|
|
|
|
The Creation and Sin of Satan
If Satan were not a created being then he must be eternal or self existent, a dualism that is incompatible with monotheism. The Scriptures declare that all things were by God through Christ, and there was nothing that was not made by Him, (John 1:3; Col. 1:16-17). The time of his creation is not specified. If Ezekiel 28:13 refers to Satan and the earthly garden in Eden, then, of course, he had to have been created before God planted the Garden in Eden (Gen. 2:8).
Many debate whether or not Ezekiel 28:11-19 has Satan in view, but if it does, then it provides us with a number of descriptive details as to the characteristics of Satan's original condition at his creation. All agree that the subject of verses 1-19 is judgment on Tyre and its leader. But the question is , do verses 11-19 go beyond the human leader to reveal things about something or someone else? The candidates for that something or someone else called the king of Tyre are: (a) a symbol drawn from the pagan mythology, (b) a primal being who lived in the Garden of Eden and was driven out through pride; (c) a mythological, unreal being presented in Phoenician mythology and incorporated and applied in this story to the king of Tyre; (d) an "ideal", though unreal, person; (e) the ideal man, the same as the historical first man, Adam, whose histories (initial privileges and subsequent sin) are analogous; (f) the sinister being Satan; (g) Satan's masterpiece, Antichrist. Views (a) through (d) are incompatible with the principles of normal interpretation, for there is no justification for introducing such mythology into the text. View (e), though possible, seems to fall short of fulfilling the totality of the sinister nature of the figure behind the king of Tyre. Views (f) and (g) can be combined; i.e., Satan is the one behind it all, including being behind Antichrist who will be the climax of all people whom Satan has indwelt throughout history. The king of Tyre was one he indwelt in the past, as Antichrist will be the final one he will indwell in the future. To understand the prophecy as including references to satan does not mean the Ezekiel did not also have a historical leader of Tyre in mind in his denunciations. The question is, did he only have the historical human leader in view, or did he also have a greater being, Satan, in mind? The flowery and highly figurative language can argue for either conclusion. Those who feel that only the human leader is in view understand the language as a typical, exaggerated way an oriental ruler might be referred to. Those who also see Satan in the passage argue that such language includes too many superlatives and figures to be true of only an earthly king no matter how great he was. It would seem difficult to apply verses 14 and 15, for example, to any earthly king. It would, of course, not be unusual for a prophetic passage to refer both to a local personage and also to someone else who fully fulfills it. This is true on many passages that relate both to King David and Jesus Christ. It is also true of the reference to the prince of the kingdom of Persia in Daniel 10:13, a reference that must include a superhuman being related to the kingdom of Persia. So for Ezekiel 28 to refer both to the then-reigning king of Tyre as well as to Satan would not be a unique interpretive conclusion. Indeed, it seems the right conclusion: The historic king of Tyre was simply a tool of Satan, possibly indwelt by him. And in describing this king, Ezekiel also gives us glimpses of the superhuman creature, Satan, who was using, if not indwelling, him. Assuming, then, that Satan is in the picture in these verses, what do we learn about his original characteristics at his creation? Whatever specifies these verses teach, they convey the clear idea that Satan was highly privileged, the epitome of God's Creation, who had an unparalleled position in the universe.
Satan stood at the zenith of God's creatures, filled with wisdom and perfect in beauty.
This may refer to a heavenly Eden or to the earthly Eden. In either case, it was, before sin entered, a unique place.
The dazzling description of his dress or robe indicates something of the glory bestowed on him.
He belonged to the order of angelic creature designated cherubim. They are associated with guarding the holiness of God (Gen. 3:24), with the throne of God (Ezek. 1:5), and here apparently with the actual presence of God. Satan was on the holy mountain of God, and he walked in the midst of the stones of fire, likely references to the presence of God Himself. Apparently Satan was the chief guardian of God's holiness and majesty.
He was perfect in the sense of being completely sound and having total moral integrity. Here, as well as in verse 13, we are reminded that Satan was created, and as a creature, he must someday answer to his Creator.
