SDA: Moses Resurrected from the Dead

Dale

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,161
1,223
71
Sebring, FL
✟657,505.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
You seem to have point--however----"Satan was alarmed for his supremacy" is the only sentence you plucked out of that paragraph---Being fearful of his supremacy in no indicates he meekly stepped aside in fear as you claim---why not post the whole paragraph?

For the first time Christ was about to give life to the dead. As the Prince of life and the shining ones approached the grave, Satan was alarmed for his supremacy. With his evil angels he stood to dispute an invasion of the territory that he claimed as his own. He boasted that the servant of God had become his prisoner. He declared that even Moses was not able to keep the law of God; that he had taken to himself the glory due to Jehovah—the very sin which had caused Satan’s banishment from heaven—and by transgression had come under the dominion of Satan. The archtraitor reiterated the original charges that he had made against the divine government, and repeated his complaints of God’s injustice toward him. {PP 478.3}

I see nothing in this that contradicts Jude. Just as you described:
"In Jude, the Devil is cantankerous, insulting, aggressive, actively seeking to seize the body of Moses."


Very well, let's look at the whole passage. If Satan "reiterated the orignal charges" against God's government, then basically Satan went on a tirade against God's rule. How is this contending for the body of Moses? Jude gives the impression that Satan intends to destroy the body of Moses, or use it for an ungodly purpose, such as idolatry. When Michael says "The Lord rebuke you," Satan is flattened and he learns to leave the body of Moses alone. For the Devil to go on a tirade is not the same as trying to seize the body of Moses, it is not the same as physical combat over the issue.
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Very well, let's look at the whole passage. If Satan "reiterated the orignal charges" against God's government, then basically Satan went on a tirade against God's rule. How is this contending for the body of Moses? Jude gives the impression that Satan intends to destroy the body of Moses, or use it for an ungodly purpose, such as idolatry. When Michael says "The Lord rebuke you," Satan is flattened and he learns to leave the body of Moses alone. For the Devil to go on a tirade is not the same as trying to seize the body of Moses, it is not the same as physical combat over the issue.


Good grief---first you complain that Satan is pictured as meekly surrendering when he was in fact
"In Jude, the Devil is cantankerous, insulting, aggressive, actively seeking to seize the body of Moses."[/QUOTE]

Now you're complaining that he has gone on a tirade!! Well, who wants it both ways??---You can't be "aggressive and insulting" unless you're on a tirade--and contentious!!!
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,161
1,223
71
Sebring, FL
✟657,505.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Good grief---first you complain that Satan is pictured as meekly surrendering when he was in fact
"In Jude, the Devil is cantankerous, insulting, aggressive, actively seeking to seize the body of Moses."

Now you're complaining that he has gone on a tirade!! Well, who wants it both ways??---You can't be "aggressive and insulting" unless you're on a tirade--and contentious!!![/QUOTE]


Ellen White is the one who can't make up her mind.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,161
1,223
71
Sebring, FL
✟657,505.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Here is another verse from the Gospels casting doubt on the resurrection of Moses.


37 [Jesus says,] But in the account of the burning bush, even Moses showed that the dead rise, for he calls the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ 38 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.”
--Luke 20 37-8 NIV


Here Jesus tells us that to God the Father "all are alive." Yet in the same passage he speaks of Moses and the dead rising, yet he says nothing about any OT resurrection of Moses. Moses is alive to God the Father in the same sense that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are.


Ellen White treats Moses, or Moses and Elijah, as the most important figure or figures in the Old Testament. Jesus doesn't seem to think so, he treats the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as the most memorable among the righteous in the OT.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ToBeLoved
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Now you're complaining that he has gone on a tirade!! Well, who wants it both ways??---You can't be "aggressive and insulting" unless you're on a tirade--and contentious!!!

Ellen White is the one who can't make up her mind.[/QUOTE]

She never said Satan was meek. Now that she agrees with your version, you say she is vacillating---you are, not her.
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Here is another verse from the Gospels casting doubt on the resurrection of Moses.


37 [Jesus says,] But in the account of the burning bush, even Moses showed that the dead rise, for he calls the Lord ‘the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’ 38 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive.”
--Luke 20 37-8 NIV


Here Jesus tells us that to God the Father "all are alive." Yet in the same passage he speaks of Moses and the dead rising, yet he says nothing about any OT resurrection of Moses. Moses is alive to God the Father in the same sense that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are.


Ellen White treats Moses, or Moses and Elijah, as the most important figure or figures in the Old Testament. Jesus doesn't seem to think so, he treats the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as the most memorable among the righteous in the OT.

No she doesn't. You are the one that is making a big deal out of this, n This is a footnote in the history of the OT. I don't see Satan pitching a fit over anyone else at their gravesite.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,161
1,223
71
Sebring, FL
✟657,505.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
He died and was buried--and this is when he was resurrected. We do not believe in the spirit going to heaven and the body remaining in the grave. We believe in the resurrection of the dead---when Jesus returns, but in the case of Moses---he was denied entry into the promised land, but God had a better promised land to give him.


Sparbud: "We do not believe in the spirit going to heaven and the body remaining in the grave."

Where did the doctrine of soul sleep come from? It isn't spelled out in any part of the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

mmksparbud

Well-Known Member
Dec 3, 2011
17,312
6,821
73
Las Vegas
✟255,978.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Sparbud: "We do not believe in the spirit going to heaven and the body remaining in the grave."

Where did the doctrine of soul sleep come from? It isn't spelled out in any part of the Bible.


I disagree---
Joh 11:11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.
Joh 11:12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well.
Joh 11:13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.
Joh 11:14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.
Act_13:36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:
Mat 9:24 He said unto them, Give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth. And they laughed him to scorn.
Mat 9:25 But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Robert Searson

New Member
Nov 12, 2017
1
0
48
South Pacific
✟15,200.00
Country
Papua New Guinea
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
What is your understanding of Jude 9 then if it does not refer to the resurection of Moses?
The bible talks about resurection and acending into heaven but does not use heavy theological words that came latter such as "assumption". Either you are dead or you are alive. Period.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,161
1,223
71
Sebring, FL
✟657,505.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
What is your understanding of Jude 9 then if it does not refer to the resurection of Moses?
The bible talks about resurection and acending into heaven but does not use heavy theological words that came latter such as "assumption". Either you are dead or you are alive. Period.




Robert, welcome to Christian Forums.


