The purpose and intent of this site is twofold:

1. Share the Word of God as found in the Bible.

2. Comment on current events as they relate to Bible prophecy

Monday, June 22, 2015

The Theology of Satan: REVISED & EXPANDED Complete

The Theology of Satan: Revised & Expanded
Parts 1 and 2 Combined & Complete

Who or what is Satan?  Is his name actually Satan?  Was he created to be an accuser and deceiver or did he rebel against God and thereby earning his reputation as a deceiver, liar, false accuser and establishing a new career?  There are several theories on the subject of the origin of Satan and some Theologians consider their particular theory as doctrine.  Some of these doctrinal concepts have been preached from the pulpit, Sunday school, commentaries and books.  They have been taught for such a lengthy period, as established fact and no one bothers to question them.  Are these theoretical theologies based on undeniable Biblical scripture?  Actually all of the opinions (or theories) are somewhat based on scripture, and all can be made to sound convincing and correct.  However, it is my opinion, that the presented scripture has a certain bias in its interpretation and chronology. 

The principle bias involves “picking and choosing” those scripture references that enhance a preconceived answer or solution. Now, a person would believe that a professional educated theologian with several degrees in theology who is supposedly capable of reading and understanding Greek, Hebrew, or other Near Eastern languages would not perform such a deed.  However, in my opinion, that is exactly the scenario which has beget a number of awkward theories.  Some of these have been “hammered home” in various Bible studies, denominations, and congregations to the point they are no longer theories but accepted fact.  It may be that most people do not bother to check the beliefs, but rather accept them as traditional doctrine because that is the belief of their particular congregation or Church group.  Just disagree with one of these devout people and they will quickly unload their preconceived theology on your head.  Now, I admit, that I am not a degreed theology minister but it may be the Holy Spirit has given me a certain perception of differentiating white from grey.  Not that I always know the correct answer but that a shadowy answer is not completely correct.  The more correct answer may come through prayer and research.  I say the “more” correct answer because the full correct answer may not be available or we may not need to know.  God gives us, through the Biblical scriptures, the information we need to know.  There are many unanswered questions and all possible information on every subject is not given to us in the Biblical narrative.

The first Old Testament use of the word “Satan” is found in Job, not the supposed appearance of a person with the name Satan but usually the printed transliterated name of Satan, although not all version apply that name.  Note the Septuagint uses the word “devil” and Young’s Literal uses “adversary” which is the literal translation of the Hebrew word “śât ân”.

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.  (Job 1:6)

And it came to pass on a day, that behold, the angels of God came to stand before the Lord, and the devil came with them.   (Job 1:6 Brenton LXX)

From Strong’s Dictionary:     śâṭân   saw-tawn'
From H7853; an opponent; especially (with the article prefixed) Satan, the arch enemy of good: - adversary, Satan, withstand.

Most Bible versions merely transliterate the Hebrew word “śâṭân” to Satan.  Other versions use one of the actual meanings of the word such as “adversary” or “accuser”.  This original Hebrew word appears to be transliterated to the Greek New Testament as “satanas” or again, Satan.  At this point it would seem the accuser’s actual name, as both Testaments employ it, would be Satan, although it may not be his personal name, but rather his avocation.

A common name in the New Testament is the word “devil” which is the translation of the Greek word “diabolos”.  Both Satan and demons are referred to as devil, but demons as devils occur more frequently.  “Strong’s defines “diabolos” as: 

Diabolos:  From G1225; a traducer; specifically Satan (compare [H7854]): - false accuser, devil, slanderer.

The apostle, Peter, calls the devil (Greek – diabolos), with the surname “adversary”. Other versions use:  enemy; opponent; and slanderer rather than adversary.  The Greek word antidikos is translated as adversary and not the expected satanas.

Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:  (1Peter 5:8)

It should be noted that other New Testament English instances rendering “devil” is actually a translation of the Greek word, “daimonion” which is usually referring to a demon.
But when the Pharisees heard this they said, "He does not cast out demons (daimonion)   (devils KJV) except by the power of Beelzebul, the ruler of demons (daimonion) (devils KJV)!"   (Matthew 12:24 NET)

Paul refers to the “accuser” as “an angel of light” and he uses the Greek word “satanas” for Satan which of course is a transliteration.  Some versions use “messenger” rather than angel.  Although the so-called “Satan” is a created entity as are the angels, the word “angel” usually has a positive connotation rather than the negative “satanas”.

