This man was very wise with great understanding and have accumulated a vast treasure. Because he had been lifted up because of his wealth God was going to bring him down.
4) When or about what time is he speaking or writing?
From the best I can determine about a 100 or 125 years before this man was born according to history.
5)What is the occasion for the speaking or writing?
God told Ezekiel to deliver the message.
Everything recorded down through verse 19 is to and about this man. The subject is changed in verse 20 to a prophesy against Zidon.,
We have had a thread (at least one) discussing Ezekiel 28. It is probably in the archive.
My position was not arrived at lightly or without consideration to standard objections. The prophecy from verse 2 through verse 11 is addressed to
the Prince of Tyre (v.2). From verse 12 the addessee changes to
"the king of Tyre" (v.12)
This is a second section to the chapter. The change should signal that something in this next
"lamentation" expresses some additional divine thoughts.
The Spirit of God must have some reason for another section of the prophecying and the change of the name from the Prince to the King.
We see in the New Testament when Jesus was speaking to Peter He suddenly addressed Satan -
"But He turned and said to Peter, Get behind Me, Satan ! You are a stumbling block to Me, for you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of men." (Matt. 16:23)
The Son of God was speaking to Peter, for he turned to Peter. But in His rebuke He addressed Satan who was working withint and behind Peter's folly -
"Get behind Me, Satan ..."
In a similar way God may have been speaking many things to an earthly ruler. But in His divine insight He suddenly addresses the powers of darkness behind that earthly ruler, the ancient anointed cherub.
So though I have often heard objections like you offer, I still remain convinced that the proud rebellious one behind ALL earthly proud rebellious ones was suddenly exposed by God. And we get a glimpse of Satan's pre-Adamic history.
This explains to me the seeming mixture of human like descriptions and those more appropriate to a superhuman figure.
The change from the
"Prince of Tyre (v.2)" to
"the King of Tyre (v.12), I think, signals intention of the Spirit of God to utter something deeper to us.
Now I will attack your objections.
jaywill writes:
"You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, .." (v.14)
I put the text with strongs numbers so you can look up the definitions for yourself. Also you can see all the words that are added by the translators.
Eze 28:15 Thou [wast] perfect 8549 in thy ways 1870 from the day 3117 that thou wast created 1254 , till iniquity 5766 was found 4672 in thee.
Thou [wast] perfect 8549 the Hebrew word tamiym meaning:
1) complete, whole, entire, sound
So this man was complete. It does not say he was sinless.
I do not have a Strong's Concordance at the moment. I do need one to better see what you are trying to convey. However, I don't think it will be completely necessary for me to defend what I wrote.
Whatever the Anointed Cherub was he was
"UNTIL unrightousness was found in you". His state then from creation seems to be WITHOUT that which was latter detected in his being, mainly unrighteousness.
A being created righteous was found to be unrighteous. He also
"sealed up perfection" and was
"full of wisdom"
Of course many many proud rulers have been with wisdom. I still think the absoluteness of this one sealing up perfection and being
"perfect in beauty" indicates God speaking beyond a mere human being and addressing Satan in his glorious past before his revolt.
jaywill writes:
Would God set a Gentile king in an idol worshipping nation to be the Anointed Cherub covering the Ark of God in paradise ? I don't think so.
Where was this Gentile king set as the Anointed Cherub covering the Ark of God in paradise?
The text in question does not support such an assumption.
The word ark is supplied by the translator. Even without it what this glorious figure was was not obtained illegally. He was set so by God.
"You were the anointed cherub who covers ... indeed I SET YOU ... (v.14)
Translators may argue that covering the ark of the covenant, as the cherubim were seen to do, is not the meaning of
"the anointed cherub who covers". But the cherub are very close to God. So the word picture is of someone very close to God.
I don't think that the human Tyrus ruler is the best candidate to be discribed that way. I think
"O covering cherub ..."(v.16) is the deep and serious utterance of God to His ancient advasary and nemisis who both originated ALL rebellions against God's holiness.