First, the scope of the Book of Jude and its place in the New Testament. Jude's purpose is to emphasize the need for civility and to call on Christians to respect the authority of the Apostles. The Book of Jude was never intended to lay out a theology of angels, demons, Old Testament figures, or the afterlife. Jude is one of the two briefest and least significant books of the New Testament, along with Philemon. It would be most strange for this book to contain major theological revelations.

You say, " The bible talks about resurection and ascending into heaven ..." The Gospels do but the Book of Jude doesn't.

Here is a question for you. In the Gospels, Moses is mentioned seven times in Matthew, nine times in Mark, ten times in Luke, and twelve times in John. In all, Moses is mentioned thirty-eight (38) times in the Gospels. Despite frequent mention, no passage says anything about Moses being resurrected in Old Testament times or being resurrected ahead of schedule. So why should we believe that there was an extraordinary, special resurrection for Moses?
 
Upvote 0

rlneub

Member
Nov 18, 2017
6
2
65
Woodbridge
✟8,026.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Divorced
I. Christ in Relation to Angelic Hosts

Angels are created beings (Col. 1:16), and as such are not to be worshiped (Col. 2:18; Rev. 19:10). They are God's messengers to those who shall be heirs of salvation (Heb. 1:13, 14).

But Christ has "a more excellent name" than the angels (Heb. 1:4). He has "a name which is above every name" (Phil. 2:9), above that of every angel in heaven (Eph. 1:21). The angels are subject to Him (1 Peter 3:22). They bow before Him (Phil. 2:10), and worship Him (Heb. 1:6). Angels of God refuse the worship of men (Rev. 22:8, 9).

Christ is NOT an angel but is God.

II. What is the meaning of Angel?

Before you proceed any further, please carefully read and digest this next thought. Because the word "angel" means messenger, it is used very freely and broadly in Scripture. Sometimes, men are called angels in the Bible (1 Samuel 29:9, Galatians 4:14). And sometimes angels are called men (Genesis 32:24). And in other places, as will be soon shown, God Himself is identified as an angel! Of course, even angels are called angels.

III. The Angel Of The Lord

Ex 3:2 And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. 3 Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.”

4 So when the Lord saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!”

Question: What/Who is the Angel of the Lord?

Ex 13:21-22. By day the Lord went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night.

Ex 14:19 And the Angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, moved and went behind them; and the pillar of cloud went from before them and stood behind them.

Question: What/Who is the Angel of God?

Judges 6:11 Now the Angel of the Lord came and sat under the terebinth tree which was in Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while his son Gideon threshed wheat in the winepress, in order to hide it from the Midianites. 12 And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him, and said to him, “The Lord is with you, you mighty man of valor!”

14 Then the Lord turned to him and said, “Go in this might of yours, and you shall save Israel from the hand of the Midianites. Have I not sent you?”

15 So he said to Him, “O my Lord, how can I save Israel? Indeed my clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house.”

16 And the Lord said to him, “Surely I will be with you, and you shall defeat the Midianites as one man.”

Question: What/Who is the Angel of the Lord?

Judges 13:13-23 13 So the Angel of the Lord said to Manoah, “Of all that I said to the woman let her be careful. 14 She may not eat anything that comes from the vine, nor may she drink wine or similar drink, nor eat anything unclean. All that I commanded her let her observe.”

15 Then Manoah said to the Angel of the Lord, “Please let us detain You, and we will prepare a young goat for You.”

16 And the Angel of the Lord said to Manoah, “Though you detain Me, I will not eat your food. But if you offer a burnt offering, you must offer it to the Lord.” (For Manoah did not know He was the Angel of the Lord.)

17 Then Manoah said to the Angel of the Lord, “What is Your name, that when Your words come to pass we may honor You?”

18 And the Angel of the Lord said to him, “Why do you ask My name, seeing it is wonderful?”

19 So Manoah took the young goat with the grain offering, and offered it upon the rock to the Lord. And He did a wondrous thing while Manoah and his wife looked on— 20 it happened as the flame went up toward heaven from the altar—the Angel of the Lord ascended in the flame of the altar! When Manoah and his wife saw this, they fell on their faces to the ground. 21 When the Angel of the Lord appeared no more to Manoah and his wife, then Manoah knew that He was the Angel of the Lord.

22 And Manoah said to his wife, “We shall surely die, because we have seen God!”

23 But his wife said to him, “If the Lord had desired to kill us, He would not have accepted a burnt offering and a grain offering from our hands, nor would He have shown us all these things, nor would He have told us such things as these at this time.”

Question: What/Who is the Angel of the Lord? What did the Angel say His name was? Who else in the bible has that Name/Title?

Genesis 28:16-19
(16) And Jacob awaked out of his sleep, and he said, Surely the LORD is in this place; and I knew it not.
(17) And he was afraid, and said, How dreadful is this place! this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.
(18) And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it.
(19) And he called the name of that place Bethel: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first.

Jacob realized that God was actually there with him, and this same God appeared to him as “the angel of God” later in Genesis 31:10. Who is this angel that keeps appearing throughout the scriptures, making these bold claims about himself?


Zach 3:1-2 Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to oppose him. 2 And the Lord said to Satan, “The Lord rebuke you, Satan! The Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is this not a brand plucked from the fire?”

Question: What/Who is the Angel of the Lord?
Question: What did the Angel of the Lord say to Satan? Where else is this wording found?


Hosea 12:4 Yes, he struggled with the Angel and prevailed; He wept, and sought favor from Him. He found Him in Bethel,

Question: The above verse is referencing Jacob fighting and prevailing. With whom did Jacob wrestle?

Isa 63: 9 In all their affliction He was afflicted, And the Angel of His Presence saved them; In His love and in His pity He redeemed them; And He bore them and carried them All the days of old.

Question: Who only redeems us? Who is "the Angle of His Presence"?

Ex 23:20 “Behold, I send an Angel before you to keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for He will not pardon your transgressions; for My name is in Him.

Question: Who only can pardon transgression? How can God's name be in Him?

The confusion seems inevitable that "mine Angel" is a member of the Godhead. With this background, it is not difficult to recognize that there was with God, in ancient days, One who was known in the foregoing instances as "the angel of the Lord," or "mine Angel," and then later as "my Son" (Ps. 2:7). At the same time He was "mine anointed" (Heb., Meshiach).

