Jennings' Satan: IV: The Cherub That Covereth

Satan by F. C. Jennings

CHAPTER IV.

“THE CHERUB THAT COVERETH.”


Contents.
Ezekiel xxviii.--Significance of the prominence of
Tyre--Tyre, the foreshadowing of commercialism--
Difference between Prince and King of Tyre--
Whom each figures--An examination of the chapter.


We have thus seen that Scripture at least is responsible for nothing contemptible, disgusting, or ridiculous in the conception it gives of the Devil: on the contrary, the picture is one calculated rather to awaken the opposite sentiments--not indeed of admiration--but of seriousness and awe as when one regards some awful scene in nature: a blasted oak, a ruined tower, a scarred mountain. But we have not yet exhausted this testimony and I must ask my readers to turn to a Scripture that must ever be of profoundest interest to any who are interested at all in our subject. I refer to Ezek. xxviii.

And even before looking at the particular passage, is not the peculiar prominence given to that single city Tyre in chapters xxvi to xxviii worthy of consideration? One single chapter (xxv) is enough to deal with the four nations; Ammon, Moab, Edom and Philistia; yet the next three chapters all refer, not even to a nation, but to one city--why this disproportion? Seventeen verses to four nations, eighty-three verses to one city! Surely Tyre is not, and never was so overwhelmingly important or prominent. Does not this at once suggest a typical or shadowy character of this earth-city; and behind it and its rulers--princes and kings--must we not see, somewhat indistinct and dim perhaps, yet sufficiently clear suggestions as to be unmistakable, of unseen spiritual verities, and these of transcendent importance? Yet whilst one may get such light as this apparent disproportion affords, we must not overlook the positive significance of this city being thus selected, and its king affording a type, and more than a type, of the dread personality we are considering.

By reading Ezek. xxvii, Tyre will be seen as peculiarly the merchant city of the earth in the Old Testament. She represents the commercial glory of the world, the wealth that accompanies it, and the pride that follows the wealth. The “King of Tyre” then would be an excellent figure of the “prince of this world”; source, pattern, and ruler of all “the children of pride” as he is. Thus we may say, it was as King of Tyre he came in the temptation on the mount, showing to the Lord Jesus all the glory of the earth he claimed as his--and it is as King of Tyre today he rules this age of commercialism, fostering ever by it and its accompanying wealth, that pride and independence of God that is his own path, the broad road in which he is leading mankind to a common ruin. As “King of Tyre” he instructs the young as to what is “Success,” and what failure; putting wealth before them as alone constituting the former, and poverty the latter. So that the man who leaves all his wealth behind him and goes to nothing, has made a success of life. He who leaves nothing, but goes to all, a failure! Is not this the prevailing teaching of our day? And it is due to him, the spirit that now works in the children of disobedience. Tyre of old had thus, too, a close and significant spiritual connection with the Babylon of the future. Tyre, the city “at the entry of the sea” whose “borders were in the midst of the seas,” was linked by the ties of commerce with all the earth. All were as Ezek. xxvii., puts it, “her merchants,” and all her merchants wail bitterly her fall. So that city, seated on “many waters,” Babylon the Great, is also filled with the merchandise of the earth, and her merchants, too, bewail her fall bitterly (Rev. xviii. 11). Indeed they are very closely connected, by commercialism, its wealth, and pride, and it will not be surprising if we find both the King of Tyre here, and the King of Babylon in Isaiah xiv. serving as figures of one and the same person. This will not weaken the typical application of both to the same one behind both, but immensely strengthen it.

There can then be no serious doubt but that we have unseen spiritual verities before us here, as chapter xxviii will be enough to prove. It opens with an address to “the Prince of Tyre,” which, however, changes in verse 11 to the King of Tyre; and we at once ask is there any significance in this change; if so, what is it? We can hardly err greatly by getting our answer from Scripture.

Now there is one Scripture that makes a very clear distinction between the “prince” and the “king.” In Judges vii. and viii. we get the details of Gideon’s victory over the hosts of Midian, in which he first captures two princes of the Midianites, Oreb and Zeeb; but the kings remain at large; and he has to pursue them further; they are Zebah and Zalmunna. As far as I am aware we are quite dependent on the meaning of these names for any light on the significance of the incident, and these meanings are in every case here quite clear and indisputable, as they would need to be for satisfaction.

Oreb means “the raven”; Zeeb, “the wolf.” Striking, is it not? for what words could express the two forms that evil ever has of “corruption” and “violence” better than these two creatures in the animal kingdom: the raven, the bird of darkness and corruption, as opposed to the dove; the wolf, the creature expressive of cruelty and fierceness, as opposed to the lamb?

