Here's something I got from another forum. Quite a shaking study.

--------- Post from another Forum Starts here --------------

Azazel -- The (misunderstood)Scapegoat of Leviticus 16
..........by Doug Goslin

This study is an attempt to help us understand the depth of the atonement in relation to the two goats of Leviticus 16. Please understand that this writer knows nothing yet as I should and yet I do know that I was meant to be one with God, at-one-meant which was made possible at the cross. The Day of Atonement was a shadow of the true atonement and that atonement was experienced by the apostles.



It was both the death and resurrection of Christ that makes us one with God, not just His death. Most believers understand the good news in the death and resurrection of the Son of God and understand that without the resurrection their can be no atonement.






For many years I unknowingly deceived many people that the death and the resurrection was not enough to make us one with God. For this I repent and ask those of you that I have deceived to forgive me. I believed this was taught in the types and shadows of the Levitical priesthood but I was wrong.

For example, the Passover was connected to the exodus from Egypt and the sacrificial lamb represented Christ. The feast of unleavened bread represented getting sin out of the life. Then there was the evening and morning sacrifices, the wave sheaf, Pentecost, etc. All of them had sacrifices connected with them and a specific meaning but the feast that had the most meaning of all the feasts was the Day of Atonement.

The Day of Atonement was the only day of the year that the High Priest put on the white linen garments and entered within the veil to the Most Holy Place.



The Day of Atonement happened one day in the year because this was the day that God the Father made His children one with Him. The priests entered many times during the year into the outer court and into the holy place but only once into the Most Holy that was within the veil and notice that he wore special white linen garments for this occasion.
Why Two Goats?



The two goats were kid goats or under a year old which depicts innocence and they were taken from inside the camp of Israel which at that time was considered a holy nation. The word "Israel" means to be an over comer with God. The fact that Aaron had to cast lots upon the two goats, means that both goats had to be innocent and without spot or blemish because the lot could have fell on either one. So the goats had to represent something pure and innocent.

But, if they both represented Christ, why did there have to be two goats?

We know that when an animal dies it has no resurrection. It's spirit goes downward. We have two goats in this "shadow" because there are two parts to the plan of redemption, the death and the resurrection. The sin offering and the atonement was a two-fold plan and one goat could not have represented twofold plan.

There was another service where two birds were required for the cleansing of a person with infectious disease. The priest was to take two birds, and slay one of them and the other was dipped in its blood and then released. Lev. 14:1-7. There are differences in the two services. For example the scapegoat was not dipped in the blood of the slain goat. However there are similarities, as one bird being slain and the other released. There is no doubt that the slain bird represented Jesus’ shed blood setting people free from the condemnation of sin and forgiveness through the shed blood. The bird set free represents Jesus removing the sins and setting people free from the penalty of sin which is death.

The two goats make a complete atonement as well as the two birds.



Step One -- The Sin Offering



This represented the cleansing of mankind from all his sin, Remember a most holy God must dwell in holy places.

Here we have the sin offering. The first kid goat that was innocent without blemish representing Christ. "He that knew no sin became sin for us." The blood was shed and brought into the most holy and an atonement is made before the mercy seat. The blood is sprinkled seven times representing completeness and perfection of the cleansing that took place.

Step Two -- The Atonement



The innocent Christ was raised from the dead where His offering was accepted by the Father. This is represented by the second (two-fold) goat which is like the first goat, an innocent victim in which the lot fell to be the live goat is taken and it is presented "before the LORD at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. Aaron who represents the HIGH priest puts the sins of the people on the head of the innocent scapegoat (one who innocently takes the blame). A fit man, which means a man of opportunity sends the goat away into the wilderness (the land of forgetfulness) where the sins are deposited but the goat is left alive!

The man of opportunity we believe are the righteous from all generations represented by Joseph of Armathea (Joseph meaning the name of seven Israelites) who now because of the atonement made for us have the opportunity to come boldly before the throne of grace to receive mercy. The live goat did not see death but he did take the sin's of the camp of Israel into the wilderness or to the land of forgetfulness which is according to Psalms 88 the place of the dead. This is what God the Father does with our confessed sins. He forgets them sending them as far as the east is from the west. Our sins are dead only in Christ.







Nowhere in the Bible will you find any hint that Satan will bear the guilt or the sins of the people.





We believe that garments represents righteousness (white linen) or unrighteousness (filthy rags). At the cross Jesus was stripped of His garments and lots were cast for them. Lots were cast for the two goats. The garments worn by the priest during the day of Atonement were of white linen and were left in the Holy Place after the service. The cloth used to bury our Lord was white linen and these were left in the tomb when he was resurrected representing the garments of our sins which were left in the land of forgetfulness. Absolutely nothing in the whole book of Leviticus 16 nor anything at the death and resurrection of Christ do we find any clue that Satan was a sin bearer or involved in the plan of salvation.







The fit man or man of opportunity returns after getting rid of confessed sins on the head of Christ and now has the opportunity to cleanse his garments and be fit to come into the camp of God's people. Isn't this a perfect picture of the plan of salvation?

Since the cross we have the opportunity to come boldly to the throne of grace and confess our sins. We then rest from salvation by works in this Sabbath rest that we now live since the cross trusting that God has forgotten our sins and live our lives from that point on cleansing our garments in the Word of God by the blood of Jesus Christ to make us fit to be taken in to the promise land. This is what the weekly Sabbath is meant to teach us and remind us of. That we are resting from our own works and trusting in the Father to create in us a new heart and to finish the creation that He started in us.



--Doug Goslin

Some things it does say:
The goat is left.
The goat is not killed by anyone.

What it does not say:
The goat continues to live.

What normally happens to a domestic goat left in a land not inhabited?

If the live goat is taken to the place of the dead, what should one expect to happen?

Some implications from Doug which must be dealt with:
Christ takes the sins and does not die.
Where is satan represented in the service?

Good points, kland.

Some points also worth mentioning:

1) The grammatical construction of Lev. 16:8 in the Hebrew implies that there are two personal beings involved, because both "Lord" and "Azazel" appear as proper names;
2) The grammatical construction of Lev. 16:8 puts the two beings in opposition to one another: for Azazel and for JHWH;
3) The Siriac version has Azzail, the "angel (strong one) who revolted";
4) The whole Hebrew tradition says that Azazel is an evil being and a fallen angel; 1 Enoch 10:4-9 says:

"And again the Lord said to Raphael: 'Bind Azazel hand and foot, and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert, which is in Dudael, and cast him therein. And place upon him rough and jagged rocks, and cover him with darkness, and let him abide there for ever, and cover his face that he may not see light. And on the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire. And heal the earth which the angels have corrupted, and proclaim the healing of the earth, that they may heal the plague, and that all the children of men may not perish through all the secret things that the Watchers have disclosed and have taught their sons. And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin.'"

There's somewhere in the pseudopigrapha which speaks of the time period as being 10,000 years (piggy backing on the point about there being a Hebrew tradition).

Ellen White believed and clearly taught the scapegoat typified Satan. Here's how she explains it:

It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed. When the high priest, by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, removed the sins from the sanctuary, he placed them upon the scapegoat. When Christ, by virtue of His own blood, removes the sins of His people from the heavenly sanctuary at the close of His ministration, He will place them upon Satan, who, in the execution of the judgment, must bear the final penalty. The scapegoat was sent away into a land not inhabited, never to come again into the congregation of Israel. So will Satan be forever banished from the presence of God and His people, and he will be blotted from existence in the final destruction of sin and sinners. {GC 422.2}

In the typical service the high priest, having made the atonement for Israel, came forth and blessed the congregation. So Christ, at the close of His work as mediator, will appear, "without sin unto salvation" (Hebrews 9:28), to bless His waiting people with eternal life. As the priest, in removing the sins from the sanctuary, confessed them upon the head of the scapegoat, so Christ will place all these sins upon Satan, the originator and instigator of sin. The scapegoat, bearing the sins of Israel, was sent away "unto a land not inhabited" (Leviticus 16:22); so Satan, bearing the guilt of all the sins which he has caused God's people to commit, will be for a thousand years confined to the earth, which will then be desolate, without inhabitant, and he will at last suffer the full penalty of sin in the fires that shall destroy all the wicked. Thus the great plan of redemption will reach its accomplishment in the final eradication of sin and the deliverance of all who have been willing to renounce evil. {GC 485.3}

Elle, the scapegoat didn't die, and that means that there's no salvivic action for us in its part of the day; especially as the scapegoat started its part once the sanctuary and people were atoned for, so judgement and salvation were complete, exclusively by the Lord's goat.
In reality, once Jesus has atoned for us by his life, death, resurrection, ascension and intercession in both phases of the sanctuary service in its heavenly original, the burden of judgement of eternal death for sin and sins confessed by the saints of all ages, already having been born for us by our Saviour, is then given rightfully back to the tempter who shouldn't have tempted in the first place.

Satan will bear his full part for sin, thus the scapegoat typifies the 1000 years Satan is bound on the earth with none to tempt after the 2nd Coming of Christ and his death following the final judgement. Rosangela's points are good, too, as I think I'm also repeating the SOP quotes' content from MM - yet my post is my own thoughts on the topic, not copying from MM's post.

I would like to bring a correction. At first I had misunderstood the meaning of the misunderstood scapegoat and thought that Jesus was Azazel, when according to the Masoretic Text, Jesus was the 2nd goat sent alive FOR Azazel(the scapegoat). Jesus is not the scapegoat. There's actually 3 goats in Lev 16.

This became clear to me of my misunderstanding when some months ago, I decided to check the Hebrew literal translation of Lev 16:10. Here is what I discovered.