He is also called "a child," "a son" (Isa. 9:6). And this "son" is none other than "The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace" (verse 6). The Targum on Isaiah 9:5 (Hebrew versification varies from KJV) reads: "Wonderful counsellor, Mighty God, He who lives forever, the Anointed one [or, Messiah]."


IV. Identity of "Prince of Princes"

Dan 8:11 He even exalted himself as high as the Prince of the host;

Dan 8:25 “Through his cunning He shall cause deceit to prosper under his rule; And he shall exalt himself in his heart. He shall destroy many in their prosperity. He shall even rise against the Prince of princes;

In Daniel 8:11 The little horn (verse 9) and exalted himself as high as the Prince of the host and in 8:25 it is again repeated as going against the Prince of Princes.

Dan 10:21 But I will tell you what is noted in the Scripture of Truth. (No one upholds me against these, except Michael your prince.

Dan 12:1 “At that time Michael shall stand up, The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; And there shall be a time of trouble, Such as never was since there was a nation, Even to that time.

And at that time your people shall be delivered, Everyone who is found written in the book.

Dan 9:25 “Know therefore and understand, That from the going forth of the command To restore and build Jerusalem Until Messiah the Prince, There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; The street[a] shall be built again, and the wall, Even in troublesome times.

If Michael is the Great Prince, the Prince of Princes, would not Messiah the Prince be "the Great Prince" or "Prince of Princes"?

Would this not imply in Daniel that Michael is the Messiah?

Daniel 10:5-6 I lifted my eyes and looked, and behold, a certain man clothed in linen, whose waist was girded with gold of Uphaz! 6 His body was like beryl, his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes like torches of fire, his arms and feet like burnished bronze in color, and the sound of his words like the voice of a multitude.

The final reference to Michael in Daniel is in chapter 12: "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people." Notice here that Michael is not called a great prince but "THE great prince." Is there any prince greater then Jesus? He is also identified as the one who "standeth for the children of thy people." This means that He intercedes, defends and even stands as a substitute. Who could this be other then Jesus?

Christ is called a prince in the new testament

Acts 3:15 and killed the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses.

Act 5:31 31 Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.

This Prince, or Messiah, of the apocalyptic visions of ancient days, is thus equated with Michael. Hence the name Michael is, I believe, one of the titles of the Son of the living God. But Michael is called the Archangel (Jude 9) and this term, I believe, also applies to Jesus our Lord.

V. Christ in Relation to the Angel Hosts

Joshua 5:14 So He said, “No, but as Commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.”

And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped, and said to Him, “What does my Lord say to His servant?”

In Rev 12 we see Michael leading the armies of the Lord and here we see the Commander or the army of the Lord accepting worship. Angels DO NOT accept worship. Only a deity can accept worship.

In the light of the foregoing I believe that the divine Son of God, one of whose titles is "Michael the archangel," is the leader of the angelic hosts. But to me, this does not in any way whatsoever detract from His deity, any more than when He became man and took our flesh. He certainly became "the Son of man," but all the while He was on earth as man, He was at the same time God manifest in the flesh (1 Tim. 4:10). Furthermore, He is also revealed in Scripture as leader of the hosts of Israel, under the title of the "angel of Jehovah," the "angel of his presence," et cetera. But being such, did not restrict, or detract from, His deity. Why could He not, then, be considered "Captain General" of the hosts of angels without equating Him with angels


VI. What about the title Archangel and Michael?

In Jude, Michael the archangel says “The Lord Rebuke thee”. Is he saying this using his own power or by using God’s authority?

The use of the expression "The Lord Rebuke thee" is significant. It is found in but one other place in the Holy Scriptures—Zechariah 3:2. There the speaker is "the angel of the Lord" (verse 1); but in verse 2, it is expressly the "Lord" who speaks. Here we find the "angel of the Lord" equated with Jehovah Himself, and it is He who says to Satan, "The Lord rebuke thee."

This is a unique expression. The first Biblical use of it is by the Lord in dealing with Satan. The same expression is used in Jude when contending with Satan over the body of Moses. Might it not be, then, that the same Divine Being is revealed here? In Zechariah He was manifested under one of His titles, "the angel of the Lord," in Jude under another of His titles, "Michael."

Furthermore, the archangel is referred to but twice in the Sacred Scripture—1 Thessalonians 4:16 and Jude 9. Paul, writing to the Thessalonians, speaks of the "voice of an archangel" and associates that with the general resurrection of the saints. As God is the only one who can resurrect anyone, having the voice of an archangel lends credence to the archangel being a deity.

In 1 Thessalonians 4:16 it says “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a [a]shout, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.” But is this the only place that this sequence of events occurs? It seems that there is another occurrence. John 5:25-30.

25 Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; 27 and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is [a]the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.

Notice in John, it is the Son, not the Father or an angel that calls the dead to life using HIS voice. So in 1 Thessalonians the dead are raised using the voice of the archangel but in John the dead are raised using the voice of the Son of God. So we have an issue. Either Christ is Michael or the scriptures do not agree.

Another reference to Michael as leader of the angelic host is seen in Revelation 12:7-10. Many scholars through the centuries have applied this to the days when Satan rebelled, before ever our world was made. Then there was war in heaven. Michael and His angels fought against the dragon and his angels. Here is evidently the beginning of the great controversy between the forces of righteousness and of evil. In this passage Michael and Satan are placed in contrast. Who is the Michael of this apocalyptic passage? If Christ is the leader of the angel hosts, then we see here the first battle in the great conflict between Christ and Satan. In other words, only Jesus Christ will call the dead, so he is the archangel in 1st Thessalonians 4:16, 17 and He is Michael who calls Moses to life in Jude.

There is good reason for this concept, for we read that it was through "the power of his Christ" that "the accuser of our brethren" was cast down (Rev. 12:10). Victory for the saints is possible only through our risen Lord. It was Christ who triumphed over Satan in the original encounter. And it is through Christ that we overcome in the continuing encounters against the devil and his evil hosts.

VII. The Key Is in the Name

First, let's consider the meaning of some words and names. In the Greek New Testament, the word "angel" means "messenger," and "arch" means "chief, principle, greatest, or highest." So "archangel" simply means "highest or greatest messenger." The Hebrew name "Michael," found in the Old Testament, means "who is like God" or sometimes it forms a question: "Who is like God?" So the title Michael the archangel can be translated as "The greatest messenger who is God." Whether this name is a question, statement, or a challenge will be clear by further study. One angel did profess to be like God. That covering cherub fallen from the heavenly courts is Lucifer, who became the devil or Satan, by claiming to "be like the most High" Isaiah 14:14. In Revelation 12:7, Satan is opposed by "Michael and his angels" and is cast out of heaven.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,161
1,223
71
Sebring, FL
✟657,505.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I. Christ in Relation to Angelic Hosts

Angels are created beings (Col. 1:16), and as such are not to be worshiped (Col. 2:18; Rev. 19:10). They are God's messengers to those who shall be heirs of salvation (Heb. 1:13, 14).

