Will God ever forgive Satan?

WisdomandLove said:

Satan is as much a creation of God as we are. I Corinthians 15:25 tells us that Christ will put all His enemies under his feet. This would certainly include Satan. The teaching that Isaiah 14 refers to Satan is in error, because we are told in verse 4 that it is actually referring to the king of Babylon. The teaching that Ezekiel 28 refers to Satan is equally in error, because we are told in that chapter that it is addressed to the king of Tyre. Both of these men die and go to their graves. They say in their hearts that they will be like God, but they will be brought down to their graves. The truth about Satan, according to our Jesus Christ, is that he was a liar and a murderer from the beginning (Joh 8:44), not some time after the beginning. He was created as a vessel of dishonor, straight from the hand of the creator for the purpose of being a 'satan', which means adversary. God needed an adversary for his purposes. Consequently, it is incumbent upon a loving Father, Who is also the Father of Satan, to redeem his entire creation. Php 2:10 and Rev 5:13 make it clear that all of creation will glorify God in the end.

Click to expand...

So what do you make of the verses about the fall and war in heaven?

Let's not forget, satan was Lucifer before he fell.

SolomonVII said:

Unlike any individual person, the book on Satan has already been written. The Bible is a prophetic book too, and Biblically speaking, Satan does not repent.

The future of Satan already fully exists in prophecy. It is not that Satan cannot repent; it is that simply he didn't repent.

Click to expand...

Does the "prophetic book" say Satan does not have knees.

PHI 2:10,11 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Strong in Him said:

That's consistent with his rebellion against God. Satan tried to overthrow God; snatch his power and authority, and failed. So of course he has to be submissive to God - he can do nothing without God's permission; he doesn't have the power.



Jesus called Satan the prince of this world. Sin, sickness and suffering come from the devil, as do evil and rebellion against God. There is plenty of that in the world today, so I would say that shows that Satan has some power and limited control.
The Kingdom of God is anywhere God is honoured, and takes his rightful place as, king. Jesus has shown us what that kingdom looks like; a kingdom without sickness, where evil spirits are driven out, where forgiveness, love, healing and peace are found and where people worship God as king and allow him to rule.

Satan is only the prince of this world - God is King.

Click to expand...

https://924jeremiah.wordpress.com/2015/02/15/satan-qa/

The popular theory is that Satan led some kind of mutinous revolt against God and a third of the angels supported him. When all of these rebellious angels were condemned by God, they continued to submit to Satan as their leader.

Now it’s important to note that we really don’t have any evidence to support this dramatic image of Satan leading some massive revolt in Heaven. Many try to turn Ezekiel 28 into a metaphorical description of Satan, and it is this passage which they then use to support the theory that Satan tried to elevate himself as God’s equal (or superior), and that that’s what got him in such hot soup. It is also this passage that feeds the very popular theory that the snake who tried to coax Eve into sinning in Eden was Satan incarnate.

As is often the case with popular traditions in the Church, this Ezekiel 28 theory is utterly ridiculous. Yahweh is explicitly clear that He is addressing a human being in this passage: the king of the seaside city of Tyre. Like the kings of Assyria, Egypt, and Babylon, the king of Tyre developed a massive ego and started entertaining grand delusions about how fabulous he was. God takes issue with human dots claiming to be Divine beings. The king of Tyre is NOT the only king to have done this. In the Bible we find God chewing out many kings for their arrogance, yet it is only the king of Tyre who we try to force into some absurd metaphor for Satan. No, this simply doesn’t work. The king of Tyre was a human being, and the famous snake from Eden was just a snake. In our over-zealous search for information about Satan, we have read demons into passages where none exist (see Taking Satan out of Ezekiel 28 & Eden: Disturbing Revelations).

Click to expand...

yes, however our Heavenly Father has already foreseen that he will not, so the answer is both. If he repented he would, but he will not, so no, his judgment comes soon.

