refer to a person, then only as that person has been offered to the Lord, and then mentioned only incidentally Leviticus 27:28.

As far as anointing, plenty of things were anointed that were inanimate, including a tent Exodus 30:26, altar Exodus 40:10, etc.

The anointing in verse 24 is a verb, in verse 26 a noun.

Between verses 24 and 26 there’s a continuing verse that gives more details, separating the two verses. It also mentions an “anointed leader”.

There is no reason to connect “Holy of Holies” in verse 24 with “Anointed One” in verse 26.

Karl W. Randolph.

[Philitas]

There is no reason to connect “Holy of Holies” in verse 24 with “Anointed One” in verse 26.

Dude, I'm not on a mission to argue for that. This was the argument of Meadowcroft (2001); and I personally happen to think it's highly unlikely.

What I came here to ask is if anyone knew any examples that were syntactically comparable, on the (purely hypothetical) assumption that it were true.

[kwrandolph]

There is no reason to connect “Holy of Holies” in verse 24 with “Anointed One” in verse 26.

Dude, I'm not on a mission to argue for that.

Sorry, sometimes I’m a bit dense, not seeing the forest for the trees.

This was the argument of Meadowcroft (2001); and I personally happen to think it's highly unlikely.

I have no idea who is Meadowcroft, but it’s irrelevant anyways.

What I came here to ask is if anyone knew any examples that were syntactically comparable, on the (purely hypothetical) assumption that it were true.

Going back to your original posting, I’m not sure exactly what you are looking for. However, let me take a guess.

David, before he became king and still on the run from Saul, justified his not taking the life of Saul because Saul was the Anointed, e.g. 1 Samuel 24:6, 10, etc.

Is this what you meant?

Karl W. Randolph.