And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
(2Corinthians 11:14)

He is also called the “god of this world” and the “prince of the power of the air” by Paul.  According to some exegetes, he was originally the prince of the earth and retains the title even though he has fallen, which will be explained later in the “Gap Theory” section.

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.  (2 Corinthians 4:4 KJV)

Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:  (Ephesians 2:2 KJV)

Other New Testament names for the adversary include but not limited to:
Father of all lies                   John 8:44
Power of darkness               Colossians 1:13
The tempter                           Matthew 4:3
The wicked one                    Matthew 13:19

Is Satan Baalzebub?
The word Beelzebul (or Baalzebub) has an interesting Jewish history.  The word “baal” means “lord” and “Zebub” means “flies” or “those who fly” giving the complete word the meaning of “The Lord of the Flies” or “The Lord of one Who Flies”.  In 2Kings 1:2 Baal-zebub is stated as the god of Ekron.  Baal worship was very common in Israel prior to the various captivity invasions.  The principal pillars of Baalism were child sacrifice, sexual immorality (both heterosexual and homosexual) and pantheism (reverence of creation over the Creator).  The ritual was intended to produce economic prosperity by prompting Baal to bring rain for the fertility of “mother earth.”  The Wordstudy Dictionary defines Baalzebul as:

Beelzeboúl; masc. noun, transliterated from the Hebrew. Ba‛al Zebūb (H1176). Beelzebub, the name properly should be Beelzebul in all NT passages (Mat_10:25; Mat_12:24, Mat_12:27; Mar_3:22; Luk_11:15, Luk_11:18-19). In the OT, Beelzebub meant lord of flies or fly-god (2Ki_1:2) and was in common use among the Jews in Christ's day as the title of Satan as the prince of the demons.

Jesus answers the Pharisee critics with:

So if Satan (satanas) casts out Satan (satanas), he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons (daimonion) by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? For this reason they will be your judges. But if I cast out demons (daimonion) by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has already overtaken you.  (Matthew 12:26-28 NET)

The above NET version transliterates satanas for Satan and correctly uses daimonion for demons rather than devils.

Can it be said that Baalzebub is another name for Satan, or in a different approach, can it be said that Satan was posing as Baalzebub during the times of the Old Testament?  Baalzebub is a product of the Canaanites, borrowed by the Israelites and later morphed into an alternate name for the deceiver referred to as Satan. 

In 2 Kings, after Moab rebelled against Israel, Ahaziah had fallen and injured himself. To find out if he would recover from the injury he sent out messengers, telling them:
“Go and inquire of Baalzebub, the god of Ekron, whether I shall recover from this injury.” (2 Kings 1:2)  The Lord, however sent Elijah to intercept the messengers on their way to Ekron, asking them if they seek Baalzebub’s advice because there is no God of Israel and instructing them to return home and inform their master that he shall not recover.

In the Testament of Solomon (1st-3rd centuries CE), Solomon learns that Beelzeboul is one of the fallen angels who destroys by means of tyrants, causes demons to be worshiped, arouses desires in priests, brings about jealousies and murders, and instigates wars.  This work is completely non-Biblical but it portrays an opinion of the personage of Baalzebub.  It is my opinion that modern so-called myths and ritual sacrificial religions have a background in actual facts and events.  The myths have been altered and edited through the passage of time with the result of occasionally appearing preposterous but there is some element of hidden truth at the core.

It is doubtful that Satan was/is posing as Baalzebub in ancient times.  The Pharisees were perhaps not referring to the all-inclusive accuser known as satanas or Satan, but rather some fallen angelic type who was worshipped in the OT days of Israel.  The issue would be relatively easy to answer is Jesus had said:  These Pharisees are saying I must be casting out demons by the power of the fly god and if the fly god is like satanas then his kingdom is divided and will crumble.  I cast out demons by the power of God because I am initiating the Kingdom of God.”  However, Jesus said exactly what He meant to say, that is -- the evil authority of Satan cannot diminish his own empire by allowing Me to cast out demons without destroying it from within.

Is Satan Belial or Beliar?
And what concord hath Christ with Belial (Beliar)? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?  (2 Corinthians 6:15 KJV)

The Wordstudy Dictionary defines Belial as:
Belíal; masc. noun transliterated from the Hebrew. Belı̄yya‛al meaning wickedness (1Sa_25:25). Belial, a word applied by the sacred writers to such lewd, profligate, and vile persons as seem to regard neither God nor man (Deu_13:13; Jdg_19:22; 1Sa_2:12). Used as an appellation of Satan by the Apostle Paul in 2Co_6:15 to the citizens of Corinth known for their lewdness and profligacy.

