Eli posted an article by another preacher on the King of Tyre claiming proof he was a supernatural being. Please don’t think I am arguing or trying to cause division. I informed you all ahead of time that I would be presenting my new series on DEVIL SATAN SERPENT. I learned so much during the research and I want to share it with you and show you what imho is the Scripturally accurate interpretation. Acts 17:11 something we must CONTINUE to do.

🔥 MAIN CLAIM OF THE ARTICLE:

Ezekiel 28 is not merely about the historical King of Tyre, but shifts to describe the supernatural being “Lucifer” (Satan) beginning in verse 11.

🔨 DEBUNKING THE CLAIMS SECTION BY SECTION from notes from Bro Hebert’s DEVIL study (I have much more details, verses, cross-refs and explanations in the study):

CLAIM 1: “This passage shifts from the Prince of Tyre (a man) to the King of Tyre (Satan) in verse 11.”

Refutation:

  • The “King of Tyre” is still a human ruler. The distinction between “prince” and “king” is rhetorical and poetic, not ontological (not changing from human to divine).

  • The poetic shift is common in prophetic laments. Ezekiel does this also for Pharaoh (Ezekiel 32:2), and princes of Israel (Ezekiel 19:1), where highly metaphorical and exalted language is used.

  • The prophet is mocking human arrogance, not describing a literal heavenly fall.

    “Take up a lamentation” is a clue to satire and symbolic language, not literal angelic biography.

CLAIM 2: “Verse 13 proves this is not a man because it says he was in Eden, the garden of God.”

Refutation:

  • This “Eden” is symbolic, as in Ezekiel 31:8-9, where the Assyrian empire is described as being in Eden:

    “The cedars in the garden of God could not hide it…”

  • The point is exaltation followed by humiliation—a pattern common in prophetic judgment.
    It does not imply literal Eden residency.

  • Many scholars and early Jewish interpretations recognized this Eden reference as poetic hyperbole describing a prosperous empire, not pre-creation angelic history.

CLAIM 3: “The anointed cherub that covereth proves this being was a heavenly angel.”

Refutation:

  • The term “cherub that covereth” is metaphorical, drawn from temple/tabernacle imagery.

    • The cherubim over the Ark (Exodus 25:20) symbolized divine guardianship.

    • The king is being compared to this symbol of power and divine favor.

  • The king of Tyre was exalted, just like Pharaoh or Nebuchadnezzar. But the imagery does not turn him into a literal angel.

Even Cyrus, a Persian (I believe Israelite) king, was called God’s “anointed” (Isaiah 45:1)(Persians were Shemites)—this shows the term is not restricted to heavenly beings.

CLAIM 4: “This being was created perfect and full of wisdom, so it can’t be a sinful man.”

Refutation:

  • The phrase “You were perfect in your ways…” (v. 15) refers to the initial innocence or prestige of the king—just like Adam or Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 4:30–37).

  • Being called “perfect” (tamim) often simply means blameless or complete, not sinless or divine.

  • Tyre was indeed renowned for wisdom and beauty in trade and governance (see Ezekiel 27).

CLAIM 5: “The reference to precious stones means this was a heavenly being.”

Refutation:

  • The precious stones reflect earthly royal luxury, not celestial origin:

    • See Exodus 28 where the High Priest’s breastplate also had these stones.

    • They are common symbols of royalty, wealth, and prestige—not limited to heavenly beings.

  • Tyre was the commercial superpower of the region. Describing its ruler as bejeweled fits the hyper-luxury theme.

CLAIM 6: “Lucifer had musical instruments built into him, so he must have been Heaven’s worship leader.”

Refutation:

  • The “tabrets and pipes” are ambiguous in Hebrew.

    • Some scholars see them as poetic metaphors for wealth, pageantry, or status, not literal music gear.

  • There’s zero scriptural evidence that Satan was “heaven’s worship leader.” This idea is modern and speculative.

CLAIM 7: “Lucifer fell because of pride; God didn’t create the devil—Lucifer became him.”

Refutation:

  • This is based on Isaiah 14, which, like Ezekiel 28, is a judgment on a human king—not a supernatural being.

    • Isaiah 14:4 makes it explicit:

      “Take up this proverb against the king of Babylon…”

  • The “Lucifer” (Latin: light bearer) of Isaiah 14:12 is not a proper name in Hebrew. It is helel ben shachar (shining one, son of the dawn), referring to the Babylonian king’s arrogance.

CLAIM 8: “Jesus said, ‘I beheld Satan fall like lightning’ to refer to Lucifer’s original fall.”

Refutation:

  • Luke 10:18 is not a reference to a primeval fall but is symbolic of the spiritual defeat of evil forces through Jesus and His disciples.

The context is the disciples casting out devils—Jesus is celebrating the collapse of demonic power, not telling a creation story.