Hishandmaiden said:

If one day, satan decides to repent, will God forgive him?

Click to expand...

Celestial Warrior said:

yes, however our Heavenly Father has already foreseen that he will not, so the answer is both. If he repented he would, but he will not, so no, his judgment comes soon.

Click to expand...

How do we know that satan and the fallen angels still have or have ever had the option to repent? The Bible doesn't say it. Sin is passed down to mankind, but the angels do not have sin from the beginning, so I don't think that they do.

ToBeLoved said:

Let's not forget, satan was Lucifer before he fell.

Click to expand...

This is basically a medieval invention.

"Lucifer" is a Latin word which refers to the planet Venus, and it means "light-bearing", Venus was also known as the "dawn star" because it was the last "star" one could see before the sun rose. The Prophet Isaiah uses the Hebrew term for Venus as an epithet against the king of Babylon, the Prophet's biting words are directed not to the devil, but a human individual, as the king considered himself among the gods in the heavens, that his high and lofty position would be short and he would fall.

This was translated into Latin as "lucifer", the Latin translation of the New Testament uses the same word to describe Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:19). And the term "lucifer" is still used in traditional Latin prayers and hymns to refer to Christ, such as the Paschal Hymn known as the Exsultet. There were a number of ancient Christian leaders who were given the name "Lucifer", such as the 4th century St. Lucifer of Cagliari.

The identification of the "morning star" in Isaiah with the devil is a medieval invention, one that became more popular in works such as Dante's Divine Comedy and Milton's Paradise Lost. But biblically speaking "Lucifer" is never a name for the devil.

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis said:

This is basically a medieval invention.

"Lucifer" is a Latin word which refers to the planet Venus, and it means "light-bearing", Venus was also known as the "dawn star" because it was the last "star" one could see before the sun rose. The Prophet Isaiah uses the Hebrew term for Venus as an epithet against the king of Babylon, the Prophet's biting words are directed not to the devil, but a human individual, as the king considered himself among the gods in the heavens, that his high and lofty position would be short and he would fall.

This was translated into Latin as "lucifer", the Latin translation of the New Testament uses the same word to describe Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:19). And the term "lucifer" is still used in traditional Latin prayers and hymns to refer to Christ, such as the Paschal Hymn known as the Exsultet. There were a number of ancient Christian leaders who were given the name "Lucifer", such as the 4th century St. Lucifer of Cagliari.

The identification of the "morning star" in Isaiah with the devil is a medieval invention, one that became more popular in works such as Dante's Divine Comedy and Milton's Paradise Lost. But biblically speaking "Lucifer" is never a name for the devil.

-CryptoLutheran

Click to expand...

Why would it matter waht Lucifer was when it was translated into latin? The Bible wasn't written in latin. I'm not getting what you are saying?

ToBeLoved said:

Why would it matter waht Lucifer was when it was translated into latin? The Bible wasn't written in latin. I'm not getting what you are saying?

Click to expand...

Okay, let's start from the beginning. Here is Isaiah 14:12 from the 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!"

This isn't about the devil. This is about the king of Babylon, a human being. This is the passage which people get the idea that Satan was once an angel named Lucifer. This passage isn't talking about the devil, it's talking about a human king, the king of Babylon, probably Nebuchadnezzar II.

The term "Lucifer" is Latin, the translators of the KJV didn't translate this word into English, they kept the word as it was found in the Latin Vulgate. They translated the passage from Hebrew into English, but used the word "lucifer" as it was found in the Vulgate.

"Lucifer" in Latin means "light-bringer".

Here is Isaiah 14:12 in the original Hebrew,

"אֵיךְ נָפַלְתָּ מִשָּׁמַיִם הֵילֵל בֶּן־שָׁחַר נִגְדַּעְתָּ לָאָרֶץ חֹולֵשׁ עַל־גֹּויִֽם׃"

I've underlined and put in bold the word heylel, this word in Hebrew referred to the planet Venus, the "morning star", the word heylel comes from the verb halal meaning "to shine" "to be bright", thus the word means "bright [thing]" in this case the meaning is "bright star" as in the planet Venus.

