Ezekiel 28

[Michael Doyle]

In Ezekiel 28, it has been brought to mind that the king of tyre is none other than Lucifer. I came across this in an examination of creation chaos in Genesis 1. It was suggested that the earth being without form and void and darkness being over the face of the earth stemmed from sin having already contaminated creation by the fall of Lucifer. Ezekiel seems to give credibility to this arguement.

My hope is to hear out the positions of my esteemed collaegues of this board to assist me in formulating a more precise position.



-----Added 1/3/2009 at 02:14:32 EST-----

These, by the way are a simplistic overview of my professor and I am merely attempting to connect the dots. It seems that this is not a majority view but again I am not certain.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

I don't want to disagree just for the sake of it, nor do I want you (or anyone) to think that my view is the one you ought to adopt, because its mine (or Matthew Henry's, or whoever).

Just think its worth considering, the view that the comparison being made is from the King of Tyre in his glory, and Adam, who was in Eden, and was perfect until iniquity was found in him (see Ezek.28:13,15).

 

[Michael Doyle]

Bruce,

I was not linking Adam as King Tyre but King Tyre as Lucifer and thusly the existance of chaos in creation in Gen. 1:1-2. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your point but I want to be clear on my question.

Thanks

 

[Contra_Mundum]

OK. I think the King of Tyre is just that, king of that city/state.

The nations surrounding Israel were at turns God's objects to discipline Israel and subjects of discipline themselves.

I don't believe that "formless and void" implies any meaningful gap between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. I don't believe Moses meant for anyone to suppose Creation was Good brought out of Evil/taint. The chaos of the unformed world would have been less valuable than the good creation brought out of it, but not because it had negative value. I don't thank that can be viewed as Moses/God's intent in Gen.1

Not that I don't believe that Scriptural inter-textuality is unimportant or insignificant. But what it means is a matter of interpretation.

I would say that when one sees a "deconstruction" metaphor in the Bible the writers may be directing us to think of the order of creation that God brought out of disorder, and reflect on the fact that ultimately judgment is a departure/dismissal from God, and reversion to a state of lifelessness. Damnation is in a certain sense un-creation.

 

[TimV]

The comparison of the King of Tyre to Adam is sometimes made by commentators.

Eze 28:1 The word of the LORD came to me:
Eze 28:2 "Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre, Thus says the Lord GOD: "Because your heart is proud, and you have said, 'I am a god, I sit in the seat of the gods, in the heart of the seas,' yet you are but a man, and no god, though you make your heart like the heart of a god--

I think the natural reading of this is similar to

Act 12:20 Now Herod was angry with the people of Tyre and Sidon, and they came to him with one accord, and having persuaded Blastus, the king's chamberlain, they asked for peace, because their country depended on the king's country for food.
Act 12:21 On an appointed day Herod put on his royal robes, took his seat upon the throne, and delivered an oration to them.
Act 12:22 And the people were shouting, "The voice of a god, and not of a man!"
Act 12:23 Immediately an angel of the Lord struck him down, because he did not give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and breathed his last.

Remeber in the ancient Mideast there wasn't always a lot of distinction between a city and it's gods. The King of Tyre felt he embodied to a great extent the gods of the city. The King of Babylon was another example.

Eze 28:3 you are indeed wiser than Daniel; no secret is hidden from you;
Eze 28:4 by your wisdom and your understanding you have made wealth for yourself, and have gathered gold and silver into your treasuries;
Eze 28:5 by your great wisdom in your trade you have increased your wealth, and your heart has become proud in your wealth--
Eze 28:6 therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you make your heart like the heart of a god,
Eze 28:7 therefore, behold, I will bring foreigners upon you,

Again, the same point.

the most ruthless of the nations; and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of your wisdom and defile your splendor.
Eze 28:8 They shall thrust you down into the pit, and you shall die the death of the slain in the heart of the seas.
Eze 28:9 Will you still say, 'I am a god,' in the presence of those who kill you, though you are but a man, and no god, in the hands of those who slay you?
Eze 28:10 You shall die the death of the uncircumcised by the hand of foreigners; for I have spoken, declares the Lord GOD."

