The following excerpt is taken from What Every Christian Should Know About Satan. Order your copy in print, Kindle, or Audible versions here.

Check out Part I of this chapter.

When considered together, Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 invite different interpretations. Three rise to the top: (1) the authors are describing the depravity of earthly kings, using exaggeration and/or sarcasm; (2) the authors are describing both earthly kings and – in Ezekiel 28 in particular – the fall of Adam; and (3) the authors are describing both earthly kings and Satan, peeling back the curtain to expose a supernatural creature who pulls the strings of his marionette monarchs. 

Trusted Bible scholars vigorously debate which interpretation best fits the text. So, let’s briefly survey each view.

View 1: earthly kings

Many commentators see Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 as graphic depictions of wicked earthly kings, with hyperbole and/or sarcasm employed to show the folly of the rulers’  bloated self-esteem.

Kenneth Boa and Robert Bowman favor this view. In Isaiah 14, the prophet directly addresses the king of Babylon (v. 4) and specifically refers to him as a “man” (v. 16). But the prophecy also draws on pagan mythology to depict the king’s fall from power. For example, in one Canaanite myth, a god named Athtar (meaning something like “son of Dawn” or “morning star”) wanted to rule on Baal’s throne from Zaphon, a sacred mountain to the north. Compare “the North” (CSB) with “Zaphon” (NRSV) in verse 13 and see the connection. So, according to this view, Isaiah likely is using religious imagery typical for his time to describe the humiliation of an arrogant earthly king.

As for Ezekiel 28, Boa and Bowman argue that the two oracles – one against the prince of Tyre and the other against the king of Tyre – focus on the same human ruler. What leads some interpreters to equate the king with Satan, according to Boa and Bowman, is that the Hebrew text refers to him as a “cherub” (vv. 14, 16). However, the Septuagint, an ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament, says the king of Tyre was “with the cherub” (v. 14), and this cherub brought him out (v. 16). Modern English translations often note this distinction. The NRSV, for example, reads, “With an anointed cherub as guardian I placed you … the guardian cherub drove you out from among the stones of fire” (emphasis added).

Boa and Bowman conclude:

The bottom line is that neither Isaiah 14 nor Ezekiel 28 clearly refers to the fall of Satan from his original innocence. We can surmise that Satan fell for reasons similar to those of the kings of Tyre and Babylon – arrogance or pride, and in particular the desire to be a god himself. This makes sense when we note that the serpent’s temptation of Eve and Adam in Eden was that they could become “like God” (Gen. 3:5). 

Other commentators follow the same line of reasoning, offering the following observations: (1) Satan is never portrayed as a cherub, or even with a cherub in the garden, in any other passage of Scripture; (2) ancient Israel’s understanding of Satan was far more limited than that found in the New Testament; even in the Book of Job, satan is not a personal name but a function; (3) Satan is not identified as the chief of fallen angels until about the second century BC, and he does not take up his position as the source and cause of evil before the formulation of Christian doctrine. Therefore, in the context of Ezekiel 28:

… it is a metaphorical description of the high stewardship entrusted to the prince of Tyre (as significant as the cherub’s role in the garden). Rather than treating this sacred trust with reverence and awe, he exploited it to his own benefit – as if the cherub of the garden had opened a roadside fruit stand. He was therefore discharged from his position, relieved of his trust and publicly humiliated. 

IVP Bible Background Commentary

View 2: earthly kings and the fall of Adam

A second view, to which scholars like G. K. Beale hold, is that Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 describe wicked earthly kings who get their comeuppance in a way that sheds light on the first human to fall: Adam. While the kings of Babylon and Tyre wish to sit among the gods, Adam actually walks with the Most High and sits among the heavenly council. He is in Eden, the garden of God. 

In reference to jewels listed in Ezekiel 28:13, some commentators say this language  refers to a literal jewel-encrusted garment a prince would wear. They in turn argue that the prince of Eden is Adam. In addition, they note that many of the jewels listed here correspond to the jewels on the breastplate of the Israelite high priest (cf. Exod. 28:17-20; 39:10-13). Thus, we get a picture of Adam as priest-king of Eden. 