When translated into Greek in the Septuagint, here is the same passage,

"πῶς ἐξέπεσεν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ὁ ἑωσφόρος ὁ πρωὶ ἀνατέλλων συνετρίβη εἰς τὴν γῆν ὁ ἀποστέλλων πρὸς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη"

I've again highlighted the word by bolding it and underlining it; the word is heosphoros, literally "dawn-bringer", a variant of the word φωσφόρος, (phosphoros "light-bringer") both refer to the planet Venus.

When this passage was translated into Latin it became,

"quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes"

Again, I've underlined and put the word in bold. The Latin word "lucifer" means "light-bringer", it is a direct literal translation of the Greek phosphoros.

In the middle ages this passage was taken by many to be, in some sense, actually talking about the fall of Satan, and since in Western Europe in the middle ages Latin was the official language of the Church, the language of Scripture, the term "lucifer" was adopted and made into a proper name for the devil: Lucifer, the fallen angel.

This medieval idea was preserved in the KJV when the translators didn't translate the Hebrew word heylel, but simply inserted the Latin word "lucifer" there in the English text, making it a proper name. And with the popularity of works like the Divine Comedy by Dante, and Milton's Paradise Lost, it has continued to seep into popular consciousness that Satan, before he was Satan, was an angel in heaven named Lucifer.

But "Lucifer" was never a name for the devil, not biblically. There never existed an angel named "Lucifer", that's not a thing, it never was. It's a popular idea that exists in modern times because of a peculiar medieval interpretation of a passage in Isaiah which is condemning Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon, a completely mortal human king.

Satan is never called Lucifer in the Bible.

On the contrary, the term "Lucifer" was applied to Jesus Christ instead, as in 2 Peter 1:19,

"Et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem: cui benefacitis attendentes quasi lucernæ lucenti in caliginoso donec dies elucescat, et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris:"

There were Christian leaders in the early church named Lucifer.

The idea that the devil is called "Lucifer" is very late, it is a medieval idea, it has no basis in Scripture.

-CryptoLutheran

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou 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!cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"
-Isaiah

vs.
'I saw Satan fall from the sky, like lightning'.
-Jesus

Suffice to say the medeival churchmen did not invent equation of Satan=Lucifer whole cloth. This was a result of Biblical research, and using the Bible to interpret the Bible.

Lucifer, like Christ is not a personal name, but a title.



For you have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’
15 Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol,
To the lowest depths of the Pit.

Biblical scholars will make note of the fact that this is about a king. King of Babylon, King of Tyre in other similarly themed passages, the gods that even Jesus makes allusion to in talking about the ruling classes of Biblical times.

It is the NT and Jesus himself who gives the darkened, spiritual perspective of this kind of power-hungry, prideful sin of great men, and reveals Satan; the lawless one and the deceiving power of 2Thess2 to be very much at the core of such wordly power and overreach. Satan, the father of lies, is the father of this sin of ancient god-men rulers.

The case is always being made that Satan of the OT is not the Satan of the NT
This can be true for Jews; I do not think that it can be true for Christians. Satan becomes fully revealed for us by Jesus himself. The luceferian aspect of Satan becomes much more readily apparent after Jesus.

Most of the NT, well the whole Bible really, focuses on the falsity of the claims of kings to be gods. Interestingly, Jesus justifies himself against accusations of blasphemy by applying OT claims of elites being god to himself and his own claims. Far from holding such claims to ridicule, he justifies himself by holding such claims to be true.

In the world of mortals, such as is the OT, the worm rules. In the age of immortality, the world that Jesus ushers in, the worm no longer ultimately turns us to rot, and claims to be god are now to be taken literally too, for after all, what uniquely separates Adam from God is immortality.