From Deliriums Realm:  http://www.deliriumsrealm.com/belial/
Belial (or Beliaal) is Hebrew for “without value.” He is known as Beliar in Greek. Among certain sections of the Jews, this demon was considered the chief of all the devils. In The War of the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness (1QM), one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Belial is the leader of the Sons of Darkness:

‘But for corruption thou hast made Belial, an angel of hostility. All his dominions are in darkness, and his purpose is to bring about wickedness and guilt. All the spirits that are associated with him are but angels of destruction.’

Belial is also mentioned in the Fragments of a Zadokite Work (which is also known as The Damascus Document (CD)), which states that at the time of the Antichrist, “Belial shall be let loose against Israel, as God spake through Isaiah the prophet.” (6:9). The Fragments also speak of “three nets of Belial” which are said to be fornication, wealth, and polution of the sanctuary. (6:10-11) In this work, Belial is sometimes presented as an agent of divine punishment and sometimes as a rebel. It was Belial who inspired the Egyptian sorcerers, Jochaneh and his brother, to oppose Moses and Aaron. The Fragments also say that anyone who is ruled by the spirits of Belial and speaks of rebellion should be condemned as a necromancer and wizard.

The word “Belial” translates as “worthlessness” or “lawlessness”, and is frequently used in the Old Testament as a proper name. It is first used as a proper name in Deuteronomy 13:13 in the KJV:  other versions use “trouble makers” and “evil people”. In the New Testament it is found only in 2 Corinthians 6:15 KJV perhaps as a proper name and could be an appellative of Satan, the personification of all that is evil. However, the word may be translated as “worthless person” and still retain logical meaning to the reader.  It is translated "wicked" in Deuteronomy 15:9 ; Psalms 41:8; 101:3 ; Proverbs 6:12.  The expression "son" or "man of Belial" means simply a worthless, lawless person, as in Judges 19:22 ; 20:13; 1 Samuel 1:16 ; 2:12.

The meaning of this word as found in the Scriptures is worthlessness, and hence reckless, lawlessness. The expressions son of Belial or man of Belial must be understood as meaning simply a worthless, lawless fellow. The term as used in (2 Corinthians 6:15) is generally understood as an appellative of Satan, as the personification of all that was bad.  It may be that “belial” was a colloquial term of the first century applied to a worthless, lawless, and evil individual.  Paul may have used the word signifying that Satan is a lawless entity.  The KJV translates 2 Thess. 2:3 as “man of sin” but many other versions use “man of lawlessness”.

Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not arrive until the rebellion comes and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction.  (2 Thessalonians 2:3 NET)

It should be said that “Belial” is a description of Satan and not one of his names. It could also be said that “Satan” is not a personal name but a transliteration of a descriptive name.

In the New Testament gospels, the designation of Satan by the word “devil” is used in the following verses:  Matthew 9:32; 11:18; 12:22; 15:22; 17:18; Mark 5:15,16; 7:26,29,30; Luke 4:33,35; 7:33; 8:12,29; 9:42; 11:14; John 6:70; 8:48,49,52; 10:20,21; 13:2.


How did Satan fall, or did he actually fall?  The historical conservative view is that Satan desired to be above God; amassed a cohort of rebel like-minded angels; led some type of offensive active; and he and his rebel angels were tossed out of the heavenly realm.  The theology of the fall of Satan is primarily derived from Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 28, and Revelation 12.  The scriptures alluding to this conclusion will be addressed in following sections.  There are also a few exegetes who have come to the conclusion that Satan, as an accuser and a deceiver, was created by God for that specific purpose.  That concept appears plausible, but other guidelines will be explored that may rule out that God would create an evil entity.  I’m certain that readers will have various opinions and side notes and, hopefully, these options and variables will be covered.

The Long Held Accepted Doctrine
The 12th chapter of Revelation is the primary exegetical source concerning the fall of Satan theology.  Commentators begin with the 1st phrase of verse four, usually ignoring the remainder.  Here is pictured the dragon (or Satan or his historical series of empires) in heaven and he sweeps (draws) a third of the angels and casts them out of heaven onto the earth.  These stars are presumed to be the rebel angels or fallen angels that are in league with the dragon or Satan (according to the long held doctrine of conservative commentators).