Since Jesus is the second Adam and a priest-king, the analogy fits. The backdrop to the prince of Tyre’s arrogance is the rebellious Adam, not Satan. Adam is blameless in his ways from the day of his creation until he disobeys God in an effort to become like his creator. 

So, the Lord expels Adam in disgrace from Eden (the mountain of God), throws him to the ground, and ultimately makes him an object of horror. This view embraces the Septuagint, which says the king of Tyre (or Adam, according to this view) was with an anointed cherub who brings him out. In other words, Adam is not an anointed cherub; rather, an anointed cherub who once was Adam’s protector has banished him from Eden and now stands guard, blazing sword in hand, to keep Adam from returning and partaking of the tree of life.

View 3: earthly kings and the fall of Satan

C. Fred Dickason is one theologian who sees a double reference in both Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28. That is, he sees two persons addressed in each passage. In Ezekiel 28, for example, verses 1-10 address a human leader (the prince of Tyre), while verses 11-19 describe a supernatural leader (the king of Tyre / Satan) behind him. 

The first leader is described as a man (vv. 2, 9), while the second is called a cherub (vv. 14, 16). The second figure is superior to the first; he is “full of wisdom,” “perfect in beauty,” and “blameless.” Dickason concludes, “For these reasons we take Ezekiel 28:12-19 to refer to Satan, not to a human.” Other commentators, dating back at least as far as Origen (AD 185-254), hold similar views. 

As for Isaiah 14, Dickason sees a parallel with Ezekiel 28, with the author first describing a human leader, and then the supernatural power behind him. This especially becomes clear when the king of Babylon proclaims his five I wills, the last being, “I will make myself like the Most High.” Graham Cole notes, “If Dickason is correct, then how ironic that a cherub, whose role is to guard the interests of God, began to attack those very interests.” 

Charles Dyer writes that the change from “ruler” (Heb. nagid) in Ezekiel 28:2 to “king” (Heb. melek) in Ezekiel 28:11 is significant in light of these prophecies. In verses 1-10, Ezekiel rebukes the ruler for claiming to be a god though he is just a man. But in verses 11-19, Ezekiel describes the king in terms that could not apply to a mere mortal. Further, in response to those who contend that the king is Adam, Dyer notes, “When Adam sinned he was not cast from the mountain of God to earth, and no nations existed to be appalled at his fall.” He summarizes:

Ezekiel was not describing an ideal man or a false god in verses 11-26. But his switch from “ruler” to “king” and his allusions to the Garden of Eden do imply that the individual being described was more than human. The best explanation is that Ezekiel was describing Satan who was the true “king” of Tyre, the one motivating the human “ruler” of Tyre. Satan was in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 3:1-7), and his chief sin was pride (1 Tim. 3:6). He also had access to God’s presence (cf. Job 1:6-12). Speaking of God’s judging the human “ruler” of Tyre for his pride (Ezek. 28:1-10), the prophet lamented the satanic “king” of Tyre who was also judged for his pride (vv. 11-19). Tyre was motivated by the same sin as Satan, and would suffer the same fate. 

Charles H. Dyer, The Bible Knowledge Commentary

One interesting parallel between the ruler of Tyre and the king of Tyre is Ezekiel’s use of the word trade. In verse 5, “trading” speaks of the ruler’s skill in commerce, which leads to great wealth. In verses 16 and 18, “trade” refers to the king’s violent and dishonest activities. The word for “trade” comes from the Hebrew verb rakal, which means “to go about from one to another.” Ezekiel uses this word, with its broad application, to compare the ruler’s commercial activities with the king’s spiritual schemes. Dyer notes of rakal:

So Ezekiel used a word that could convey a broad meaning. Satan’s position in heaven involved broad contact with many elements of God’s creation much as the prince of Tyre’s position enabled him to contact many nations. 