Being a follower of Christ, one of my greatest hopes is that all souls will eventually be reconciled back to God, no matter what they have to go through to understand that wickedness and loving yourself more than God is not the way. Even in the most wicked people there is a little bit of love. That part I hope is saved.

Hillsage said:

Does the "prophetic book" say Satan does not have knees.

PHI 2:10,11 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Click to expand...

And if Christ never offered Him forgiveness why would Satan think his confessing Christ will change anything or him bending the knee.

Satan KNOWS God exists. Satan lived with God, not through faith in what we cannot see as we do.

Every knee will bow and then he will be tossed into the lake of fire. Jesus does not offer him redemption. You are putting angels on the same level as human beings, but Jesus cast them out of heaven long ago.

SolomonVII said:

"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou 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!cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"
-Isaiah

vs.
'I saw Satan fall from the sky, like lightning'.
-Jesus

Suffice to say the medeival churchmen did not invent equation of Satan=Lucifer whole cloth. This was a result of Biblical research, and using the Bible to interpret the Bible.

Lucifer, like Christ is not a personal name, but a title.



For you have said in your heart:
‘I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;
I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.’
15 Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol,
To the lowest depths of the Pit.

Biblical scholars will make note of the fact that this is about a king. King of Babylon, King of Tyre in other similarly themed passages, the gods that even Jesus makes allusion to in talking about the ruling classes of Biblical times.

It is the NT and Jesus himself who gives the darkened, spiritual perspective of this kind of power-hungry, prideful sin of great men, and reveals Satan; the lawless one and the deceiving power of 2Thess2 to be very much at the core of such wordly power and overreach. Satan, the father of lies, is the father of this sin of ancient god-men rulers.

The case is always being made that Satan of the OT is not the Satan of the NT
This can be true for Jews; I do not think that it can be true for Christians. Satan becomes fully revealed for us by Jesus himself. The luceferian aspect of Satan becomes much more readily apparent after Jesus.

Most of the NT, well the whole Bible really, focuses on the falsity of the claims of kings to be gods. Interestingly, Jesus justifies himself against accusations of blasphemy by applying OT claims of elites being god to himself and his own claims. Far from holding such claims to ridicule, he justifies himself by holding such claims to be true.

In the world of mortals, such as is the OT, the worm rules. In the age of immortality, the world that Jesus ushers in, the worm no longer ultimately turns us to rot, and claims to be god are now to be taken literally too, for after all, what uniquely separates Adam from God is immortality.

Click to expand...

I don't even see that your scripture support what you've written in the Bible verses.

What are these verses that talk about these ancient God-men rulers you speak of?

Really Jesus was pretty basic, you have a master, is it God or the flesh/Satan. One is saved by the blood of Christ one is not. Only Christ can justify anyone. So your either in, or your out. black or white. Up or down.

Actually God says that we all will live eternally, either with Christ or without Christ. What Jesus cares about is our spiritual lives. Where do you get from the Bible that we are not immortal?

ToBeLoved said:

I don't even see that your scripture support what you've written in the Bible verses.

What are these verses that talk about these ancient God-men rulers you speak of?

Click to expand...

JOHN1034 said:

* Jesus answered them,u “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”’?

Click to expand...

http://usccb.org/bible/john/10:27#51010034-u

PSALMS826 said:

I declare: “Gods though you be,*d

offspring of the Most High all of you,

Click to expand...

http://www.usccb.org/bible/ps/82:6#23082006

Really Jesus was pretty basic, you have a master, is it God or the flesh/Satan. One is saved by the blood of Christ one is not. Only Christ can justify anyone. So your either in, or your out. black or white. Up or down.

Actually God says that we all will live eternally, either with Christ or without Christ. What Jesus cares about is our spiritual lives. Where do you get from the Bible that we are not immortal?

Click to expand...

GENESIS 3.22-23
Then the LORD God said: See! The man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil! Now, what if he also reaches out his hand to take fruit from the tree of life, and eats of it and lives forever?
The LORD God therefore banished him from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he had been taken.

