Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
I had to chuckle at this.
‘Your heart is proud and you said, “I am a god; I sit in the seat of gods, in the heart of the seas” yet you are a man and not a god, though you think you are godlike. Ezek 28:2
Divine Knowledge Of Good And Evil Before Human Knowledge Of Good And Evil
- Thread starter Stumpmaster
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
‘Your heart is proud and you said, “I am a god; I sit in the seat of gods, in the heart of the seas” yet you are a man and not a god, though you think you are godlike. Ezek 28:2
Nameaboveallnames
Active Member
The laugh is on you.
Here is the complete verse that you deliberately truncated:
"Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:" (Ezekiel 28:2)
That was said of "the prince of Tyrus."
My question was about "the king of Tyrus" (Ezekiel 28:12)
That is strike one against you and your erroneous position.
Would you care to try again?
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Correct. Though a man he “made your heart/mind (לֵב, lev) like the heart/mind of gods.”
Keep digging!
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Rulers bear responsibility for the character and conduct of their kingdoms
...a lesson every believer should take to heart!
In the case of Tyre, the nation’s arrogance reflected the personal pride of its leader. Though unnamed in the text, the king during this period was likely Ethbaal II (585–573 B.C.). He is referred to as the “ruler” (sometimes translated “prince”), a term used in earlier biblical texts to describe a charismatic leader (1 Sam. 9:16; 10:1) or a dynastic king (1 Kings 1:35).
The king of Tyre was guilty of the same sin as his people, pride and self-exaltation (cf. Ezek. 27:1–9; Prov. 6:17; 8:13; 16:18). His arrogance came “from your heart,” which in Hebrew thought refers to the mind or will. It was this self-willed pride that led him to declare, “I am a god” (Ezek. 28:2).
The verse paints a clear picture of this mindset: “You think you are as wise as a god” literally, “You have given your heart [will] as the heart of a god.” In other words, he elevated his own thinking and will to divine status.
But this delusion is immediately corrected: “Yet you are a man, and not a god.” No matter what he claimed, he was and always would be—nothing more than a man.
Like you really or maybe a woman
If you want to come over to learn about the chapter's truth and the meaning of the lament, you're welcome anytime. Though leave your baseball bat at home, you won't need it!
...a lesson every believer should take to heart!
In the case of Tyre, the nation’s arrogance reflected the personal pride of its leader. Though unnamed in the text, the king during this period was likely Ethbaal II (585–573 B.C.). He is referred to as the “ruler” (sometimes translated “prince”), a term used in earlier biblical texts to describe a charismatic leader (1 Sam. 9:16; 10:1) or a dynastic king (1 Kings 1:35).
The king of Tyre was guilty of the same sin as his people, pride and self-exaltation (cf. Ezek. 27:1–9; Prov. 6:17; 8:13; 16:18). His arrogance came “from your heart,” which in Hebrew thought refers to the mind or will. It was this self-willed pride that led him to declare, “I am a god” (Ezek. 28:2).
The verse paints a clear picture of this mindset: “You think you are as wise as a god” literally, “You have given your heart [will] as the heart of a god.” In other words, he elevated his own thinking and will to divine status.
But this delusion is immediately corrected: “Yet you are a man, and not a god.” No matter what he claimed, he was and always would be—nothing more than a man.
Like you really or maybe a woman
If you want to come over to learn about the chapter's truth and the meaning of the lament, you're welcome anytime. Though leave your baseball bat at home, you won't need it!
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
@Nameaboveallnames
What follows in verse 3 should spark your interest!
Two rhetorical questions follow both expecting a negative response.
The king of Tyre (a man!) was not wiser than Daniel, nor did he possess all knowledge. I believe it is referencing the Biblical Daniel who was
Ezekiel’s contemporary in Babylon. Some think it might be referencing mythical Ugaritic Dan’el but that doesn't fit the context.
What’s especially noteworthy is that the character of the biblical Daniel, marked by humility, wisdom, and dependence on God, stands in sharp contrast to the pride and self-sufficiency of the king of Tyre mentioned in verse 3.
Here, we will provide an accurate interpretation of the king’s lament and offer a detailed explanation of the symbols as they relate to his divine judgment.
Unlocking Ezekiel 28
All welcome!
What follows in verse 3 should spark your interest!
Two rhetorical questions follow both expecting a negative response.
The king of Tyre (a man!) was not wiser than Daniel, nor did he possess all knowledge. I believe it is referencing the Biblical Daniel who was
Ezekiel’s contemporary in Babylon. Some think it might be referencing mythical Ugaritic Dan’el but that doesn't fit the context.