And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.  (Revelation 12:4 KJV)

Then, there is a skip to verses 7 and 8 where a war in heaven is portrayed between the dragon and his accomplices verses Michael and the good non-fallen angels.  The dragon brigade does not prevail (they lose) and are confined to the earthly dimension and no longer allowed residence in the heaven of God.  When does this event happen – before creation of the heaven and earth according to historical exegetes of course?

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.  (Revelation 12:7-8 KJV)

Both of the words “drew” and “cast” seam to connote violence or the notion of intense action.  It doesn’t appear that this particular group of angels were willing participants but were forced out of heaven and thrown down to earth.  There is an interesting, similar statement in Daniel 8 that speaks of the little horn (antichrist) casting down angels and trampling or stomping them in a violent manner.
And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land.  And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.  (Dan 8:9-10)

It is an accepted fact among these conservative historical exegetes that Satan and his angelic team fell prior to the creation of the earth.  Therefore, it is only logical, in their thinking, that Revelation chapter 12 must be referring to these pre-creation events.  The new breed of commentators believe that all of the Revelation is future prophecy and Revelation 12 is not an historical chapter or event.

A slight twist on the pre-creation fall is the “Gap Theory”.  According to this theory:  God created the world in Genesis 1:1; Satan and his fallen angel group assumed dominion and corrupted the original creation; God destroyed the Satanic corrupted creation world; millions or billions of years passed; God recreated the world in Genesis 1:2 and we then continue with the remainder of Genesis.

I have generally disagreed with the Gap Theory due to the wordplay and interpretive renderings of the two Hebrew words “bara” and “tohu”.  I also considered the Gap Theory to be a recent development but was surprised to learn that George H. Pember, in his book, Earth’s Earliest Ages presents the almost identical theory in 1876.  Mr. Pember does an excellent job explaining the meaning and usage of the Hebrew words “bara” and “tohu” to the point it was almost believable.  He then interjects his concept of the denizens of this first earth and their exploits which resulted in the original earth’s destruction causing it to be “without form, and void”.  Although without a hint of evidence, he chronicles that God created the heavens and the earth similar to the Garden of Eden.  The one we refer to as Satan (or Lucifer) was placed as the administrator of the earth with many of his fellow angels as assistants.  Satan, through his ego and self-aggrandizement decided to play “god” through DNA manipulation and created the dinosaurs and other monstrosities, both plant and animal, that can be found buried under the earth.  The earth became consumed with sin, iniquity, and non-created creatures to the point that God destroyed the entire galaxy including the earth.  There were no sun, stars, or planets to be found.

This act of Satan (not his actual name, but his current avocation) and his band of cohorts resulted in their fall from the throne room of God but Satan retained his title of the administrator of the world or as Paul states, “the god of this world”.  The theological idea that Revelation 12 is speaking of the fall of Satan and his minions in the far past is absurd.  There is no logical reason Revelation 12 would reveal events of the distant past right in the middle of the 70th week of Daniel or the fulfillment of the Kingdom of God.  Again, there is not a shred of proof for Mr. Pember’s first earth chronicles but it provides a more believable scenario for the fall of certain angels (created entities) than all commentators and exegetes I have read.

Dr. Michael Lake, author of the Shinar Directive and other works, contends that Satan became (or was designated) the “god of this world” by default, at the time when he induced (seduced) Eve and then Adam to eat of the tree of the “knowledge of good and evil”.  Dr. Lake states, “they (Adam and Eve) were infused with this satanic force, were separated from the life and nature of God, took on this sinful nature, and everything that they had been given authority over had now succumbed to this foreign force”.  Basically, because Satan was the initiator of sin and evil into the world of humanity and Satan is the amalgamation of sin and evil, he became the administrator of a world of sinful and evil individuals.

My Accepted Doctrine
This dragon is a composite beast, which is later identified as a Satan-type symbolic entity.  It is representative of the empire instigated by Satan throughout the history of the Hebrew-Israelite people:  Egypt; Assyria; Babylon; Persia; Greece; Rome; and lastly the beast empire.  The purpose of these historical empires has been to prevent the birth of the woman’s Son who will bruise the head of the serpent or Satan as prophesied in Genesis.  This prophetic composite beast also appears in Daniel 7 and in its final form in Revelation 13.  For a more complete exposition of the composite beast go to:  The Composite Beast at http://freedomfromdelusion.blogspot.com.