ViaCrucis said:

2 Peter 1:19,

"Et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem: cui benefacitis attendentes quasi lucernæ lucenti in caliginoso donec dies elucescat, et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris:"

Click to expand...

I'm looking at the Greek and I don't see Lucifer. Do I have the wrong verse? http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-19.htm

2 Peter 1:19,

kai echomen bebaioteron ton prophētikon logon hō kalōs poieite hōs prosechontes
καὶ ἔχομεν βεβαιότερον τὸν προφητικὸν λόγον ᾧ καλῶς ποιεῖτε ὡς προσέχοντες ,

hōs lychnō phainonti en auchmērō topō heōs hou hēmera diaugasē kai phōsphoros
ὡς λύχνῳ φαίνοντι ἐν αὐχμηρῷ τόπῳ ἕως οὗ ἡμέρα διαυγάσῃ καὶ φωσφόρος



19 2532 [e]
19 kai
19 καὶ
19 and
19 Conj
2192 [e]

echomen
ἔχομεν
we have
V-PIA-1P
949 [e]

bebaioteron
βεβαιότερον
more sure
Adj-AMS-C
3588 [e]

ton
τὸν
the
Art-AMS
4397 [e]

prophētikon
προφητικὸν
prophetic
Adj-AMS
3056 [e]

logon
λόγον ,
word
N-AMS
3739 [e]

hō
ᾧ
to which
RelPro-DMS
2573 [e]

kalōs
καλῶς
well
Adv
4160 [e]

poieite
ποιεῖτε
you do
V-PIA-2P
4337 [e]

prosechontes
προσέχοντες ,
taking heed
V-PPA-NMP
5613 [e]

hōs
ὡς
as
Adv
3088 [e]

lychnō
λύχνῳ
to a lamp
N-DMS
5316 [e]

phainonti
φαίνοντι
shining
V-PPA-DMS
1722 [e]

en
ἐν
in
Prep
850 [e]

auchmērō
αὐχμηρῷ
[a] dark
Adj-DMS
5117 [e]

topō
τόπῳ ,
place
N-DMS
2193 [e]

heōs
ἕως
until
Prep
3739 [e]

hou
οὗ
this
RelPro-GMS
2250 [e]

hēmera
ἡμέρα
day
N-NFS
1306 [e]

diaugasē
διαυγάσῃ ,
should have dawned
V-ASA-3S
2532 [e]

kai
καὶ
and
Conj
5459 [e]

phōsphoros
φωσφόρος
[the] morning star
Adj-NMS
393 [e]

anateilē
ἀνατείλῃ
should have arisen
V-ASA-3S
1722 [e]

en
ἐν
in
Prep
3588 [e]

tais
ταῖς
the
Art-DFP
2588 [e]

kardiais
καρδίαις
hearts
N-DFP
4771 [e]

hymōn
ὑμῶν ;
of you
PPro-G2P

Hishandmaiden said:

If one day, satan decides to repent, will God forgive him?

Click to expand...

My theory is that the first fallen angel who will
repent with his whole hearth is named in Leviticus 16:10.....
in a sense this particular fallen angel will be like a
metaphorical General Abner who brought the ten tribes over to
King David after the death of King Saul.


Yom Kippur/The Rapture connection?!

Yom Kippur/The Rapture connection?!

....
"but the goat on which the lot fell for Aza'zel shall be presented alive before the LORD to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Aza'zel."(Leviticus 16:10 RSV)

DennisTate said:

My theory is that the first fallen angel who will
repent with his whole hearth is named in Leviticus 16:10.....

Click to expand...

This is not true.

It specifically says Aaron and Aaron was not an angel but a human and the first member of the Aaronic Priesthood.