But Christ has "a more excellent name" than the angels (Heb. 1:4). He has "a name which is above every name" (Phil. 2:9), above that of every angel in heaven (Eph. 1:21). The angels are subject to Him (1 Peter 3:22). They bow before Him (Phil. 2:10), and worship Him (Heb. 1:6). Angels of God refuse the worship of men (Rev. 22:8, 9).

Christ is NOT an angel but is God.

II. What is the meaning of Angel?

Before you proceed any further, please carefully read and digest this next thought. Because the word "angel" means messenger, it is used very freely and broadly in Scripture. Sometimes, men are called angels in the Bible (1 Samuel 29:9, Galatians 4:14). And sometimes angels are called men (Genesis 32:24). And in other places, as will be soon shown, God Himself is identified as an angel! Of course, even angels are called angels.

III. The Angel Of The Lord

Ex 3:2 And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. 3 Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.”

4 So when the Lord saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!”

Question: What/Who is the Angel of the Lord?

Ex 13:21-22. By day the Lord went ahead of them in a pillar of cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night.

Ex 14:19 And the Angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, moved and went behind them; and the pillar of cloud went from before them and stood behind them.

Question: What/Who is the Angel of God?

Judges 6:11 Now the Angel of the Lord came and sat under the terebinth tree which was in Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while his son Gideon threshed wheat in the winepress, in order to hide it from the Midianites. 12 And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him, and said to him, “The Lord is with you, you mighty man of valor!”

14 Then the Lord turned to him and said, “Go in this might of yours, and you shall save Israel from the hand of the Midianites. Have I not sent you?”

15 So he said to Him, “O my Lord, how can I save Israel? Indeed my clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house.”

16 And the Lord said to him, “Surely I will be with you, and you shall defeat the Midianites as one man.”

Question: What/Who is the Angel of the Lord?

Judges 13:13-23 13 So the Angel of the Lord said to Manoah, “Of all that I said to the woman let her be careful. 14 She may not eat anything that comes from the vine, nor may she drink wine or similar drink, nor eat anything unclean. All that I commanded her let her observe.”

15 Then Manoah said to the Angel of the Lord, “Please let us detain You, and we will prepare a young goat for You.”

16 And the Angel of the Lord said to Manoah, “Though you detain Me, I will not eat your food. But if you offer a burnt offering, you must offer it to the Lord.” (For Manoah did not know He was the Angel of the Lord.)

17 Then Manoah said to the Angel of the Lord, “What is Your name, that when Your words come to pass we may honor You?”

18 And the Angel of the Lord said to him, “Why do you ask My name, seeing it is wonderful?”

19 So Manoah took the young goat with the grain offering, and offered it upon the rock to the Lord. And He did a wondrous thing while Manoah and his wife looked on— 20 it happened as the flame went up toward heaven from the altar—the Angel of the Lord ascended in the flame of the altar! When Manoah and his wife saw this, they fell on their faces to the ground. 21 When the Angel of the Lord appeared no more to Manoah and his wife, then Manoah knew that He was the Angel of the Lord.

22 And Manoah said to his wife, “We shall surely die, because we have seen God!”

23 But his wife said to him, “If the Lord had desired to kill us, He would not have accepted a burnt offering and a grain offering from our hands, nor would He have shown us all these things, nor would He have told us such things as these at this time.”

Question: What/Who is the Angel of the Lord? What did the Angel say His name was? Who else in the bible has that Name/Title?

Genesis 28:16-19
(16) And Jacob awaked out of his sleep, and he said, Surely the LORD is in this place; and I knew it not.
(17) And he was afraid, and said, How dreadful is this place! this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven.
(18) And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it.
(19) And he called the name of that place Bethel: but the name of that city was called Luz at the first.

Jacob realized that God was actually there with him, and this same God appeared to him as “the angel of God” later in Genesis 31:10. Who is this angel that keeps appearing throughout the scriptures, making these bold claims about himself?


Zach 3:1-2 Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to oppose him. 2 And the Lord said to Satan, “The Lord rebuke you, Satan! The Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is this not a brand plucked from the fire?”

Question: What/Who is the Angel of the Lord?
Question: What did the Angel of the Lord say to Satan? Where else is this wording found?


Hosea 12:4 Yes, he struggled with the Angel and prevailed; He wept, and sought favor from Him. He found Him in Bethel,

Question: The above verse is referencing Jacob fighting and prevailing. With whom did Jacob wrestle?

Isa 63: 9 In all their affliction He was afflicted, And the Angel of His Presence saved them; In His love and in His pity He redeemed them; And He bore them and carried them All the days of old.

Question: Who only redeems us? Who is "the Angle of His Presence"?

Ex 23:20 “Behold, I send an Angel before you to keep you in the way and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. 21 Beware of Him and obey His voice; do not provoke Him, for He will not pardon your transgressions; for My name is in Him.

Question: Who only can pardon transgression? How can God's name be in Him?

The confusion seems inevitable that "mine Angel" is a member of the Godhead. With this background, it is not difficult to recognize that there was with God, in ancient days, One who was known in the foregoing instances as "the angel of the Lord," or "mine Angel," and then later as "my Son" (Ps. 2:7). At the same time He was "mine anointed" (Heb., Meshiach).

He is also called "a child," "a son" (Isa. 9:6). And this "son" is none other than "The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace" (verse 6). The Targum on Isaiah 9:5 (Hebrew versification varies from KJV) reads: "Wonderful counsellor, Mighty God, He who lives forever, the Anointed one [or, Messiah]."


IV. Identity of "Prince of Princes"

Dan 8:11 He even exalted himself as high as the Prince of the host;

Dan 8:25 “Through his cunning He shall cause deceit to prosper under his rule; And he shall exalt himself in his heart. He shall destroy many in their prosperity. He shall even rise against the Prince of princes;

In Daniel 8:11 The little horn (verse 9) and exalted himself as high as the Prince of the host and in 8:25 it is again repeated as going against the Prince of Princes.

