Ruler of Tyre and Ezekiel 28?

[Sovereign Grace]

I figure this has been hashed out on here over the years as I perused the subject somewhat but found nothing that really helped me out. Exactly who is this leader? I know many link him(and Lucifer in Isaiah 14) to a pre-fallen Satan. I know there is language that seems to at least alludes to this being the case. But was this Hebrew language that employed hyperbole or was the ruler Satan?

Personally I believe it’s referring to the ruler of Tyre. Any and all info would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Sovereign Grace]

If this isn’t the right forum, please move it. TIA

 

[RamistThomist]

I figure this has been hashed out on here over the years as I perused the subject somewhat but found nothing that really helped me out. Exactly who is this leader? I know many link him(and Lucifer in Isaiah 14) to a pre-fallen Satan. I know there is language that seems to at least alludes to this being the case. But was this Hebrew language that employed hyperbole or was the ruler Satan?

Personally I believe it’s referring to the ruler of Tyre. Any and all info would be greatly appreciated.

Multiple layers of meaning. At one level it is the ruler of Tyre. That is the simplest answer because it doesn't involve the supernatural. On the other hand, most of the language there could not possibly refer to Tyre. The prophet is speaking to the king but uses realities from the pre-fall Satan figure.

 

[iainduguid]

From my forthcoming commentary in the ESVEC series:

There is a long interpretive tradition of taking this passage [Ezek. 28], along with Isaiah 14 which addresses the King of Babylon, as containing a veiled reference to a heavenly conflict between God and the leader of the forces of darkness. On this reading, the King of Tyre is equated with “Lucifer” or the “Day Star” in Isaiah 14:12, and both are identified as Satan. This reading dates back at least to Tertullian and perhaps earlier, but it ignores the metaphorical context of the passage. The King of Tyre is no more an original inhabitant of the Garden of Eden than the city of Tyre is a ship in full sail (see Ezek. 27). Metaphors compare one thing with another in order to illuminate a point: in this case, how great pride can go before a great fall. Adam and Eve’s position in the Garden of Eden was the pinnacle of privilege, but their attempt to grasp deity through eating the forbidden fruit led to the loss of their position (see Gen. 3). The folly of their attempt was exposed by their mortality: far from acquiring divinity, in the day they ate from the fruit they began to die (Gen. 3:19). In the same way, the proud boasts of the King of Tyre concerning his power and security would be exposed as baseless when his city was destroyed and he himself brought down to the depths of Sheol. It is a hermeneutical mistake to try to use this passage to pry into the origins and early history of the Evil One; that is a subject upon which the Scriptures give us very little information.

If you can't wait for that to come out (probably next year), there is also my commentary in the NIVAC series. But this is probably a more succinct statement.

 

[Sovereign Grace]

From my forthcoming commentary in the ESVEC series:

There is a long interpretive tradition of taking this passage [Ezek. 28], along with Isaiah 14 which addresses the King of Babylon, as containing a veiled reference to a heavenly conflict between God and the leader of the forces of darkness. On this reading, the King of Tyre is equated with “Lucifer” or the “Day Star” in Isaiah 14:12, and both are identified as Satan. This reading dates back at least to Tertullian and perhaps earlier, but it ignores the metaphorical context of the passage. The King of Tyre is no more an original inhabitant of the Garden of Eden than the city of Tyre is a ship in full sail (see Ezek. 27). Metaphors compare one thing with another in order to illuminate a point: in this case, how great pride can go before a great fall. Adam and Eve’s position in the Garden of Eden was the pinnacle of privilege, but their attempt to grasp deity through eating the forbidden fruit led to the loss of their position (see Gen. 3). The folly of their attempt was exposed by their mortality: far from acquiring divinity, in the day they ate from the fruit they began to die (Gen. 3:19). In the same way, the proud boasts of the King of Tyre concerning his power and security would be exposed as baseless when his city was destroyed and he himself brought down to the depths of Sheol. It is a hermeneutical mistake to try to use this passage to pry into the origins and early history of the Evil One; that is a subject upon which the Scriptures give us very little information.

If you can't wait for that to come out (probably next year), there is also my commentary in the NIVAC series. But this is probably a more succinct statement.

I brought this up here as I’m debating a guy on another forum about Isaiah 14. May I have permission to copy and paste this to him? If not, I truly respect your decision. He kept wanting to jump to Ezekiel 28 and the prince(king) of Tyre. I told him that wasn’t what the OP was about.

As Foghorn Leghorn said, “You have to be a magician to keep a kid’s attention for more than five minutes these days.”

 

[iainduguid]

Permission granted, with appropriate attribution.

Thanks

 

[Sovereign Grace]

Permission granted, with appropriate attribution.

Thanks

Thank you Brother.