It is doubtful that Satan and one third of the angels fell from heaven and the throne of God prior to creation.  Job states that angels shouted for joy at creation.  However, one could consider the gap theology as the first creation and debate the timing of the event described in Job.

"Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you possess understanding! Who set its measurements -- if you know -- or who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its bases set, or who laid its cornerstone --when the morning stars sang in chorus, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?   (Job 38:4-7 NET)

According to Dr. Michael Heiser, Genesis 3 indicates that a nachash (shining one), possibly with serpentine characteristics, deceived Eve and then Adam to disobey the commands of God.  If this entity was Satan then he most likely became a fallen angel at that point.  The snake entity is never identified as a specific created being.  For more information go to:  Angels & the Divine Council: Part 2 . 

The only real Biblical evidence that angels fell from heaven is found in Genesis 6.  These “sons of God” or angels departed heaven (left their own habitation) and mated with human women.  In the book of 1 Enoch there are referred to as “Watchers”.  They are currently in chains inside the abyss.

And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.  (Jude 1:6 KJV)

In Deuteronomy Moses gave a semi-historical account of events occurring after the flood.  He commented that after the language alterations associated with the tower of Babel that God divided the bounds of the people and set a “son of God” as their overseer.  The wording of the phrase “angels of God” has been changed in the Masoretic text to read, “Sons of Israel”, however, there were no sons of Israel at that time of the tower of Babel.

When the Most High divided the nations, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God.  (Deuteronomy 32:8 Brenton LXX)

These “sons” or angelic entities may be the second current group of supposed fallen angels.  They may not be fallen as the angels of Genesis 6 or they would be imprisoned in Tartarus by God (see 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 1:6).  These administrative angels may be written about in Psalm 82 where it is indicated they will die as men.  A few commentators have accused them of demanding human worship and sacrifices during the Old Testament days, and thus, the initiators of idolatry and idol worship.

A Psalm of Asaph. God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah. Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy. Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked. They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course. I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes. Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.
(Psalms 82:1-8 KJV)

As a summary of the fall of Satan, there are several possibilities.  He fell as the administrator of the alleged gap creation or as the nachash tempting Eve to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.  The concept that he fell from heaven prior to the creation of the world, as some exegetes claim, is not acceptable in my opinion.

Satan in Isaiah Chapter 14
Isaiah 14:12-14 KJV  How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!  (13)  For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:  (14)  I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

The verses supposedly dealing with the origin of Satan in Isaiah chapter 14, according to the long-held view by conservative expositors, is generally found in verses 12 through 14.  The first 4 verses of this chapter describe the millennial reign of Christ (the Kingdom of God) where Jacob, Israel, and strangers (Gentiles; the nations) will possess the “land of the Lord”.  Verse four states these eternal Sabbath rest individuals are to “take up a proverb” against the king of Babylon.  Some expositors, such as Peter Goodgame, consider the king of Babylon as the end-times beast or antichrist in the personage of Nimrod.  The beast is the king of the world, particularly Israel, which is mystery, Babylon, therefore the antichrist would be the king of the mystery Babylon system.  Satan is undoubtedly fully sponsoring this endeavor but few if any consider him as the beast:  perhaps possessing the beast but not the actual beast.

Dr. Michael Heiser claims this chapter is about an evil tyrant king, whose pride is described in terms of an ancient story concerning a divine being who fell from paradise due to his rebellion against God.  The Hebrew word translated as Lucifer in the KJV is “Helel ben Shachar” which literally means “shining one, son of the dawn.”  The word “Lucifer” was taken from the Latin vulgate translation of “Helel” and transliterated to English.  If one takes the Hebrew text literally, there is no angel or created entity with the name of Lucifer, which should be understood as a mistranslation by the Latin Vulgate, the King James, and other versions using this word as a proper name.

Many conservative exegetes view this passage as part of the history of Satan with the name of Lucifer.  Albert Pike (1809-1891), in his book, Morals and Dogma makes the following comment:  Lucifer, the Light-Bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual or selfish Souls? Doubt it not!

A possible view of Satan can be ascertained in verse 13.  This entity desired to ascend higher in heavenly authority; he desired to have authority over the stars of God (angels); and he wanted to be in charge of the divine council.  This list of “I wills” is generally agreed to be the aspirations of the Satan entity at some point in history but when these became “thoughts” and when these thoughts resulted in a fall from the heaven of God is not actually known.  For more information on the Divine Council go to:  Angels and the Divine Council: Part 1 ; Angels and the Divine Council: Part 2 ; Angels and the Divine Council: Part 3

For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:  (Isaiah 14:13 KJV)

Satan in Isaiah Ezekiel 28
The 28th chapter of Ezekiel is another “go-to” scripture reference concerning the history of Satan for certain conservative theologians.  The chapter contains two different but related comments concerning the king of Tyrus.  The first part, Verses 1 through 11, is a statement to the king and the second part, verses 12 through 19 is a lamentation or dirge about the king.