Dan 10:21 But I will tell you what is noted in the Scripture of Truth. (No one upholds me against these, except Michael your prince.

Dan 12:1 “At that time Michael shall stand up, The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; And there shall be a time of trouble, Such as never was since there was a nation, Even to that time.

And at that time your people shall be delivered, Everyone who is found written in the book.

Dan 9:25 “Know therefore and understand, That from the going forth of the command To restore and build Jerusalem Until Messiah the Prince, There shall be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; The street[a] shall be built again, and the wall, Even in troublesome times.

If Michael is the Great Prince, the Prince of Princes, would not Messiah the Prince be "the Great Prince" or "Prince of Princes"?

Would this not imply in Daniel that Michael is the Messiah?

Daniel 10:5-6 I lifted my eyes and looked, and behold, a certain man clothed in linen, whose waist was girded with gold of Uphaz! 6 His body was like beryl, his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes like torches of fire, his arms and feet like burnished bronze in color, and the sound of his words like the voice of a multitude.

The final reference to Michael in Daniel is in chapter 12: "And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people." Notice here that Michael is not called a great prince but "THE great prince." Is there any prince greater then Jesus? He is also identified as the one who "standeth for the children of thy people." This means that He intercedes, defends and even stands as a substitute. Who could this be other then Jesus?

Christ is called a prince in the new testament

Acts 3:15 and killed the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses.

Act 5:31 31 Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.

This Prince, or Messiah, of the apocalyptic visions of ancient days, is thus equated with Michael. Hence the name Michael is, I believe, one of the titles of the Son of the living God. But Michael is called the Archangel (Jude 9) and this term, I believe, also applies to Jesus our Lord.

V. Christ in Relation to the Angel Hosts

Joshua 5:14 So He said, “No, but as Commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.”

And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped, and said to Him, “What does my Lord say to His servant?”

In Rev 12 we see Michael leading the armies of the Lord and here we see the Commander or the army of the Lord accepting worship. Angels DO NOT accept worship. Only a deity can accept worship.

In the light of the foregoing I believe that the divine Son of God, one of whose titles is "Michael the archangel," is the leader of the angelic hosts. But to me, this does not in any way whatsoever detract from His deity, any more than when He became man and took our flesh. He certainly became "the Son of man," but all the while He was on earth as man, He was at the same time God manifest in the flesh (1 Tim. 4:10). Furthermore, He is also revealed in Scripture as leader of the hosts of Israel, under the title of the "angel of Jehovah," the "angel of his presence," et cetera. But being such, did not restrict, or detract from, His deity. Why could He not, then, be considered "Captain General" of the hosts of angels without equating Him with angels


VI. What about the title Archangel and Michael?

In Jude, Michael the archangel says “The Lord Rebuke thee”. Is he saying this using his own power or by using God’s authority?

The use of the expression "The Lord Rebuke thee" is significant. It is found in but one other place in the Holy Scriptures—Zechariah 3:2. There the speaker is "the angel of the Lord" (verse 1); but in verse 2, it is expressly the "Lord" who speaks. Here we find the "angel of the Lord" equated with Jehovah Himself, and it is He who says to Satan, "The Lord rebuke thee."

This is a unique expression. The first Biblical use of it is by the Lord in dealing with Satan. The same expression is used in Jude when contending with Satan over the body of Moses. Might it not be, then, that the same Divine Being is revealed here? In Zechariah He was manifested under one of His titles, "the angel of the Lord," in Jude under another of His titles, "Michael."

Furthermore, the archangel is referred to but twice in the Sacred Scripture—1 Thessalonians 4:16 and Jude 9. Paul, writing to the Thessalonians, speaks of the "voice of an archangel" and associates that with the general resurrection of the saints. As God is the only one who can resurrect anyone, having the voice of an archangel lends credence to the archangel being a deity.

In 1 Thessalonians 4:16 it says “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a [a]shout, with the voice of an archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.” But is this the only place that this sequence of events occurs? It seems that there is another occurrence. John 5:25-30.

25 Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26 For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; 27 and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is [a]the Son of Man. 28 Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29 and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.

Notice in John, it is the Son, not the Father or an angel that calls the dead to life using HIS voice. So in 1 Thessalonians the dead are raised using the voice of the archangel but in John the dead are raised using the voice of the Son of God. So we have an issue. Either Christ is Michael or the scriptures do not agree.

Another reference to Michael as leader of the angelic host is seen in Revelation 12:7-10. Many scholars through the centuries have applied this to the days when Satan rebelled, before ever our world was made. Then there was war in heaven. Michael and His angels fought against the dragon and his angels. Here is evidently the beginning of the great controversy between the forces of righteousness and of evil. In this passage Michael and Satan are placed in contrast. Who is the Michael of this apocalyptic passage? If Christ is the leader of the angel hosts, then we see here the first battle in the great conflict between Christ and Satan. In other words, only Jesus Christ will call the dead, so he is the archangel in 1st Thessalonians 4:16, 17 and He is Michael who calls Moses to life in Jude.

There is good reason for this concept, for we read that it was through "the power of his Christ" that "the accuser of our brethren" was cast down (Rev. 12:10). Victory for the saints is possible only through our risen Lord. It was Christ who triumphed over Satan in the original encounter. And it is through Christ that we overcome in the continuing encounters against the devil and his evil hosts.

VII. The Key Is in the Name

First, let's consider the meaning of some words and names. In the Greek New Testament, the word "angel" means "messenger," and "arch" means "chief, principle, greatest, or highest." So "archangel" simply means "highest or greatest messenger." The Hebrew name "Michael," found in the Old Testament, means "who is like God" or sometimes it forms a question: "Who is like God?" So the title Michael the archangel can be translated as "The greatest messenger who is God." Whether this name is a question, statement, or a challenge will be clear by further study. One angel did profess to be like God. That covering cherub fallen from the heavenly courts is Lucifer, who became the devil or Satan, by claiming to "be like the most High" Isaiah 14:14. In Revelation 12:7, Satan is opposed by "Michael and his angels" and is cast out of heaven.


This is one of the longest posts I have ever seen.



At the end you say that Lucifer is a fallen "covering cherub." I have never heard Lucifer called a cherub. Lucifer's function in heaven was to be a "light bearer" or torch holder, not a covering cherub. It is not at all certain that Isaiah 14 refers to the Fall of Lucifer. It is quite possible that it refers to the spiritual fall of a King of Tyre at the time of Isaiah, or the spiritual deterioration of the city of Tyre or the surrounding territory.