What’s especially noteworthy is that the character of the biblical Daniel, marked by humility, wisdom, and dependence on God, stands in sharp contrast to the pride and self-sufficiency of the king of Tyre mentioned in verse 3.
Here, we will provide an accurate interpretation of the king’s lament and offer a detailed explanation of the symbols as they relate to his divine judgment.
Unlocking Ezekiel 28
All welcome!
Nameaboveallnames
Active Member
Not at all. Again, I asked you about "the king of Tyrus" (vs. 12), and you deliberately keep on addressing "the prince of Tyrus" (vs. 2) because you cannot answer my actual question without refuting your own erroneous position.
Nope. Again, that was written about "the prince of Tyrus," so stop lying.
"Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God: Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee:" (Ezekiel 28:2-3)
Another lie. In truth and reality, verse 3 is talking about "the prince of Tyrus," and not "the king of Tyrus."
You are beginning to weary me with your repeated lies and deliberate twistings of scripture. That said and meant, I will refute one of your other responses a little later on today when I have more time.
Davy
Well-Known Member
Mine does.
The rest of your post seems to make my case, so . . .
Believe whatever fantasy you want then.
Nameaboveallnames
Active Member
While I have a moment, let me quickly point out a biblical principle that is directly related to the topic at hand. There are times in scripture when God not only addresses a man, but he also addresses the Spirit or spirit behind the man that is inspiring him.
For example, we read:
Matthew chapter 16
[13] When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
[14] And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
[15] He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
[16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
[17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
[18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
[19] And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
[20] Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.
[21] From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
[22] Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
[23] But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
In verse 16, Simon Peter spoke that which had been inspired by God or that which had been revealed to him by the Father in heaven (vs. 17).
Just moments later, in verse 22, Simon Peter spoke that which had been inspired by Satan (vs. 23). When Jesus said to Peter, "Get thee behind me, Satan," he was not directly addressing Peter, but rather he was addressing the spirit (Satan) who was inspiring him at that moment in time.
It is the same exact scenario in Ezekiel chapter 28. In verses, 1 through 10, God is obviously addressing "the prince of Tyrus" (vs. 2), and this prince is obviously a man.
However, in verses 11 through 19, God is obviously addressing "the king of Tyrus" (vs. 12), and this king is obviously an angelic being.
Simply put, in verses 1 through 10, God is addressing the man, and in verses 11 through 19, he is addressing the spirit (an angelic being) that was inspiring the man. I will prove my assertion later on when I have a bit more free time available to me.
For example, we read:
Matthew chapter 16
[13] When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
[14] And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
[15] He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
[16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
[17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
[18] And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
[19] And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
[20] Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.
[21] From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
[22] Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
[23] But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
In verse 16, Simon Peter spoke that which had been inspired by God or that which had been revealed to him by the Father in heaven (vs. 17).
Just moments later, in verse 22, Simon Peter spoke that which had been inspired by Satan (vs. 23). When Jesus said to Peter, "Get thee behind me, Satan," he was not directly addressing Peter, but rather he was addressing the spirit (Satan) who was inspiring him at that moment in time.
It is the same exact scenario in Ezekiel chapter 28. In verses, 1 through 10, God is obviously addressing "the prince of Tyrus" (vs. 2), and this prince is obviously a man.
However, in verses 11 through 19, God is obviously addressing "the king of Tyrus" (vs. 12), and this king is obviously an angelic being.
Simply put, in verses 1 through 10, God is addressing the man, and in verses 11 through 19, he is addressing the spirit (an angelic being) that was inspiring the man. I will prove my assertion later on when I have a bit more free time available to me.
Davy
Well-Known Member
In the sense of how Lucifer rebelled originally by claiming to be God, that part of the "prince of Tyrus" can apply to him. Also, the name Tyrus means 'rock', so remember who the lower case 'rock' is vs. our Rock.
But I agree the "king of Tyrus" section can only be about an angelic being, a cherub.
Nameaboveallnames
Active Member
Rather than waste any more precious time with someone who deliberately conflates “the prince of Tyrus” (Ezek. 28:2) and “the king of Tyrus” (Ezek. 28:12), I will just quickly point out some things about “the king of Tyrus” myself.
We read:
Ezekiel chapter 28
[11] Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
[12] Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.
[13] Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
[14] Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
[15] Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
[16] By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
[17] Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.
[18] Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.
[19] All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.
Here are some truths (there are more) that we can exegete from this portion of scripture.
1. This "king" (vs. 12) was "in Eden the garden of God" (vs. 13).
Good luck to anybody who seeks to prove that any earthly “king of Tyrus” was in the garden of Eden. At my end, I can easily prove that Satan was there (Gen. 3:1-15, 2 Cor. 11:3, Rev. 12:9, 20:2).
