The Resurrection of The Antichrist: Ezekiel 28

The other major Hebrew Bible passage on the Fall of Satan is in Ezekiel 28. Some people discuss how Ezekiel 28 starts out talking about a human ruler of Tyre and then goes on to discus Satan as if it's ambiguous where this change happens, but it's not.

 Ezekiel 28 begins with "The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying", which is a typical Sign of a new message being given, that might be in some way connected to the prior message, but might not. Verse 11 says "Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying". It's after verse 11 it's talking about the "Anointed Cherub", the first 10 verses are about the human ruler.

The human ruler is the "Prince of Tyrus" the word for "Prince" here being Nagiyd, which is also translated Ruler, Captain, Leader, Governor and Noble. Satan is refereed to as the "King of Tyrus", the word for King being "Melek". The patron deity of ancient Tyre was Melqart, who's name was derived in part from Melek and means "King of the City". So part of the intent in referring to Satan this way may have been to link him to that false god. (Who the Ancient Greeks identified with Herakles/Hercules.)  Also the Hebrew word Melek for King is spelled the same as it's word for Angel, Malak,  M-L-K.  So the Holy Spirit could be doing some word play here.  Moloch is also spelled the same BTW.

Don't get over excited about an Antichrist passage seemingly calling him the "Prince of _____" or "King of _____". He will conquer and take over many Near Eastern locations, so none of these really tell us anything about his origin. Tyre may likely come under his control when he is victorious over the "King of the North" in Daniel 11:36-45. He'll also conquer Egypt (King of The South) which is important to remember later. This particular Prophecy is speaking of him in terms of his connection to Tyre because it spins off from Ezekiel's earlier prophecies of the contemporary conquest of Tyre by Babylon.

"Son of man, say unto the Ruler of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord Yahweh; 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 a 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: With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures: By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches: Therefore thus saith the Lord Yahweh; Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God; Behold, therefore I will bring foreigners upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness. They shall bring thee down to the pit, and thou shalt die the deaths of them that are slain in the midst of the seas.  Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, "I am God"? but thou shalt be a man, and no god, in the hand of him that slayeth thee. Thou shalt die the deaths of the uncircumcised by the hand of foreigners: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord Yahweh."

Here we have a ruler explicitly thinking of himself as God-Like, and also being sent down to the Pit. The word for "pit" here is different in the Hebrew then in Isaiah 14, but the idea is still clearly the same.

We're also told specifically he will be killed, and his killer is refereed to as "the terrible of the nations". This figure is significant, to me since many of the False Prophecies I see as setting up Messianic Figures that I think The Antichrist could seek to identify himself with have what I like to call a "Decoy Antichrist" figure who will kill him setting the stage for his Resurrection. Messiah Ben-Ephriam is killed by Armilus and the Mahdi by Dajjal. There are also similar ideas in apostate Christians traditions, though they don't as specifically expect their hero to be killed. I'll return to this subject latter.

Some see "die the deaths of the uncircumcised" as meaning he is Jewish, and that dying like a Gentile is some kind of mystical disgrace. If that's the case then it certainly goes against seeing this as applying to Ithobaal III (Ethbaal) the Ruler of Tyre at the time of Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of Tyre. But others see it the opposite, as simply saying he's Uncircumcised.

I believe The Antichrist will die only one death, because of what I mentioned before about Revelation 19 and being cast alive into The Lake of Fire. Some see Daniel 7:11 as clarifying that "The Beast" is killed first. "I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame." While the Beast imagery in Revelation draws on Daniel 7 it's also different. In Revelation The beast is both the individual and his Kingdom, in Daniel 7 The Beast is only The Kingdom, the Little Horn is the individual who is The Antichrist. This detail of Daniel 7:11 is about Edom/Rome as a nation being destroyed, not an individual person being killed.

Chris White and some others like to diminish the Eschatological-Antichrist significance of this passage by saying it merely makes this ruler of Tyre a type. But the problem is none of this really fits Ithoball/Ethoball at all. I alluded to one possible problem already, but there are others.

 He was not killed by Nebuchadnezzar (who in a contemporary context is the only person "the terrible of the nations" could be, Ezekiel elsewhere gives this title him explicitly) or his armies, simply forced to abdicate. And there is no evidence he arrogantly deified himself, I don't know whether or not like in Egypt the ruler was ceremonially always viewed as a sort of avatar of the patron god, but that would be different from this Prophecy where someone really honestly believes he's divine in his own heart.

This prophecy appears to be about him before and up to his death. but since the Abomination of Desolation is clearly after his resurrection, isn't the focus on his deification a little out of place? This prophecy does not reference that specific event, it may not be a matter of not publicly proclaiming himself yet but believing it in his heart, and/or simply not silencing his supporters who deify him. In which case I think it might work well to see Herod Agrippa in Acts 12 as a type.

Acts 12:20-23 And Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon: but they came with one accord to him, and, having made Blastus the king's chamberlain their friend, desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king's country.  And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them.  And the people gave a shout, saying, "It is the voice of a god, and not of a man".  And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.

This is verified by Josephus in Antiquities of The Jews Chapter 8.

Now when Agrippa had reigned three years over all Judea, he came to the city Cesarea, which was formerly called Strato's Tower; and there he exhibited shows in honor of Caesar, upon his being informed that there was a certain festival celebrated to make vows for his safety. At which festival a great multitude was gotten together of the principal persons, and such as were of dignity through his province. On the second day of which shows he put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly wonderful, and came into the theater early in the morning; at which time the silver of his garment being illuminated by the fresh reflection of the sun's rays upon it, shone out after a surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a horror over those that looked intently upon him; and presently his flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another, [though not for his good,] that he was a god; and they added, "Be thou merciful to us; for although we have hitherto reverenced thee only as a man, yet shall we henceforth own thee as superior to mortal nature." Upon this the king did neither rebuke them, nor reject their impious flattery. But as he presently afterward looked up, he saw an owl sitting on a certain rope over his head, and immediately understood that this bird was the messenger of ill tidings, as it had once been the messenger of good tidings to him; and fell into the deepest sorrow. A severe pain also arose in his belly, and began in a most violent manner. He therefore looked upon his friends, and said, "I, whom you call a god, am commanded presently to depart this life; while Providence thus reproves the lying words you just now said to me; and I, who was by you called immortal, am immediately to be hurried away by death. But I am bound to accept of what Providence allots, as it pleases God; for we have by no means lived ill, but in a splendid and happy manner." When he said this, his pain was become violent. Accordingly he was carried into the palace, and the rumor went abroad every where, that he would certainly die in a little time. But the multitude presently sat in sackcloth, with their wives and children, after the law of their country, and besought God for the king's recovery. All places were also full of mourning and lamentation. Now the king rested in a high chamber, and as he saw them below lying prostrate on the ground, he could not himself forbear weeping. And when he had been quite worn out by the pain in his belly for five days, he departed this life, being in the fifty-fourth year of his age, and in the seventh year of his reign;

The last part of Ezekiel 28 is about a judgment on Sidon. Which did not suffer any so epic Judgment in Ancient Times. I think it's possible to keep that passage in mind anytime tensions involving modern Lebanon are flaring up.

Ezekiel reuses some of the key themes of this passage in chapters 29-32. Another human ruler killed by "the terrible of the nations" and going down into Sheol. This time it's given new details like "and he shall groan before him with the groanings of a deadly wounded man." But there the human ruler is the Pharaoh of Egypt.

This time there definitely is a sense of near fulfillment in Ezekiel's own time, since "the terrible of the nations" is spoken of as synonymous with 'The King of Babylon" and Nebuchadrezzar is mentioned by name.

Along with this is a prophecy of Egypt being uninhabited for 40 years. Ussher believed this was fulfilled from about 572-532 B.C., but the documentation for that isn't solid. Some see in the text a possible allusion to this 40 year desolation beginning with the Aswan Dam being Nuked, with the references to a fire being set, and references to "the tower of Syene". Syene being where the Dam was build and no major ancient structure was built there.

Nebuchadnezzar is clearly only a type of The Antichrist's killer here. Many see him ironically as serving as a type of The Antichrist in Daniel 3. So I don't see this as definitive that the future "Terrible of the Nations" will be from or in Iraq. But Daniel 11:36-45 does refer to The Antichrist having trouble from the North and the East, after he's already conquered the King of The North (Syria). So that makes either Turkey and/or Iraq a likely candidate for this new adversary.

But if the King of Babylon detail is relevant, it seems awkward given it's The Antichrist who's the King of Babylon in Isaiah 14. After his Resurrection and return to power this enemy will quickly be taken care of. Armilus and Dajjal seem to be killed by the False Prophet figure in those false prophecies, but the heretical Christian traditions would rather see it be the Last Roman Emperor/Great Catholic Monarch who defeats the evil tyrant. Either way, it's likely The Antichrist will then take Rulership of Babylon, or whatever lands "the Terrible of the Nations" controls, for himself.

It's interesting to note that there are rival claimants to the Hashamite "King of Iraq" title right now. In addition to the proper claimants coming form two rival lines, there are those in the international community who'd rather give the title to someone of the Jordanian Royal Family.  But I'm no longer a fan of the Islamic Anitchrist view as I used to be.

That Nebuchadnezzar can be a type of The Antichrist to one Prophet, but a type of his killer to another, just further reinforces my belief that this individual will be a sort of "Decoy Antichrist". I've written elsewhere that I think there may be many potential Antichrists during the first half of the 70th Week, or perhaps even before the 70th week begins. And that no matter how convincing it might seem to view someone currently on the rise as The Antichrist, to remember that we will not know for certain who he is until the Abomination of Desolation happens.

The Resurrection of The Antichrist: Isaiah 14

Isaiah 13 and most of 14 is one Prophecy. 13 is talking about the Fall of Babylon, a prophecy that has not been literally fulfilled, an arguable near fulfillment exists in Isaiah's day, but it doesn't fit the full details even remotely. And attempts to make this fit the fall to Cyrus don't work at all. 14 begins with saying how Yaweh will choose Israel and give them the land.

I used to view The King of Babylon as not being The Beast, but as probably a decoy Antichrist the Beast will defeat, but I've changed my mind after only recently noticing aspects of this I repeatedly overlooked. Which is gonna cause me to have to go back and adjust some details of my older dissertations.

A note, I shall adjust the KJV rendering to better reflect The Hebrew, influenced by my own in depth study.

Now let's begin, verses 4-11 are talking about the human King.

That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased ! the golden city ceased ! Yaweh hath broken the staff of the wicked, and the sceptre of the rulers.  He who smote the people in wrath with a continual stroke, he that ruled the nations in anger, is persecuted, and none hindereth.  The whole earth is at rest, and is quiet: they break forth into singing.  Yea, the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon, saying, Since thou art laid down, no feller is come up against us. Sheol from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy coming: it stirreth up the demons for thee, even all the rams of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.  All they shall speak and say unto thee, "Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us?" Thy pomp is brought down to Sheol, and the noise of thy viols: the maggot is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

So this Human ruler has died and is now in Sheol, called Hades in the Greek and often by us Hell. But this isn't the Lake of Fire.

Now people assume what comes next is mentioned for the purpose of comparing these two personages. I feel the grammar justifies that a new character is in mind, but the person we were discussing will come up again latter. Isaiah 14:12-14

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the Dawn ! how art thou cut down to the earth, 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 Highest.

This is one of the core passages on the fall of Satan from heaven. The only one besides Revelation that could help us time it chronologically, but Revelation is far more precise.

Now I think we learn why these two come together in verse 15

Yet thou shalt go down to Sheol, to the sides of the pit.

They are now in the same place. In the New Testament "The Pit" is used of the Abyss. Given Hebrew poetic style however, I think this reference means a synonym of Hades. Though it could work either way if the Abyss is a specific part of Hades, or a location right next to it. This Hebrew word is also used of just literal cisterns and dungeons also.

The big translation issue I noticed is that the part of the usual translations that imply he's being brought there against his will, like his fall was, isn't in the Hebrew. It can be read that he went down there on his own, his fall was only to The Earth.

In the past I've been against viewing The Beast as possessed by Satan like Judas was, simply out of lack of direct reference. But here once both characters are in the underworld, the grammar of the text does seem to treat them as one.

Now verses 16-19 is the key really interesting part.

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, lay 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.

Generally we've considered the idea of the Beast's having his own Death and Resurrection merely implied by the "mortal wound" being healed in Revelation 13, and how Daniel 45 speaks of his end. But we miss how Isaiah here explicitly speaks of a King who'll go to Hell, but then be "cast out of his grave". And having some sort of wound from a sword.