If you are trying to prove that Jesus and Michael are the same, I don't believe that citing passages that tell of "the angel of the Lord" are relevant. "The angel of the Lord" is simply a way of saying that God manifested himself. Biblical authors may have feared that a manifestation of God would undermine understanding of God's transcendence, which may be why the speak of an "angel of the Lord." There is no reason to believe that "the angel of the Lord" has anything to do with Michael.

We really don't know how many archangels there are. The Bible tells us little about angels and less about archangels. That's one reason that we shouldn't jump to conclusions about archangels.
 
Upvote 0

rlneub

Member
Nov 18, 2017
6
2
65
Woodbridge
✟8,026.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Divorced
Ez 28

You were the seal of perfection, Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. --- Does not sound like any human

You were in Eden, the garden of God; Every precious stone was your covering: The sardius, topaz, and diamond, Beryl, onyx, and jasper, Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold. The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes Was prepared for you on the day you were created. --- King of Tyre was never in Eden.

“You were the anointed cherub who covers; I established you; You were on the holy mountain of God; You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones. 15 You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, Till iniquity was found in you. -- King of Tyre was NOT a CHERUB. Men are NOT PERFECT in all their ways.

Therefore I cast you as a profane thing Out of the mountain of God; And I destroyed you, O covering cherub, From the midst of the fiery stones. -- We do know that Satan was cast out. And as this does not fit the King of Tyre it would seem that the covering cherub was Satan.

My point in the "long post" was to show that The Commander of the Armies received worship and in Rev the Commander is Michael. The 2 places the words "the Lord Rebuke you" once is called the Lord and the other Michael. The 2 places where the dead hear a voice and awake is where Christ says they hear his voice and the other is where they hear the voice of an arch angel.

All the other posts "angel of the Lord" show that the angel either received worship, redeemed men, pardons sin etc. Thus angel can be God when used as a title not as a type of being. Michael is an archangel, a title, and as shown to be equated with the Commander of the armies of God, Uses his voice to awaken the dead, uses the exact phrase as God when contending for Moses body, Is called THE Great Prince.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dale

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,161
1,223
71
Sebring, FL
✟657,505.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Ez 28

You were the seal of perfection, Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. --- Does not sound like any human

You were in Eden, the garden of God; Every precious stone was your covering: The sardius, topaz, and diamond, Beryl, onyx, and jasper, Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold. The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes Was prepared for you on the day you were created. --- King of Tyre was never in Eden.

“You were the anointed cherub who covers; I established you; You were on the holy mountain of God; You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones. 15 You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, Till iniquity was found in you. -- King of Tyre was NOT a CHERUB. Men are NOT PERFECT in all their ways.

Therefore I cast you as a profane thing Out of the mountain of God; And I destroyed you, O covering cherub, From the midst of the fiery stones. -- We do know that Satan was cast out. And as this does not fit the King of Tyre it would seem that the covering cherub was Satan.

My point in the "long post" was to show that The Commander of the Armies received worship and in Rev the Commander is Michael. The 2 places the words "the Lord Rebuke you" once is called the Lord and the other Michael. The 2 places where the dead hear a voice and awake is where Christ says they hear his voice and the other is where they hear the voice of an arch angel.

All the other posts "angel of the Lord" show that the angel either received worship, redeemed men, pardons sin etc. Thus angel can be God when used as a title not as a type of being. Michael is an archangel, a title, and as shown to be equated with the Commander of the armies of God, Uses his voice to awaken the dead, uses the exact phrase as God when contending for Moses body, Is called THE Great Prince.


Rineub:<< You were the seal of perfection, Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. --- Does not sound like any human
You were in Eden, the garden of God ... --- King of Tyre was never in Eden. >>


Doesn't sound like a human?
It's hard to believe you are being honest. In Ezekiel 28:1-19, the Scripture plainly tells us, twice, that this truth-speaking of doom is addressed to the King of Tyre.

12 “Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:
“‘You were the seal of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden,
the garden of God ...
--Ezekiel 28: 12-13 NIV



Also:
2 “Son of man, say to the ruler of Tyre, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:
“‘In the pride of your heart
you say, “I am a god;
I sit on the throne of a god
in the heart of the seas.”
But you are a mere mortal and not a god,
though you think you are as wise as a god.

--Ezekiel 28: 2 NIV


Ezekiel 28:2 tells us that the prophecy refers to "a mere mortal" not an angel or archangel.
 
Upvote 0

rlneub

Member
Nov 18, 2017
6
2
65
Woodbridge
✟8,026.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Divorced
Rineub:<< You were the seal of perfection, Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. --- Does not sound like any human
You were in Eden, the garden of God ... --- King of Tyre was never in Eden. >>


Doesn't sound like a human?
It's hard to believe you are being honest. In Ezekiel 28:1-19, the Scripture plainly tells us, twice, that this truth-speaking of doom is addressed to the King of Tyre.

12 “Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:
“‘You were the seal of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden,
the garden of God ...
--Ezekiel 28: 12-13 NIV



Also:
2 “Son of man, say to the ruler of Tyre, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:
“‘In the pride of your heart
you say, “I am a god;
I sit on the throne of a god
in the heart of the seas.”
But you are a mere mortal and not a god,
though you think you are as wise as a god.

--Ezekiel 28: 2 NIV


Ezekiel 28:2 tells us that the prophecy refers to "a mere mortal" not an angel or archangel.

I am not alone in this as a duel interpretation. And I am not saying I am correct and you are not. If you wish to disregard this piece that is ok by me as the rest will still apply.

And just to show that I am am being honest here is a short list from both camps. This will not defend the above text but will show that others do think as I do about this being a duel interpretation.