A Statement to the King of Tyrus
The king has said (in his heart) “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God.”  The Lord replies that he is merely a man but says in his heart that he is a God.  He is wiser than Daniel; no secret can be kept from him; and he is extremely wealthy.  Because he considers himself a God (or higher than God), the Lord will send armed nations against him.  He will be slain and descend to the pit (Hebrew word: shachath) which actually means a pit as a large hole in the ground or possibly a grave, and not the abyss.

Wilt thou yet say before him that slays thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slays thee.  (Ezekiel 28:9 KJV)

A Lament to the King of Tyrus
If this section concerns Satan or another high ranking angelic being, then the lament or dirge due to his death will not be completed until the lake of fire.  This entity is said to have been in Eden, the garden of God; his covering was of precious stones; and the KJV claims he had tabrets and pipes (other versions say settings and mounts).

Verse 14 KJV states he was the anointed cherub, but the NET says, “I placed you there with an anointed cherub.”  It is difficult to determine the authenticity of the king as a possible cherub with the various translations of the Hebrew.  If the entity is a cherub or with a cherub then he may actually be Satan although no mention is made of Satan in the Ezekiel text.  The correlation to a possible Satan is the mention of his presence in the garden of Eden.

According to verse 16 the king was filled with violence due to the quantity of his merchandise or trade (goods perhaps?).  The king sinned, was defiled by God, and banished from the mountain of God (Eden or Moriah perhaps).  Scripture appears to indicate that God will destroy him with fire (maybe the lake of fire at the end of the Millennium).

The final part of Ezekiel 28 appears to be a prophecy concerning the wrath of God culminating the 70th week of Daniel and the appearance of the Millennium.  This third section could place an interesting perspective on the preceding parts of the chapter.  Perhaps it is referring to the beast (antichrist) who will be destroyed at the end of the age.  Perhaps the king of Tyrus is the beast as a Nephilim figure, as some suspect; the king may be Satan; he could be Nimrod/Asshur/Ninus; he could be another angelic entity (nachash) not even associated with Satan.


It is considered a fact that all Hebrew names have a meaning or definition.  Is the word “Satan” a name or a definition?  The Hebrew word sawtawn in Job is translated as Satan in the majority of versions, with a few reading “adversary”.  However, there is a transliteral connection between the Hebrew sawtawn and the English word Satan, which may represent a play-on-words.  It is still uncertain if Satan is a proper name but is highly probable merely an English transliteration of sawtawn. 

It is certain an angelic creation was the protagonist in the Garden of Eden.  Doctor Heiser has verified (to my satisfaction) the being was a nachash or shining one with certain reptilian features and therefore a heavenly being.  The seraph figure in Isaiah 14 could be the same entity as the Genesis 3 entity but it never uses the word sawtawn as an identifier.  The word Lucifer is actually Helel ben Shachar, which is borrowed from the Latin Vulgate.  Lucifer is a transliteration of the Latin word for shining or the planet Venus.  Does this mean that Satan’s actual name is Helel?  It is uncertain is Helel is a name but Lucifer is probably not.

The supposed Ezekiel 28 history of Satan is another uncertain exposition.  Language scholars are in disagreement whether the entity called the king of Tyrus is a cherubim or if the questionable entity was placed in the company of a cherubim.  It may be two different entities:  the king of Tyrus and a nachash with the nachash having an influence on the king.  Again, the use of a Hebrew or Ugaritic word implying Satan is not present in the text.

The New Testament occasionally uses the Greek word satanas of which Satan is a transliteration.  It is my opinion that the Greek satanas is merely another transliteration phase of the Hebrew sawtawn.  This would mean that both the Old Testament “Satan” and the New Testament “Satan” are transliterates of the common sound of the words in question.  Periodically the Greek word diablos is used to denote Satan as the devil, but the majority of instances the word diablos is used to identify a demon, which is probably the manner it should be presented.

The events of Revelation chapter 12 only deal with the 70th week of Daniel and has nothing to do with the history of Satan or fallen angels in the past.

No comments:

Post a Comment