Of the three ways the KJV translated that word throughout The Bible I chose "grave" because it most literally conveyed the idea poetically. It can also mean "sepulcher", and I do think as I explained elsewhere the Dome of The Rock could be his sepulcher. It's not Sheol however, which the KJV also often renders Grave, but I personally choose never to translate it that way.

Revelation twice when describing The Beast (both references timing wise I see as after his resurrection). Refers to him as ascending out of the Abyss. 11:7 "And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them." 17:8 "The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition".

I also see here a possible description of his post resurrection state. See I don't think The Antichrist's resurrection will be one like Lazurus, just being returned to how he was before. Though he's certainly not like our promised Resurrection either. That he and The False Prophet are in Revelation 19 cast into the Lake of Fire without being killed first implies to me that they are early partakers of the Second Resurrection. I've written on my theory about The False Prophet's identity elsewhere.

Since we who will be of The First Resurrection will have bodies like The Angels. I think it's possible that the bodies of The Second Resurrection will be like the bodies of Fallen Angels. II Corinthians 5:2 "For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven". The word translated "house" here is Oiketerion. A word used only one other time in The Bible, in Jude 6 where it's translated "habitation". "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." Like Chuck Missler I view this word as being a technical term for the Incorruptible bodies of Unfallen beings.

Does this tell us anything about the timing of other events in relation to his resurrection, mainly the destruction of Babylon that was discussed before?

That his mortal wound's healing is mid week is pretty indisputable from other references. This account is in the context of the yet future Fall of Babylon. But the context here is a semi change of subject, it could be looking back to explain how this King became what he is now, when Babylon falls. Or it could be this is going on to describe how this King after is judged Babylon is judged. Or maybe Babylon's End Times Judgment really happens in phases? Now to continue. Verses 19-23

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 stand, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with enemy cities. For I will rise up against them, saith Yahweh of hosts, and cut off from Babylon the name, and remnant, and offspring, and posterity, saith Yahweh.  I will also make it a possession for the porcupines, and pools of water: and I will sweep it with the broom of destruction, saith Yahweh of hosts.

The subject of Babylon itself seems to be returned to, as if the process of destruction began earlier but hadn't ended yet. It's interesting that he's spoken of as slaying his own people.

What new does this understanding tell us?

It kind of directly links the counterfeit resurrection to Satan's fall. Daniel 11:45 and 12:1 are the same continuous message originally, (the Chapter divisions are modern), also place "Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people" at the time the Willful King meets his end. Daniel 12:1 I also believe correlates to Revelation 12:7 "And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon" which is directly linked to when The Woman (Israel) flees to the Wilderness.

Verses 24-27 are still the same Prophecy, no "Word of The LORD came unto me saying" or any other indicator of it being a change in subject. None the less some Bibles include a new Chapter heading here as if it were different that calls it Judgment on Assyria. The text in the KJV says The Assyrian however.

The Assyrian here could be one of 3 or 4 things

1. The same King of Babylon we'd been discussing. I consider this the least likely since the other passages people cite as calling The Antichrist as The Assyrian I see as flawed logically also. Micah 5 is being hypothetical, saying how Israel can't be attacked once The Messiah reigns. And I've come to see Isaiah 9-11, if End Times at all (it could be easily just be about events form Isaiah's time when he gave this Prophecy) as linking The Antichrist to Ephraim rather then Assyria. Because I see Isaiah 9:14-15 "Therefore the LORD will cut off from Israel head and tail, branch and rush, in one day. The ancient and honourable, he is the head; and the prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail." as being a rare outside Revelation reference to The Antichrist being paired with a False Prophet.

2. Perhaps the "Terrible of The Nations" from Ezekiel I'll discus when I study those Chapters later.

3. The "King of The North" from Daniel 11:40. Could be the same person as 2 or maybe not.

4. It could be a flawed Translation, and simply mean Assyria, or the Assyrian people. Which could maybe overlap with either 1 or 2 or 3.

When it's said of The Beast "and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months." The terminology could mean continue as in he should have ended already. I think specifically it's referring to the amount of time following his being cast out of Hades.