Survey of Theologies

Isaiah 14 and/or Ezekiel 28 refer to Satan:

  • Lewis Sperry Chafer (Chafer, Systematic Theology, 7:284-5).
  • Charles Ryrie (Ryrie, Basic Theology, 141-5). Ryrie is one of the few theologians that interacts with the interpretative options for concluding that the passages apply to Satan. A very worthwhile read.
  • Henry Thiessen (Lectures in Systematic Theology, 194-5).
  • Millard Erickson does not address Satan’s fall in his section on angels (Christian Theology, 472). He does, however, point out that Isaiah 14 contains a picture of the fall of Satan (Christian Theology, 604).
  • James Boice applies Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 to Satan (Foundations of the Christian Faith, 173).
Isaiah 14 and/or Ezekiel 28 do not refer to Satan:

  • Berkhof, Systematic Theology and Dabney, Systematic Theology simply do not reference the fall of Satan or deal with Isaiah or Ezekiel. However, I take their silence to mean that they do not apply to Satan (though admittedly it is an inference from silence).
  • As best as I was able to discern, Augustus Strong in his Systematic Theology does not apply Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 to Satan. He only provides passing comments on these passages and does not address the fall of Satan. He seems to take the approach in the brief remarks on each passage that it is referring to a historical, human figure (Systematic Theology, 450 and 518).
  • Charles Hodge speaks little about the fall of Satan. Concerning evil angels in general he says, “When they fell or what was the nature of their sin is not revealed” (Hodge, Systematic Theology, 1:643). As far as Satan in particular, he only makes reference to the fact that he is fallen without reference to when he fell or the nature of his fall. Hodge makes a great point about the pride of Satan, which is alluded to in 1 Timothy 3:6, “He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil.” The connection is “the condemnation which the devil incurred for the same sin [i.e. pride].” Hodge then goes on to say, “Some have conjectured that Satan was moved to rebel against God and to seduce our race from its allegiance, by the desire to rule over our globe and the race of man. Of this, however, there is no intimation in Scripture. His first appearance in the sacred history is in the character of an apostate angel” (Hodge, Systematic Theology, 1:643). So what Hodge seems to be saying is that there are no passages that refer to Satan’s fall. When he comes onto the Biblical scene (in the garden) he is already a fallen angel.
Survey of Commentaries

Isaiah 14 and/or Ezekiel 28 refer to Satan:
  • *W.A. Criswell, Ezekiel, 149.
  • * Lamar Cooper suggests that “the difficulty of the text makes it unwise to insist upon a particular interpretation, but the latter traditional view [that ‘the lament is an account of the fall of Satan not given in Scripture but alluded to elsewhere, especially in Isa 14:12-17’] appears to the present writer to account best for the language and logic of the passage” (Cooper, Ezekiel, NAC, 265).
  • *Charles Feinberg states, “But as [Ezekiel] viewed the thoughts and ways of [the King of Tyre], he clearly discerned behind him the motivating force and personality who was impelling him in his opposition to God. In short, he saw the work and activity of Satan, whom the king of Tyre was emulating in so many ways” (Feinberg, The Prophecy of Ezekiel, 161). This approach parallels Ryrie who views both the King of Tyre and Satan in view in the passage.
Isaiah 14 and/or Ezekiel 28 do not refer to Satan:

  • John Calvin (not surprisingly) is unequivocal in denying that Isaiah has anything whatsoever to do with Satan, “The exposition of this passage, which some have given, as if it referred to Satan, has arisen from ignorance; for the context plainly shows that these statements must be understood in reference to the king of the Babylonians” (Calvin, Commentaries, 7:442).
  • Edward J. Young, says that Isaiah 14 has the king of Babylon in view, no more (Young, The Book of Isaiah, 1:441). He contends that the phrase, “how are you fallen from heaven” “is to fall from great political height” (Young, The Book of Isaiah, 1:440).
  • Keil and Delitzsch say that applying the name Lucifer to Satan based on Isaiah 14:12 is “without any warrant whatever” (Keil and Delitzsch, Isaiah, 312). They contend that Ezekiel 28 is referring to the King of Tyre and no one else (Keil and Delitzsch, Ezekiel, 411).
  • Matthew Henry also sees Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 as applying to the historical kings mentioned in each passage (Matthew Henry, Commentary, 4:67 and 4:721).
  • *John D.W. Watts sees this as a poem as “a simile to picture the fall and disgrace of the tyrant” (Watts, Isaiah 1-33, WBC, 212). It is general in its scope and references neither the king of Babylon or Satan.
  • *John N. Oswalt concludes that this passage deals with human pride manifested by the king of Babylon (Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah 1-39, NICOT, 320).
  • *Jan Ridderbos straddles the fence saying, “there is an element of truth in the idea [that Lucifer is Satan]: by his self-deification Babylon’s king is the imitator of the devil and the type of the Antichrist (Daniel 11:36; 2 Thess 2:4); therefore his humiliation is also an example of Satan’s fall from the position of power that he has usurped (cf. Luke 10:18; Rev. 12:9) (Ridderbos, Isaiah, 142).
  • *Gray takes this portion to be based on a Babylonian genre of a mythical hero. Strange as the interpretation is he does not find Satan in Isaiah 14:12-14 (Gray, Isaiah, ICC, 1:256-7).
  • *Block contends that “Ezekiel’s prophecy is indeed couched in extravagant terms, but the primary referent within the context is clearly the human king of Tyre” (Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel, NICOT, 119).
  • *Leslie Allen says that the interpreter who applies “vv 11-19 to Satan” is “guilty of detaching the passage from its literary setting” (Allen, Ezekiel 20-48, WBC, 95).
  • Youngblood quips, “In this case, the devil is not in the details” (Ronald Youngblood, “The Fall of Lucifer,” in The Way of Wisdom: Essays in Honor of Bruce K. Waltke, eds. J.I. Packer and Sven Soderlund [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000], 171).
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,161
1,223
71
Sebring, FL
✟657,505.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I am not alone in this as a duel interpretation. And I am not saying I am correct and you are not. If you wish to disregard this piece that is ok by me as the rest will still apply.

And just to show that I am am being honest here is a short list from both camps. This will not defend the above text but will show that others do think as I do about this being a duel interpretation.