2. Not only were the sardius, topaz, diamond, beryl, onyx, jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle this king's covering (vs. 13), but the workmanship of his tabrets and pipes were prepared in him in the day that he was created (vs. 13).
If you don’t know what tabrets are, then this should help:
www.blueletterbible.org
Tabrets are timbrels or tambourines, and they were prepared in this king, along with pipes, as in organ pipes, in the day that he was created. If any of you HONESTLY believe that this description pertains to any earthly man, then I question your sanity.
3. This king is also an "anointed cherub" (vs. 14), and, of course, a cherub is an angelic being.
4. This king is not only an “anointed cherub” (vs. 14), but, more specifically, “the anointed cherub that covereth” (vs. 14)
“Covereth” what? When Moses was making and erecting the tabernacle in the wilderness, he was instructed by God to make everything according to the pattern that he was shown in Mount Sinai (Exo. 25:40, Heb. 8:5), and that pattern was in accordance with the true tabernacle that is in heaven, which the Lord pitched, and not man (Heb. 8:2). A very important part of that tabernacle was the ark of the covenant, and it was overshadowed or covered by two cherubim (Exo. 37:7-9). With this in mind, it is highly probable that this “anointed cherub that covereth” once covered the true ark of the covenant or testament in the temple in heaven (Rev. 11:19).
There is more that I could say, but this should suffice for now.
We read:
Ezekiel chapter 28
[11] Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
[12] Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.
[13] Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
[14] Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
[15] Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
[16] By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
[17] Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.
[18] Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.
[19] All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.
Here are some truths (there are more) that we can exegete from this portion of scripture.
1. This "king" (vs. 12) was "in Eden the garden of God" (vs. 13).
Good luck to anybody who seeks to prove that any earthly “king of Tyrus” was in the garden of Eden. At my end, I can easily prove that Satan was there (Gen. 3:1-15, 2 Cor. 11:3, Rev. 12:9, 20:2).
2. Not only were the sardius, topaz, diamond, beryl, onyx, jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle this king's covering (vs. 13), but the workmanship of his tabrets and pipes were prepared in him in the day that he was created (vs. 13).
If you don’t know what tabrets are, then this should help:
H8596 - tōp̄ - Strong's Hebrew Lexicon (KJV)
H8596 - תֹּף tôph, tofe; from contracted; a tambourine:—tabret, timbrel.
www.blueletterbible.org
Tabrets are timbrels or tambourines, and they were prepared in this king, along with pipes, as in organ pipes, in the day that he was created. If any of you HONESTLY believe that this description pertains to any earthly man, then I question your sanity.
3. This king is also an "anointed cherub" (vs. 14), and, of course, a cherub is an angelic being.
4. This king is not only an “anointed cherub” (vs. 14), but, more specifically, “the anointed cherub that covereth” (vs. 14)
“Covereth” what? When Moses was making and erecting the tabernacle in the wilderness, he was instructed by God to make everything according to the pattern that he was shown in Mount Sinai (Exo. 25:40, Heb. 8:5), and that pattern was in accordance with the true tabernacle that is in heaven, which the Lord pitched, and not man (Heb. 8:2). A very important part of that tabernacle was the ark of the covenant, and it was overshadowed or covered by two cherubim (Exo. 37:7-9). With this in mind, it is highly probable that this “anointed cherub that covereth” once covered the true ark of the covenant or testament in the temple in heaven (Rev. 11:19).
There is more that I could say, but this should suffice for now.
Last edited:
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Prince and king refer to the same person, the chief political officer of Tyre (Ezek 28:2, 12).
Easily wearied, simply means you're not cut out for this discussion...maybe you should take a rest!
Nameaboveallnames
Active Member
Nope. The king of Tyrus was a cherub. An angelic being. Get's you right there, doesn't it?
Perhaps you should try repentance. Go for it. It will do you good.
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Nameaboveallnames
Active Member
Nope.
It just proves that the "hidden things" are those that are right before your closed eyes.
I've admonished you as the heretic that you are more than twice, so now I will put you on "ignore."
Bye...
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
The Hebrew term נָגִיד (nāgîd), often translated as “prince”, is more accurately understood in many pre-exilic contexts as a “divine designee”—a royal figure appointed by God. Though the typical English rendering may be misleading, its usage in the Hebrew Bible suggests a title closely tied to divine appointment and early kingship.
In pre-exilic texts, nāgîd is used exclusively of kings, such as Saul, David, Solomon, Jeroboam I, and Jehu—all figures involved in the establishment or continuation of dynasties. It is therefore best understood as a primary royal title, rather than a general term for a prince or official. For example, in 2 Kings 20:5, the term is used of Hezekiah, though it does not appear in the parallel passage in Isaiah 38:5. If original, its use here may reflect a retrospective application of terminology from the Davidic period.