The Literal Hebrew translation of Lev 16:10

Before hand, let me explain in brief that there are two works of Christ to atone for the sins of the world.

1. Justification : accomplish/symbolized by His death
2. Sanctification: accomplish/symbolized by His ressurection and His work in us and His work in destroying the works of the Devil.

The death and resurection of Jesus depicts this two works. This works was reveal in the TYPE with the 2 doves ritual(one dead, the other alive).(Lev 14) The same is depicted in the TYPE with the 2 goats ritual(one dead, the other alive) (Lev. 16).

First of all you have to acknowledge that these two goats were both without blemish for the lot could of fell on either. Right there one of these goats couldn't represent Lucifer, for he is filled with blemish. Both of these animals were without blemish because both represented Christ and His two works to atone for the world.

Lev 16:10 "But the goat, on which the lot fell [to be the] (for) scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the Lord, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go [for a ] (to) scapegoat into the wilderness. "

Notice what I have put in bracket and highlight in red the inaccuracy of the translation. What is in parenthese and in green is what the litteral translation in the original text would say. Do look at the masoretic text with strong code available at www. scripture4all.org. I have their free software download on my computer, which is more detail than the one online. So I'm referring to their software.

Basically the translation error(& bias) is that the second goat was for Azazel and not to be Azazel.

Let me paraphrase from the literal text by only giving the literal translation provided by this software where I will supply the strong codes with it. Please go check the Masoretic text yourself at Scripture4All Link if you really want to be objective about this and know the truth about God's plan of salvation.

Lev 16:10 "But the goat, on which the lot fell over-him (5921) for-goat-of-departure (5799) shall be presented alive before the Lord, to make an atonement with him and to-send-away-of[/i] (7971) him (853) to-goat-of-departure (5799) the-wilderness-ward (4057)"

Above is the literal translation of the Hebrew are in bold and italic font. As you can see the goat that the lot fell on was FOR the scapegoat. It was not the scapegoat itself. And in the later half of the text, that goat (that the lot fell on) was sent away TO the scapegoat in the wilderness.

This was fufilled when Jesus was baptised(=death of 1st goat for the Lord) and then the Holy Spirit(the fit man) led him(live 2nd goat for Azazel

There's a quote I've found helpful in trying to understand the scapegoat transaction. It describes the sequence of events just after the close of probation.

I appreciate the gesture Glen in providing an EGW quote in the hope that it would clarify things for me, but for me, what the Bible says have authority over any of EGW writings.

According to Scriptures, the sin was confessed over the head of the goat that the lot fell on which was a sin offering. I acknowledge that the laying of the hand on the head is not specified in Lev 16, however, that was mentioned previously in details in Exodus 29 for the Burnt Offering of the daily, and the Sin offering for the priests, also in Lev 1, Lev 3 and Lev 4 for Burnt offerings, Sin offerings(which applies to Trepasses Offerings) and Peace offerings, for priest, congregation, kings or rulers, and common people.

There’s no mention that there is a laying of the hands on the head of the alive goat for it doesn’t fall on any of these category of offering(not a burnt, peace, or sin Offering). Neither is there any mentioned of the laying of the hand on the head on the 2 Doves rituals in Lev 14. However, the dove that represented the sin offering there was such things according to the manner of the offering.

Also, there’s nowhere in the TYPE any references that there is a transfer of all the sins on Satan. Is there any such things elsewhere in the Bible? Please bring me those texts if you know of some.

Therefore EGW interpretation in the quote provided is not in scriptures and also she erronously refers the 2nd goat that the lot didn't fall on “the scapegoat” which was the common mistakes made based on a mis-translation which still exist in most of our English translations today.

Here’s the Tenakh version on Lev 16:10 “10. And the he goat upon which the lot "For Azazel" came up, shall be placed while still alive, before the Lord, to [initiate] atonement upon it, and to send it away to Azazel, into the desert. » (quote and capitalization not added -- from original text)

See the above scripture here : http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9917/jewish/Chapter-16.htm

As this is what EGW “saw” in vision, thus a direct revelation, then I see it as unbiblical to not seek to harmonize it with the Biblical testimony. (1 Thess 5;19-21) It indeed could be further light by God to help us understand that obscure sanctuary symbolism for an eschatological, even prophetic understanding, i.e., prior to is antitypical fulfillment. Such added revelations are indeed intended to fill in ‘what has/had not been (explicitly) mentioned,’ or even injunctively institute or emphasize something “new”, i.e., for a new covenant context, now that Jesus has sealed Satan’s fate at the Cross. The passing away of the Old Covenant due to Christ’s victory, which most clearly came through a revelation to Paul highlights this dynamic/injunctive theological possibility.

The divine insight of “ it would take time to lead away the Scape Goat into the land of forgetfulness after the sins were put on his head” is prophetically quite enlightening to me.