Sin was found in him (Ezek. 28:15). This is really the only verse in the Bible that states exactly the origin of sin. The details of Satan's sin are specified elsewhere, but the origin is only expressed here. This sin must have been included in the eternal plan of God. Yet God never assumes the responsibility for the commission of any sin, including Satan's. Sin was found in Satan; yet he was created perfect. God is not the blameworthy cause of Satan's sin; yet it was included in His plan.
The New Testament pinpoints Satan's particular sin as arrogance, conceit, or being puffed up (I Tim. 3:16). It is likened to the conceit a new convert may have when he is either pushed forward or asserts himself too quickly and begins to take to himself the glory that belongs to God. Ezekiel 28:16 assigns the cause of Satan's downfall to the abundance of his trade. In other words, Satan used his position for personal profit---to traffic in his own self-promotion. Isaiah gives more detail of Satan's sin (Isa. 14:12-17). Like the Ezekiel 28:11-19 there is a question as to whether or not this refers at all to Satan. (1) Some regard the Isaiah passage as referring only to the fall of the King of Babylon mentioned in verse 4. (2) Others understand the passage to relate only to the fall of Satan. (3) Those who hold views (1) or (2) may also see the king of Babylon or Satan as prefiguring the fall of the coming Antichrist. (4) Likely the truth includes all of the references; i.e., the fall of the king of Babylon is an antitype of the previous fall of Satan and a type of the future fall of Antichrist. (4) Likely the truth includes all of these references: i.e., the fall of the king of Babylon is an antitype of the previous fall of Satan and a type of the future fall of Antichrist. The passage transcends anything that can be said of an earthly king and has been understood from earliest times to also refer to Satan's fall as described in Luke 10:18. Satan is called the morning star in Isaiah 14:12. The Latin equivalent is Lucifer, which, on the basis of this passage, becomes a name for Satan. However, the use of the morning star with reference to Satan gives us an indication of the basic character of his plot against God. Since the same title is used in Revelation 22:16 of Christ, we are alerted to the fact that Satan's plan was to counterfeit the plan of God, and indeed it was and is. How he initiated the plan is detailed in five "I Will" phrases in Isaiah 14:13-14.
As guardian of God's holiness Satan had access to heaven, but this expresses his desire to occupy and settle in heaven on an equality with God.
The meaning of this depends on the understanding of "stars." If they refer to angels (Job 38:7); Jude 13; Rev. 12:3-4), then Satan wished to rule over all the angels. If they refer to the luminous heavenly bodies, then he wished to rule in the heavens.
This bespeaks Satan's ambition to govern the universe as the assembly of Babylonian gods supposedly did.
He wanted the glory that belonged to God (clouds are often associated with God's presence, see Exod.16:10; Isa. 19:1).
Here his counterfeit is crystal clear. Satan wanted to be like, not unlike, God. The name "Elyon" for God stresses God's strength and sovereignty (Gen. 14:18). Satan wanted to be as powerful as God. He wanted to exercise the authority and control in this world that rightfully belongs only to God. His sin was a direct challenge to the power and authority of God. Satan's sin was all the heinous because of the great privileges, intelligence, and position he had. His sin was also more damaging because of the widespread effects of it. It affected other angels (Rev. 12:7); it affects all people (Eph. 2:2); it positioned him as the ruler of this world, which he uses to promote his kingdom and to counterfeit God's (John 16:11); it affects all the nations of the world, for he works to deceive them (Rev. 20:3). All sin is serious, and all sin affects others. But sin in high places is more serious and its ramifications more widespread. The sin of Satan should serve as a constant reminder and warning to us. 1. See a full discussion in Charles L. Feinberg, The prophecy of Ezekiel (Chicago: Moody, 1969), 158-632. Donald Grey Barnhouse, The Invisible War (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 19659, 26-27.3. J. Oliver Buswell, "The Origin and Nature of Sin," Basic Christian Doctrines, Carl F. H. Henry, ed. (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1962), 107-9.4. Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah (Edinburgh: T. T. Clark, 1875), 1:312.5. Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology (Chicago: Moody Press, C. C. Ryrie, 1999), 161-165. |
|
Send mail to
Webmaster@ibc-giessen.org with
questions or comments about this web site.
|