Curiously, the use of nāgîd in Ezekiel 28:2 for the king of Tyre stands out, as the term is otherwise confined to Israelite kings in pre-exilic usage.
In post-exilic texts, the scope of nāgîd broadens significantly, referring to a range of high-ranking figures—priestly officials (e.g., 1 Chr. 9:11; Neh. 11:11), military leaders (e.g., 1 Chr. 9:20; 2 Chr. 32:21), and other administrative roles. This broader usage continued into later Hebrew.
In earlier texts, nāgîd is most often associated with divine appointment, using verbs like צִוָּה (tsivvah, "command") or מָשַׁח (mashach, "anoint"), indicating that God himself designated individuals for this role (e.g., 1 Sam. 10:1; 13:14; 2 Sam. 6:21; 7:8; 1 Kgs. 14:7).
Though some scholars (e.g., Mettinger and Lipiński) have proposed that nāgîd originally meant “crown prince,” this theory is weakly supported:
Nevertheless, several key features of the term stand out:
In pre-exilic texts, nāgîd is used exclusively of kings, such as Saul, David, Solomon, Jeroboam I, and Jehu—all figures involved in the establishment or continuation of dynasties. It is therefore best understood as a primary royal title, rather than a general term for a prince or official. For example, in 2 Kings 20:5, the term is used of Hezekiah, though it does not appear in the parallel passage in Isaiah 38:5. If original, its use here may reflect a retrospective application of terminology from the Davidic period.
Curiously, the use of nāgîd in Ezekiel 28:2 for the king of Tyre stands out, as the term is otherwise confined to Israelite kings in pre-exilic usage.
In post-exilic texts, the scope of nāgîd broadens significantly, referring to a range of high-ranking figures—priestly officials (e.g., 1 Chr. 9:11; Neh. 11:11), military leaders (e.g., 1 Chr. 9:20; 2 Chr. 32:21), and other administrative roles. This broader usage continued into later Hebrew.
In earlier texts, nāgîd is most often associated with divine appointment, using verbs like צִוָּה (tsivvah, "command") or מָשַׁח (mashach, "anoint"), indicating that God himself designated individuals for this role (e.g., 1 Sam. 10:1; 13:14; 2 Sam. 6:21; 7:8; 1 Kgs. 14:7).
Though some scholars (e.g., Mettinger and Lipiński) have proposed that nāgîd originally meant “crown prince,” this theory is weakly supported:
- 1 Kgs 1:35, where David appoints Solomon as nāgîd, is unique in having a human make the designation.
- 2 Chr. 11:22 may reflect a later, expanded use of nāgîd in the post-exilic period, not its original meaning.
- The suggested etymology linking nāgîd to the root נגד (n-g-d, “to declare” or “announce”) is linguistically problematic. As noted, the derivation would require a Hiphil form, and the argument leans on a questionable wordplay rather than true etymology.
Nevertheless, several key features of the term stand out:
- It is mostly limited to Israel’s first monarchs.
- Its use is typically tied to divine appointment, with God as the subject of the verb nearly every time.
- It appears infrequently in poetic literature, suggesting it was more of a functional or official title than a literary or metaphorical one.
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
You’re trying to impose ideas onto Ezekiel 28 that simply aren’t there, and being challenged on them seems to frustrate/upset you. You’re even willing to twist the context to fit your view while overlooking the clear and explicit subject of the passage, the Prince (or King) of Tyre.
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
For everyone else reading #36, it’s immediately clear that the King/Prince/Ruler/Leader of Tyre held a privileged position, both in relation to God and in connection with Israel. His fall from that position was great and it taught Israel that God is no respecter of person when it comes to those who are in a covenant relationship with Him.
This discussion has been insightful, especially in highlighting how Names’ desire to ignore the context and impose human imagination onto the text ultimately leads to error.
Back to your OP!
This discussion has been insightful, especially in highlighting how Names’ desire to ignore the context and impose human imagination onto the text ultimately leads to error.
Back to your OP!
Hiddenthings
Well-Known Member
Join us in breaking open the misinterpreted chapter in Isaiah 14.
www.christianityboard.com
Unlocking Isaiah 14
@Wick Stick — I thought we might as well take a closer look at Isaiah 14, since this is yet another heavily misused passage by those who believe in a literal fallen angel (devil). The careless and spiritually negligent way these chapters are often handled will not go without accountability...
www.christianityboard.com
- Apr 5, 2009
- 2,751
- 1,792
- 113
- 71
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
Quotes can be used in answers.. Everyone knows that unless their perception is clouded.
Last edited:
