Is Lucifer "Satan" in the Old Testament?

Two passages on the OT -- Is. 14:12-22 and Ezekiel 28:12-19 -- are often suggested as
providing a "biography" of Satan; from thence come other presumptions.
Is this a valid interpretation? To start, here are the passages in question:
Isaiah 14:12-22 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art
thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine
heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit
also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above
the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to
hell, to the sides of the pit. They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and
consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake
kingdoms; That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that
opened not the house of his prisoners? All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lie
in glory, every one in his own house. But thou art cast out of thy grave like an
abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a
sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet. Thou shalt
not be joined with them in burial, because thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy
people: the seed of evildoers shall never be renowned. Prepare slaughter for his
children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill
the face of the world with cities. For I will rise up against them, saith the LORD of hosts,
and cut off from Babylon the name, and remnant, and son, and nephew, saith the
LORD.
Ezekiel 28:12-19 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. 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. 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. Thou wast
perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee. 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. 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. Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the
iniquity of thy traffic; 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. 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.
From the start, a telling sign against an identification with Satan is that the equation here
was made in the 3rd and 4th century AD, by church writers -- not by Jews of the OT or
NT era. This does not mean it is wrong, but it does place a greater burden of proof on
claimants.
As it happens, it is the passage in Ezekiel that is considered more detailed, and is used
to support the Isaiah passage's interpretation, so dealing with Ezekiel will address the
matter sufficiently. Our primary sources are the commentaries by Cooper (Ezekiel,
266ff) and by Allen (Ezekiel 20-48), which provided the most thorough explanations
available to us. Cooper stands for a mild endorsement of the equation with Satan, while
Allen dismisses it.
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.
This portion by itself is not determiniative. Ancient kings were regarded as the
repositories of wisdom; the point of "beauty" may be vanity (cf. Prov. 31:30) which would
fit as well with the king of Tyre's honor status as leader of a wealtrhy nation. There is
nothing particular here to point us towards Satan, or away from Satan.
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.
It is here that attempts to connect with Satan gain some apparent ground. By way of
deduction, commentators like Cooper conclude that since the literal king of Tyre could

not have been in the garden of Eden, the verse must be alluding to someone who was
(even if indeed comparing the king of Tyre to that whoever).
But is that required? Not at all. The factor which tells the story is creative Jewish use of
the prior Scriptures. Eden for Ezekiel is a type of the wealthy city of Tyre; a virtual
"paradise" for its residents and for the king of Tyre especially. There is no need to seek a
"certain person" who actually was in Eden.
The role of the jewels is not clear. Cooper supposes a connection to the Jewish
priesthood (these are 9 of the 12 jewels) would be confusing; I disagree, and he does
not explain what the confusion would be. In contrast, Allen notes that the king of Tyre
doubled as a priest; so that the stones may express that king's role (9 of 12 stones
signifying, may I suggest, a priest inferior to Yahweh's priests), as well as the wealth of
Tyre.
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.
It is perhaps this passage that makes the strongest case for an equation with Satan. But
the reference to the ruler as a "cherub" no more means an actual cherub is in view than
it means a dragon or a giant tree is actually in view in the next chapters about Pharaoh
-- and this point is made even stronger by the fact that cherubs were a key symbol of
Phoenician and Tyrian iconography.
The references to a holy mountain and stones of fire are peculiar in any setting. Those
who suggest Satan in view here are compelled to suggest a vivid anthropomorphism, for
obviously a spirit being is not walking on an actual mountain or among actual stones.
Thus indeed Cooper's claim that this must be more than a "strictly human creature" fails,
for the metaphor requires an interpretative massage regardless of who we think this is.
Allen points out that the language suggests accounts of mountains as abodes of gods,
and also points to a very late use of the phrase "in all my holy mountain" in a description
of the return to Paradise. The fiery stones may relate to a picture in the Gilgamesh epic
of a garden in which fruit and leaves took the form of jewels, which would be an
appropriate image of Eden to use when addressing a pagan king.

The context may elude us because of lack of informing material, but given the creative
use of imagery, there is no automatic ground here to identity Satan as the party of
intent.
Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found
in thee. 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.
This repeats images from above and thus suggests nothing new. However, it raises a
point to note the "multitude of thy merchandise," which fits the trading nature of Tyre (a
significant city-state for that practice) but doesn't meld well with Satan, who is no
salesman.
As a consequence of this and further portions of the passage, exegetes like Cooper are
compelled to suggest "a shift of focus back and forth" between the king of Tyre and
Satan, and to claim that with this reference, the allusions to Satan are "temporarily
abandoned." We would suggest rather that this is an explanation that begs the question.
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. Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine
iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffic; 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. 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.
There is again little new here; it may be noted that there is little channce that a spirit
being will be brought to literal ashes, or will be seen by people. A king of course won't
likely be made literally ashes either; this is normal "trash talk" of the ANE variety.
In summation, Cooper lists numerous traits of the personality in Ez. 28 and Is. 14. With
the exception of language associated with Eden and the mount of God, none of this
would not fit a human king; and once we recognize the creative use of imagery and their
contexts, these portions fall behind an identification of a human leader of Tyre as well.

Finding Satan here is an excellent exercise in midrashic typology -- but in terms of

actual justification from the intent of the text, there is little that can be found.
-JPH