The natural reading, when compare to elsewhere in Ezekiel as well as secular history is that the King of Babylon carried this things out. There has been for years much doubt about that, specifically that the King of Babylon wasn't successful, but if you look into the proof these people uses it's really not convincing, especially as God says that for wages earned He gave the King of Babylon Egypt as payment, i.e. the contract was fulfilled.
So far, there's nothing that doesn't make clear reference to the King of Tyre.

Eze 28:12 "Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the Lord GOD: "You were the signet of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
Eze 28:13 You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, sardius, topaz, and diamond, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle; and crafted in gold were your settings and your engravings. On the day that you were created they were prepared.

Still nothing (although I admit it's tempting!) convincing about Satan. This sort of language is used by other earthly rulers in the Bible. The King of Tyre was unimaginably wealthy and successful, and lived in a virtual paradise.

Eze 28:14 You were an anointed guardian cherub. I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire you walked.
Eze 28:15 You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created, till unrighteousness was found in you.

Here we don't even have to go to Adam, let alone Satan. God placed (and it's significant the word is Elohim rather than Jehovah, a word that is in other places used for humans rather than God) the King of Tyre in the place where he was, a place that Ithobal was sacred. As Kliefoth said

“The Tyrian state was the production and seat of its gods. He, the prince of Tyre, presided over this divine creation and divine seat; therefore he, the prince, was himself a god, a manifestation of the deity, having its work and home in the state of Tyre.” All heathen rulers looked upon themselves in this light; so that the king of Babylon is addressed in a similar manner in Isa_14:13-14.

Eze 28:16 In the abundance of your trade you were filled with violence in your midst, and you sinned; so I cast you as a profane thing from the mountain of God, and I destroyed you, O guardian cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
Eze 28:17 Your heart was proud because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I exposed you before kings, to feast their eyes on you.
Eze 28:18 By the multitude of your iniquities, in the unrighteousness of your trade you profaned your sanctuaries; so I brought fire out from your midst; it consumed you, and I turned you to ashes on the earth in the sight of all who saw you.
Eze 28:19 All who know you among the peoples are appalled at you; you have come to a dreadful end and shall be no more forever."

Notice the word "trade" and the context it which it is used. Again, neither Adam or Satan match.

 

[Michael Doyle]

Thank you Bruce,

Question: How then do we account for the two personages involved in Ezekiel 28, one human and one cherub?

My professor is suggesting that the earth was under judgment in Gen. 1 using the Hebrew phrase tohu wabohu without form and without life used in Jeremiah 4:23 and again in Isaiah.

Again he suggests that Darkness and Sea are signs of imperfection.

Now he suggests that the causality of chaos, sin and death is the fall of Satan. This is a foreign perspective to me and I am trying to wrap my mind around its plausibility.

-----Added 1/3/2009 at 11:59:35 EST-----

Thank you Tim, That was very helpful. So are you saying that the creation therefore was not in judgment at its advent? Is it not tempting to to look at the second grouping of creation days as God salvation out of chaos?

again thank you all so much for helping me through this tension. The jury is out on this course for me.

 

[TimV]

Question: How then do we account for the two personages involved in Ezekiel 28, one human and one cherub?

Gill says

Eze 28:14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth,.... In allusion to the cherubim over the mercy seat, which covered it with their wings; and which, as the ark of the testimony and all the vessels of the tabernacle were anointed, were so likewise; in all probability the king of Tyre is called a "cherub" because of his wisdom and power; "anointed", because of his royal dignity; and "that covereth", because of his office, which was to protect his people; all which he either was, or ought to be, or was in his own opinion.... The Targum understands all this of regal power, and renders it,

"thou art a king anointed for a kingdom:''

Henry says

Thou art the anointed cherub that covers or protects; that is, he looked upon himself as a guardian angel to his people, so bright, so strong, so faithful, appointed to this office and qualified for it. Anointed kings should be to their subjects as anointed cherubim, that cover them with the wings of their power; and, when they are such, God will own them. Their advancement was from him: I have set thee so.