Survey of Theologies

Isaiah 14 and/or Ezekiel 28 refer to Satan:

  • Lewis Sperry Chafer (Chafer, Systematic Theology, 7:284-5).
  • Charles Ryrie (Ryrie, Basic Theology, 141-5). Ryrie is one of the few theologians that interacts with the interpretative options for concluding that the passages apply to Satan. A very worthwhile read.
  • Henry Thiessen (Lectures in Systematic Theology, 194-5).
  • Millard Erickson does not address Satan’s fall in his section on angels (Christian Theology, 472). He does, however, point out that Isaiah 14 contains a picture of the fall of Satan (Christian Theology, 604).
  • James Boice applies Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 to Satan (Foundations of the Christian Faith, 173).
Isaiah 14 and/or Ezekiel 28 do not refer to Satan:

  • Berkhof, Systematic Theology and Dabney, Systematic Theology simply do not reference the fall of Satan or deal with Isaiah or Ezekiel. However, I take their silence to mean that they do not apply to Satan (though admittedly it is an inference from silence).
  • As best as I was able to discern, Augustus Strong in his Systematic Theology does not apply Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 to Satan. He only provides passing comments on these passages and does not address the fall of Satan. He seems to take the approach in the brief remarks on each passage that it is referring to a historical, human figure (Systematic Theology, 450 and 518).
  • Charles Hodge speaks little about the fall of Satan. Concerning evil angels in general he says, “When they fell or what was the nature of their sin is not revealed” (Hodge, Systematic Theology, 1:643). As far as Satan in particular, he only makes reference to the fact that he is fallen without reference to when he fell or the nature of his fall. Hodge makes a great point about the pride of Satan, which is alluded to in 1 Timothy 3:6, “He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil.” The connection is “the condemnation which the devil incurred for the same sin [i.e. pride].” Hodge then goes on to say, “Some have conjectured that Satan was moved to rebel against God and to seduce our race from its allegiance, by the desire to rule over our globe and the race of man. Of this, however, there is no intimation in Scripture. His first appearance in the sacred history is in the character of an apostate angel” (Hodge, Systematic Theology, 1:643). So what Hodge seems to be saying is that there are no passages that refer to Satan’s fall. When he comes onto the Biblical scene (in the garden) he is already a fallen angel.
Survey of Commentaries

Isaiah 14 and/or Ezekiel 28 refer to Satan:
  • *W.A. Criswell, Ezekiel, 149.
  • * Lamar Cooper suggests that “the difficulty of the text makes it unwise to insist upon a particular interpretation, but the latter traditional view [that ‘the lament is an account of the fall of Satan not given in Scripture but alluded to elsewhere, especially in Isa 14:12-17’] appears to the present writer to account best for the language and logic of the passage” (Cooper, Ezekiel, NAC, 265).
  • *Charles Feinberg states, “But as [Ezekiel] viewed the thoughts and ways of [the King of Tyre], he clearly discerned behind him the motivating force and personality who was impelling him in his opposition to God. In short, he saw the work and activity of Satan, whom the king of Tyre was emulating in so many ways” (Feinberg, The Prophecy of Ezekiel, 161). This approach parallels Ryrie who views both the King of Tyre and Satan in view in the passage.
Isaiah 14 and/or Ezekiel 28 do not refer to Satan:

  • John Calvin (not surprisingly) is unequivocal in denying that Isaiah has anything whatsoever to do with Satan, “The exposition of this passage, which some have given, as if it referred to Satan, has arisen from ignorance; for the context plainly shows that these statements must be understood in reference to the king of the Babylonians” (Calvin, Commentaries, 7:442).
  • Edward J. Young, says that Isaiah 14 has the king of Babylon in view, no more (Young, The Book of Isaiah, 1:441). He contends that the phrase, “how are you fallen from heaven” “is to fall from great political height” (Young, The Book of Isaiah, 1:440).
  • Keil and Delitzsch say that applying the name Lucifer to Satan based on Isaiah 14:12 is “without any warrant whatever” (Keil and Delitzsch, Isaiah, 312). They contend that Ezekiel 28 is referring to the King of Tyre and no one else (Keil and Delitzsch, Ezekiel, 411).
  • Matthew Henry also sees Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 as applying to the historical kings mentioned in each passage (Matthew Henry, Commentary, 4:67 and 4:721).
  • *John D.W. Watts sees this as a poem as “a simile to picture the fall and disgrace of the tyrant” (Watts, Isaiah 1-33, WBC, 212). It is general in its scope and references neither the king of Babylon or Satan.
  • *John N. Oswalt concludes that this passage deals with human pride manifested by the king of Babylon (Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah 1-39, NICOT, 320).
  • *Jan Ridderbos straddles the fence saying, “there is an element of truth in the idea [that Lucifer is Satan]: by his self-deification Babylon’s king is the imitator of the devil and the type of the Antichrist (Daniel 11:36; 2 Thess 2:4); therefore his humiliation is also an example of Satan’s fall from the position of power that he has usurped (cf. Luke 10:18; Rev. 12:9) (Ridderbos, Isaiah, 142).
  • *Gray takes this portion to be based on a Babylonian genre of a mythical hero. Strange as the interpretation is he does not find Satan in Isaiah 14:12-14 (Gray, Isaiah, ICC, 1:256-7).
  • *Block contends that “Ezekiel’s prophecy is indeed couched in extravagant terms, but the primary referent within the context is clearly the human king of Tyre” (Daniel Block, The Book of Ezekiel, NICOT, 119).
  • *Leslie Allen says that the interpreter who applies “vv 11-19 to Satan” is “guilty of detaching the passage from its literary setting” (Allen, Ezekiel 20-48, WBC, 95).
  • Youngblood quips, “In this case, the devil is not in the details” (Ronald Youngblood, “The Fall of Lucifer,” in The Way of Wisdom: Essays in Honor of Bruce K. Waltke, eds. J.I. Packer and Sven Soderlund [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2000], 171).


Rineub in post #97:
<< I am not alone in this as a duel interpretation. ... >>


It just doesn't fit with a Fall of Lucifer.

It looks like many of these commentators start with a fixed idea that there must be a Fall of Lucifer somewhere in Scripture.

4 By your wisdom and understanding
you have gained wealth for yourself
and amassed gold and silver
in your treasuries.
5 By your great skill in trading
you have increased your wealth,
and because of your wealth
your heart has grown proud.
--Ezekiel 28:4-5 NIV

7 I am going to bring foreigners against you,
the most ruthless of nations ...
--Ezekiel 28: 7 NIV

16 Through your widespread trade
you were filled with violence,
and you sinned.
--Ezekiel 28: 16 NIV


In verses 4-5, the word "wealth" appears three times, along with "amassed gold and silver." Verse 16 refers to "trade" and verse 5 to "trading." But according to the Catholic legend of the Fall of Lucifer, his sin wasn't greed but pride. When did Satan trade, or get paid in gold and silver? Verse 7 says that foreigners will come against this King of Tyre. Again, this isn't what happened to Lucifer.

19 All the nations who knew you
are appalled at you;
you have come to a horrible end
and will be no more.’”
--Ezekiel 28:19 NIV


The nations aren't appalled at Satan. I wish they were. The nations do not see Satan as cast down and destroyed, they are bedazzled by the temptations of evil.
 
Upvote 0