Though Ezekiel was describing the “ultimate” ruler of Tyre, Satan, the purpose of the lament was to speak of the city’s destruction. So he began to blend the characteristics of the satanic king with the human ruler. Satan would be cast to the earth (v. 17), and the king of Tyre would be cast down before other kings, his enemies. Satan’s ultimate destiny will be the lake of fire (cf. Rev. 20:10), and the defeat and death of the human ruler of Tyre was pictured as being consumed by fire (Ezek. 28:18). Both Satan’s and Tyre’s defeats would shock those nations who had followed them. They would be appalled because of Satan’s and Tyre’s horrible end (cf. 27:35-36). 

In his commentary on Ezekiel, Lamar Cooper asks, “Who, then, was the person whose character was like the king of Tyre that fulfilled the elements of [Ezekiel 28] vv. 12-17?” His reply:

The serpent was known for his craftiness (Gen. 3:1), his deceit, and his anti-God attitude (3:4), leading humanity to sin (3:6-7). Elsewhere he is presented as a deceiver (Rev. 12:9; 20:3), an instigator of evil (John 13:2, 27), one who seeks worship as a god (Luke 4:6-8; 2 Thess. 2:3-4), and one who seeks to get others to renounce God (Job 2:4-5). He appears as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14) and as the father of lies and violence (John 8:44), distorts Scripture (Matt. 4:6), opposes believers (2 Cor. 2:11), and finally is judged (Matt. 25:41; Rev. 19:20-21; 20:13-15). Therefore the conclusion that the figure behind the poetic symbol is the serpent (also known as the adversary, the devil, Satan; Rev. 12:9) is a logical one…. Ezekiel presented the king of Tyre as an evil tyrant who was animated and motivated by a more sinister, unseen tyrant, Satan. The picture presented by the prophet goes beyond what we know about the adversary in other passages. It tells us of his wisdom, beauty, appearance of perfection, appointment as a guardian and his expulsion from the presence of God. 

Lamar Cooper, New American Commentary

Michael Heiser is another scholar who ties Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 to Satan, and he connects both passages to Genesis 3. The serpent’s crime, according to Heiser, is that he freely chooses to reject God’s authority. God has chosen to create humans and entrust them with the power to extend Eden on earth. But the enemy bristles at the plan and thus decides to put himself in the place of God. He says in his heart, “I will ascend to the heavens; I will set up my throne above the stars of God. I will sit on the mount of the gods’ assembly, in the remotest parts of the North” (Isa. 14:13).

“He got a rude awakening,” writes Heiser. “Since the Serpent’s deception led to Adam and Eve’s sin, he was expelled from God’s home (Ezek. 28:14-16) and banished to earth – ‘cut [or cast] down to the ground’ in biblical language (Isa. 14:12 NLT) – the place where death reigns, where life is not everlasting.” 

Instead of being lord of life, Satan becomes lord of the dead, according to Heiser. This means the enemy now has claim over humans since the events in Eden result in the loss of earthly immortality. Humanity now needs to be redeemed to have eternal life with God in a new Eden. 

As for the imagery of the kings of Babylon and Tyre being cast down to the ground (Isa. 14:11-12; Ezek. 28:17), the Hebrew word erets refers literally to the dirt and metaphorically to the underworld. This ties back to Genesis 3, with God cursing the serpent to eat the dust of the ground. Snakes don’t eat dirt for nutrition. The point being made in all three passages is that the evil one is cast away from God, and from God’s  heavenly host, down to the earth, and even under the earth. In the underworld, the serpent is even lower than the beasts of the field. He is hidden from view and from life in God’s world. Death is his domain. 

Other views

There are other views of Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 beyond these three perspectives, including the belief that Satan actually indwelt the kings of Babylon and Tyre, along with the view that Isaiah and Ezekiel draw from Ancient Near Eastern paganism and myth to magnify the wickedness of human rulers. 

In any case, it seems biblically faithful to understand that Isaiah and Ezekiel are foretelling the hard fall of two wicked earthly kings. At the same time, it’s possible these prophets are drawing back the curtain to give us a glimpse of the one pulling the strings of his puppet kings. This bizarre show may enjoy a long run, but it ends tragically for all. Though we cannot say with certainty, it seems anointed guardian cherub is a fitting term for the evil one. 

Next: The Mystery of How and When Satan Falls