9 "Then Aaron shall offer the goat on which the lot for the LORD fell, and make it a sin offering. 10 "But the goat on which the lot for the scapegoat fell shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, to send it into the wilderness as the scapegoat. 11 "Then Aaron shall offer the bull of the sin offering which is for himself and make atonement for himself and for his household, and he shall slaughter the bull of the sin offering which is for himself.

ToBeLoved said:

This is not true.

It specifically says Aaron and Aaron was not an angel but a human and the first member of the Aaronic Priesthood.

9 "Then Aaron shall offer the goat on which the lot for the LORD fell, and make it a sin offering. 10 "But the goat on which the lot for the scapegoat fell shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, to send it into the wilderness as the scapegoat. 11 "Then Aaron shall offer the bull of the sin offering which is for himself and make atonement for himself and for his household, and he shall slaughter the bull of the sin offering which is for himself.

Click to expand...

I am referring to the name "Azazel' that is there in the original Hebrew.

The Book of Enoch that was considered part of Christian canon for five centuries until it was
replaced by the Book of Revelation / The Apocalypse elaborates on Azazel as being the king of the
Watchers.... who took the daughters of men as wives..... had children.... the children were giants... who
became cannibals and ate humans.

The Book of Enoch at least gives Azazel credit for having a somewhat humble attitude and being
unable to life up his face toward heaven as a message was given to him by the Patriarch Enoch.....
that is chapter 13 of The Book of Enoch.

Hillsage said:

So will your opinion change with scripture?

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

Hebrews 12:9 Besides this, we have had earthly fathers to discipline us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live?

Genesis 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any other wild creature that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God say, 'You shall not eat of any tree of the garden'?"


Yes, very true.


And 'your' scripture saying he is not?

Click to expand...

God did not create Satan as evil. God didn't create imperfect creation.

Ezekiel 28:15-18


15 You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created, till unrighteousness was found in you.

16 In the abundance of your trade you were filled with violence in your midst, and you sinned so I cast you as a profane thing from the mountain of God, and I destroyed you, O guardian cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

17 Your heart was proud because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I exposed you before kings, to feast their eyes on you.

18 By the multitude of your iniquities, in the unrighteousness of your trade you profaned your sanctuaries;
so I brought fire out from your midst; it consumed you, dand I turned you to ashes on the earth in the sight of all who saw you

DennisTate said:

I am referring to the name "Azazel' that is there in the original Hebrew.

The Book of Enoch that was considered part of Christian canon for five centuries until it was
replaced by the Book of Revelation / The Apocalypse elaborates on Azazel as being the king of the
Watchers.... who took the daughters of men as wives..... had children.... the children were giants... who
became cannibals and ate humans.

The Book of Enoch at least gives Azazel credit for having a somewhat humble attitude and being
unable to life up his face toward heaven as a message was given to him by the Patriarch Enoch.....
that is chapter 13 of The Book of Enoch.

Click to expand...

Well that might explain it because I don't consider any of the non-conical books scripture.

ToBeLoved said:

God did not create Satan as evil. God didn't create imperfect creation.

Click to expand...

Notice that the verse you quote says he was "blameless in your WAYS". To me that could be, in keeping with, all the things that he DID before he was ever tempted the first time. But not 'falling before' that first time, doesn't mean the "multitude of iniquities" in his created nature, weren't there from his very beginning. They just never manifested until the time of his first temptation.

John 8:44 "You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

Ezekiel 28:15-18


15 You were blameless in your ways

Click to expand...

from the day you were created, till unrighteousness was found in you.

16 In the abundance of your trade you were filled with violence in your midst, and you sinned so I cast you as a profane thing from the mountain of God, and I destroyed you, O guardian cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

17 Your heart was proud because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I exposed you before kings, to feast their eyes on you.

18 By the multitude of your iniquities, in the unrighteousness of your trade you profaned your sanctuaries;
so I brought fire out from your midst; it consumed you, dand I turned you to ashes on the earth in the sight of all who saw you

Click to expand...

That view would reconcile the opposition of those scriptures.