Exodus 25:18-21 supplies the translator the rational that the covering action of the cherub means the covering of the Ark. And
Hebrews 9:5 the cherubim are associated with and very close to the glory of God:
"And above it cherubim of glory overshadowing the propitiation place ..." (Heb. 9:5)
The cherubim was also placed with a flaming sword to guard the way to the tree of life when Adam was expelled from Eden's garden
(Gen. 3:24) .
God was speaking to one very close to the glory of God who was himself glorious. But he became corrupted and the author of revolt against God. It may be true that many world leaders have proudly set themselves against God. Behind them ALL as a basic prinicple, is this Anointed Cherub and Daystar of Ezekiel and Isaiah.
God was speaking to the very original unrighteousness one himself, an arch rival and opponent like Jesus spoke beyond Peter to address His arch enemy behind Peter, Satan.
The subject has not changed from verse 12 therefore Ezekiel is talking about the ruler of Tyrus.
He was speaking about the Prince. Now God instructs the prophet to take up a lamentation about the King of Tyre.
There must be some reason for the change. From verses 1 though 11 all things uttered are appropriate to any human figure. But from verse 12 there are some passages which indicate someone beyond a mere human.
Verse 12 is simliar to verses 12 through 15 of
Isaiah 14. Those passages identify the Daystar (Lucifer - Latin). In Isaiah 14 the backround human person is Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. This Ezekiel chapter yields additional revelation of the Daystar's ancient past. The origin of Satan is therefore doubly testified to using human figures as a means to relate something perhaps too profound to grasp without this aid.
And this Eden where the Anointed Cherub (aka Daystar or Lucifer [Latin]) is is not the Eden of Genesis 2. For this Eden of Ezekiel is on the holy mountian of God in the heavenlies
(v.14 comp Isaiah 14:13b).
A human that God has set in place. God had placed him over a kingdom.
The kingdom that this Cherub is set over is God's own.
[T]he holy mountain of God" should represent not just any standard worldly kingdom but God's own seat of administration.
And amid the stones of fire may be an allusion to what Moses and the 70 elders of Israel saw. God became visible on Mt. Sinai and they saw some glorious paved stone work under His feet in
Exodus 24:
"Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up.
And they saw the God of Israel, and under His feet there was [something] like a paved work of saphire, even like heaven itself for clearness.... And they beheld God." (Exo. 24:9,10,11b)
And the appearance of the glory of Jehovah was like consuming fire on the top of the mountain to the eyes of the children of Israel. (v.17)
Perhaps the stones of fire have to do with this pavement of saphire reflecting the glory of God who appeared as consumming fire. At any rate the Anointed Cherubs priviledged position so close to God is evident.
I think he must have been a leader in the universal worship of God until he became obsessed with his own beauty.
Why Ezekiel used the word Cherub I have no idea. I do know from the text that he was talking about the ruler of Tyrus.
I have proposed an answer, but briefly.
jaywill writes:
And since Adam what fallen man was perfect in his ways from the day he was created ? Even the Son of God "learned obedience through the things in which He suffered" Christ was sinless. Yet He also was perfected.
The mankind created in Genesis 1:27 male and female is the only humans said to have been created.
The Christ was God in the flesh.
On this we agree. Christ is God become a man.
Before man was created the dominion must have belonged to this ancient Anointed Cherub who led the universal worship to God.
Without quoting every passage, I would direct you to the book of Revelation
(Rev. 4:4). There God has before Him 24 thrones with 24 elders. These elders are not the elders of the church for John would be among them if that were so (see Rev. 5:5). Neither are they the elders of Israel.
Since the chapter is on God the Creator of the universe the
"elders" should be the elders of God's creation. That is they are the first beings that God created, ancient angelic beings on thrones ruling in God's creation before the reigning of the sons of God in New Jerusalem
(Rev.22:5)
My only point is, that generally speaking, the first and most eldest of God's creatures were the angels. And from this class of beings the Anointed Cherub came forth.
jaywill writes:
I think God deems it important that we know something about the origin of the enemy of God and man.
And he gives us plenty of information throughout the Bible.
That is true. I did not mean that only in Ezekiel 28 are we told something about Satan's past, far from it. You are right.
But Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14 add to what we are told, particularly about his beginnings - his origin. The earthly rulers like the prince or king of Tyre and Nebuchadnessar only serve as pointers to the ultimate source of rebelious despotism. Satan is the Tyrant behind all the worldly tyrants.
He just does not give us any in Ezekiel chapter 28.
We differ on this opinion. I believe that he does.
If we do not take it I think our knowledge of the origin of Satan becomes incomplete and rather foggy. Though we still know something about him, we do not know where he came from without the Ezekiel passage on the Anointed Cherub and the Isaiah passage on Lucifer [Latin] the Daystar.
Satan is still in Heaven today.
He still has some freedom to appear before God to accuse His saints. This freedom to appear in Heaven will be terminated at the rapture of the Manchild in Revelation 12.
Then he is restricted to move on the earth solely rather than back and forth. And his being limited to the earth will initiate the great tribulation.
But I am digressing.
Job 1:7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.
Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
It seems like until this moment when it comes to pass Satan is before the throne of God accusing God's sons and daughters day and night.
Sorry but there goes the ruin caused by the fall of Satan.
The things that I have shared with you I did not get from anything like Paradise Lost by Milton. Simply taking the word of God some of us have arrived at these understandings.
In your objections, I will be careful to note whether you are objecting to something I have written or to some popular religious prose like Dante or Milton.
I am arguing from the text of the Bible alone.
jaywill writes:
I think that for such a great cataclysmic opposition party to form against God it should have undergone a long time of fermentation.
I have never been inclined to believe that a being who would actually take it upon itself to oppose God Almighty could quickly hatch such an affair in a few days. God is long suffering. God let the Canaanites get worse for 400 (plus 40) years before God brought in judgment. Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].
God said I create evil.
God created Satan. An angel did not become Satan.
I don't agree here. I think that all this ancient angelic being could do to rebel against his Creator was to become the opposite of whatever God was.
God is life. Satan became a god of death.
God is truth. Satan became a god of lies and deception.
God is love. Satan became the supreme hater.
God is just. Satan became totally unjust and unrighteous.
God is light. Satan became a god of all kinds of darkness, moral and spiritual.
Satan simply set himself up to be God's opposite. I believe that he was made capable of doing that and he did.
Until God placed the man formed from the dust of the ground in a garden and forbid him to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil Satan had no one to tempt.
Before the creation of man he tempted and deceived other angels. The general vision of the dragon sweeping one third of the stars away with his tail shows his deception and tempting to deceive his hosts. That was about one third of the angels created by God.
And the pre-Adamic beings on earth, whatever they were, were also tempted and joined his rebellion. They became the demons. All the fallen angels and all the demons are among the beings tempted and deceived by Satan. I don't know if there are others.
Eventually he got to man. And that was the man created in the image of God that he deceived.
Everybody tries to make Satan out to be some wicked angelic being.
He is just a tool God made to carry out His will and give mankind a choice. The only torment Satan will have in the lake of fire is that he won't have anyone to deceive.
That Satan is a tool of God, I have no objection to.
That he deserves any sympathy I would reject. And I believe that he was perfect in his ways UNTIL unrighteousness was found in him.
So he became the ugly thing that he is from supreme beauty that he was in his creation.
jaywill writes:
Before you made main opinions based on the silence about certain matters. I think you said that because nothing was said about the soul in Gen. 1 therefore man the created had no soul.
Anything that is not said to happen in chapter 1 cannot be assumed to happen in chapter 1.
How could you be consistent with this ?
Man dies. Man created in the image of God, DIES. And he needs a Savior.
That man in Genesis chapter one today sins, dies, and needs a salvation. I am positive of that.
jaywill writes:
You said other things not mentioned in chapter two indicated that they did not happen in chapter two. Am I right ?
Anything that is not said to happen in chapter 2 can not be assumed to happen in chapter 2.
jaywill writes:
Well, now is the time for me to assume that because no Anointed Cherub of kingly rank as a great priest to God, walking up and down among the stones of fire, is mentioned in Genesis chapter two, that this matter has to do with some OTHER Eden, most likely a pre-Adamic Eden.
You can make any assumption you desire. But that does not mean it is true.
That is all I can comment tonight.
Goodnight.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2