K&D

Consequently the king of Tyre is called a cherub, because, as an anointed king, he covered or overshadowed a sanctuary, like the cherubim upon the ark of the covenant. What this sanctuary was is evident from the remarks already made at Eze_28:2 concerning the divine seat of the king. If the “seat of God,” upon which the king of Tyre sat, is to be understood as signifying the state of Tyre, then the sanctuary which he covered or overshadowed as a cherub will also be the Tyrian state, with its holy places and sacred things.

 

[Michael Doyle]

Ezek. 28:11–19 The final anti-Tyre oracle adds a plethora of detail. As in ch. 27, there is no indictment (like in 28:1–10) but rather a narrative lament culminating in inevitable doom. The imagery is kaleidoscopic. Tyre is likened to a second Adam, clearly a created being (vv. 13, 15) and yet a “cherub” (v. 14). It is in the “garden of God” in v. 13, and on the “mountain of God” in vv. 14 and 16. Some would see v. 17 as a poetic allusion, wherein Ezekiel likens the downfall of the proud king of Tyre to the fall and curse on Satan in Gen. 3:1–15. At minimum, the extravagant pretensions of Tyre are graphically and poetically portrayed (cf. note on Ezek. 28:4–5), along with the utter devastation inflicted upon Tyre as a consequence (vv. 18–19).

ESV Study Bible

 

[Contra_Mundum]

I think "cherub" is an "exalted description", like if I called my wife a "queen". It's not like we're royalty.

But what sort of "exalted language" do you use with one who's already a queen, or in Tyre's case, a king?

Adam unfallen might easily be described in such glowing terms, compared to his (our) fallen condition. Perhaps he truly rivaled the "cherubim" in glory before he fell.

In any case, Tyre's glory is being compared to the apogee of human expression, even to the heights of unfallen humanity, and from that imagined height he is to be brought down to utter uncreation.

My personal feeling on the professor's ideas is that he's inverting the connection. He's reading the judgment of uncreation back into Genesis; rather than reading the pre-formative/pre-constructive state (absent sin, just being there) as simple chaos. To return to uncreation is judgment. Original "lack" of creation isn't intrinsically evil, something nugatory.

Gen 1:1 is creatio ex nihilo. Where there was nothing, now there's something. That in and of itself is a positive. When 1:2 describes what "is" as chaotic, now that description takes on a subtractive quality, when we either think about what order exists in our own present, or what order will be brought forth in the coming verses. The language has to be comparative, in order to describe it at all.

But before that order is imposed, it is just false to suspect Moses/God of passing a value judgment on the incomparable. At that moment, there is nothing in space or time to compare it to. Afterward its another matter. To return to chaos is judgment.

 

[TimV]

It was suggested that the earth being without form and void and darkness being over the face of the earth stemmed from sin having already contaminated creation by the fall of Lucifer.

Thank you Tim, That was very helpful. So are you saying that the creation therefore was not in judgment at its advent? Is it not tempting to to look at the second grouping of creation days as God salvation out of chaos?

To clarify, are you saying that God created physical matter and angelic beings, and an act of rebellion on the part of Lucifer corrupted physical matter with sin? And that God rearranging the form of matter to create light, plants, animals, water etc..was an act of redemption? And that it became "good" again?

And that Adam's rebellion was a repetition of the whole previous scenario?

Thanks

 

[Michael Doyle]

I believe I gave a misrepresentation of my instructors intent. He is more along the lines of saying that thier was chaos in creation but God overcame the "formlessness" in days 1-3 and overcame "lifelessness" in days 4-6.

Yes, he is saying that there is the prescence of evil in the opening narrative. He is equating thaat chaos to sin and judgment and out of that God saves and initiates His program to establish His kingdom upon the earth through man.

-----Added 1/3/2009 at 02:06:24 EST-----

Thank you Bruce, your commentary was both helpful and instructive. I am considering your post and will attempt to comment after contemplation.