Turning to the names of the kings: Zebah means “a slaughter made in sacrifice,” exactly the same idea as in Zeeb the wolf, only now it is in connection with the unseen powers. So “Zalmunna” means “a forbidden shadow,” or “spiritual deathshade,” a thoroughly kindred thought to that in Oreb, the bird of darkness, corruption; only again, in this case, suggesting a similar connection with the occult or spiritual powers; and as these are necessarily evil, the kings speak either of evil spirits, or the dual character of evil, violence and corruption, in one spirit. The princes then appear to represent evil in and governing man; the kings, that which is back of this, and dominates it, in him whom man serves as king: “the Prince (only so-called because there is still One higher than he) of this world.” It is a deeper character or degree of evil, superhuman, diabolical. Oreb and Zeeb, the princes, may be simple qualities of fallen human nature; Zebah and Zalmunna, the kings, spiritual wickedness, controlling and using the merely human qualities as the king does the prince. Of course, the slaying these, is not literal, but figurative of bringing their power to nothing, by the Cross of Christ.

Throw the light of this on Ezek. xxviii and we shall see in the prince addressed in verses 1-10 a man, very proud, very evil, very exalted, too, but still a man; then in verse 11 the man disappears, and we shall see in the king, a spirit who is behind and above the evil man--who can that be? Can it be a question?

Note in the address to the prince, the striking similarity in that which is ascribed to him, to what is foretold of “the man of sin, the son of perdition,” in 2 Thess. ii. 3:

The prince of Tyre:
Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said “I am God, I sit in the seat of God.”

The man of sin:
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

We may confidently conclude that the prince of Tyre is intended as a foreshadowing of the man of sin, in whom we also recognize the Antichrist.

Again and again, however, is the prince reminded that he is a man, and only a man--and all his pretensions are treated with keenest irony.*[Pember in “Earth’s Earliest Ages,” whilst recognizing that the address to the King in vv. 11-19 contains “expressions which cannot be applied to any mortal,” yet as it would seem in direct denial of this does claim that it is the King, (as distinguished from his type the Prince), who is the great final Antichrist. Surely Antichrist is mortal.]  But when we come to the King in verse 12 there is no such word as man at all; all irony is dropped--the strain deepens. It is no longer simply “say,” but “take up a lamentation,” a dirge, a song of sorrow*[Exactly the same word as used for David’s lamentation over King Saul--the type of Satan--has this no bearing?] over the king of Tyre, as if God Himself were sorrowing over the ruin and wreck of His once fair but fallen creature; as we know, by His tears over Jerusalem, He ever does. Not even the king of Tyre, not even he whom he represents, shall pass to his doom without a “lamentation” from his Maker!

Let us be quite sure that this king does represent another, and to this end let us with some patience examine these few verses. Note how strikingly the address opens:

“Thou who sealest up the measure [of perfection]; full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.”

We must surely recognize the utter impossibility of applying such terms to any mere heathen King of a very small, and comparatively unimportant territory. This would not be hyperbole merely, but insane hyperbole.

This is the divine estimate and therefore a sober statement, without one single ingredient of hyperbole or irony in it. The one addressed is the highest of all creatures; indeed, he expresses creature-perfection, there is nothing more to be said or done. “Thou art the topstone: internally, full of wisdom; externally, perfect in beauty”; the very highest example of what omnipotence could create. How harmonious with what we have seen in Jude.

“Every precious stone was thy covering,” i.e., God had put upon him, decked him with every form of His own beauty. Every beauty that is in the one ray of Light (God is Light), expressed by these stones, was put on him.*

“The workmanship of thy tambours and thy pipes was in thee, from the day thou wast created were they prepared.”

From the very first, his complex being evidenced the beneficent intention of his Creator; it was that he should be filled with joy and find in himself every facility for expressing that joy to his Maker’s praise. He needed no harp to be placed in his hand; no trumpet nor shawm; for he carried ever within himself, that which was quick to respond to the touch of his affections (tambours) or answer to the breathings of his spirit (pipes).

We must surely recognize the utter impossibility of applying such terms to any mere heathen King of a very small, and comparatively unimportant territory.

*Note the three recurrences of these precious stones:
12 in the High Priest’s breastplate, expressive of all the display of divine beauties in Grace.
12 in the New Jerusalem, expressive of all the display of divine beauties in manifested Glory.
10 in this “King,” expressive of the same beauties (only connected with responsibility: 10) in the highest Creature.