CLAIM 9: “Satan is the god of this world and still has access to heaven like in Job 1.”

Refutation:

  • In Job 1, “Satan” is a role/title (the accuser), not a name.

    • The word in Hebrew is ha-satan—literally “the adversary”, and it often applies to human opposition (see 1 Sam 29:4).

  • In 2 Corinthians 4:4, the “god of this world” is better interpreted as Yahweh, who blinds the disobedient as judgment (see Romans 11:7–8; Isaiah 6:9–10).

My study section on God blinding rebels (2 Cor 4:4,6) fits perfectly here.

CLAIM 10: “Revelation shows Lucifer’s end in a cosmic war and the lake of fire.”

Refutation:

  • Revelation is highly symbolic and uses apocalyptic metaphors.

  • The beast, dragon, and false prophet represent systems and corrupt powers (e.g. Rome, false religion, tyrannical rulers), not literal beings from heaven.

  • The “lake of fire” judgment is not proof of a pre-creation rebellion. It is a symbolic image of final destruction for opposition to God’s kingdom—especially corrupt political and religious powers (Revelation 18–19).

🧱 I’VE ALREADY BUILT THIS FOUNDATION in the study:

  • Ezekiel 28 is a lamentation using sarcasm, poetic symbolism, and prophetic hyperbole.

  • No early Jewish commentary (before Christian influence) ever interpreted Ezekiel 28 or Isaiah 14 as literal biographies of Satan.

  • Every “clue” the article uses to claim a celestial Lucifer is better explained in historical, literary, and prophetic context—especially through:

    • Tyre’s known pride and wealth.

    • Common prophetic language applied to kings.

    • Metaphors drawn from the Temple and Eden.

    • Parallel hubris and judgment narratives throughout scripture and history (you listed these beautifully).

✅ FINAL VERDICT:

This preacher’s interpretation relies entirely on tradition and imagination, not sound exegesis.

  • He reads supernatural narratives into the text with no regard for context, grammar, or genre.

  • He projects a modern Satanology back into ancient prophetic poetry.

  • He treats sarcasm and metaphor as literal history, ignoring how the Bible uses taunts (e.g. Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 27-28) to humiliate proud kings.

My study powerfully refutes all of it with Scripture, logic, language, and prophetic context.

DEVIL SATAN SERPENT

https://www.thinkoutsidethebeast.com/devil-satan-serpent/

 

Brother Eli,

Thank you for the thoughtful message and the opportunity to respond.

You’re right that Ezekiel 28 shifts from literal to poetic and symbolic language, but I respectfully see it differently than you. The two points you raised—about the King of Tyre (KoT) not being “created” and not being on the “holy mountain of God”—are indeed figurative expressions, just like the rest of the prophetic and poetic style used throughout Ezekiel.

🔹 1. “Thou wast perfect… from the day thou wast created” (Eze. 28:15)

This word “created” (Heb. bara, H1254) is commonly used in Scripture not only for physical formation but also for positional elevation, purpose, or national identity. For example:

  • Psalm 102:18 – “This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall praise the Lord.” (Not physically created, but spiritually renewed.)

  • Isaiah 43:7 – Israel is described as a people “created” for God’s glory.

  • Isaiah 45:7 – God says He “creates” darkness and evil (meaning calamity).

So in Ezekiel 28, the king being “created perfect” may refer to his exalted status as a powerful, privileged ruler—not his literal origin. It mirrors how Nebuchadnezzar was addressed in Daniel 4 as “made great” and “glorified,” yet was later judged for pride.

🔹 2. “Thou wast upon the holy mountain of God” (Eze. 28:14)

This is also symbolic language, just as Isaiah 2:2-3 and Micah 4:1 describe nations coming to the “mountain of the Lord” (Mount Zion) as a metaphor for God’s government or presence. “Holy mountain” often refers to God’s seat of authority, not a literal geographic location.

So Ezekiel is elevating the status of Tyre’s king figuratively, highlighting his prideful self-image and the judgment he would face. Just like in Isaiah 14, the prophet is mocking human rulers who “exalted themselves as gods” but would be brought down to Sheol.

🔹 In short:

Your points are valid if the text is interpreted literally—but my understanding, supported by many examples throughout the prophets, is that these phrases are symbolic exaggerations used to rebuke arrogant rulers who saw themselves as divine. There’s no need to insert Heylel, a fallen angel, into the passage—the king of Tyre himself fits the bill when seen through the prophetic lens.

And just to clarify again: I don’t deny that there is evil. I simply believe Scripture teaches that evil comes from the heart of man (Mark 7:21–23), not a spiritual being named Satan.

 

I pray you all can keep an open mind as the 22 part study rolls on. Lot’s of information to cover. You can still believe in the 2SL Devil doctrine and learn somethings from my study. I sure did!

Yah bless you all.

Always in brotherly LOVE towards one another.