| (Copyright) by Rich Traver (Clifton, Colorado) |
|---|
| An explanation commonly offered as to the Identity of the ‘Other Goat’ associated with the Ceremonies performed on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) poses that both animals represent Jesus Christ. Is that explanation, correct? Within the Biblical fall Holy Day season is a day which specifically focuses on the essential function of achieving Atonement for sins. It incorporates a unique Ceremony that should teach us something about sin, its origins, and its full scope that we might not otherwise realize. Not only does it illustrate the origins of sin, but the means of dealing effectively with its lethal condition. I say ‘origins’ because there are two aspects to its motivation and two actions necessary to fully expiate its effects. Misleading Choice of Term Unfortunately, there has been a common term used for Azazel that’s linguistically misleading. The word “scapegoat” as is commonly used, conveys to the reader a sense of one assigned to bear guilt who is not really the guilty party. In English, the term suggests assigning blame on an individual who in reality is not to blame but will draw the focus away from the real guilty party. This idea (when Satan is deemed the assignee) suggests that Satan is not really the guilty party. It’s interesting that when Christ is deemed the assignee, He theoretically ‘bears the sins’ of others, (allegedly being guiltless Himself). Effectively, either way, the ‘other goat’ is itself posed as being originally guiltless. We need to consider if either view fulfills the intent of the Ceremonial illustration. Before pursuing this topic, we should bear in mind that the instructions for this Ceremony were given long before the idea of Christ’s sacrifice was brought to the awareness of the observers. Secondly, in their day, the name Azazel was identified with an evil entity, not a ‘savior’ of any pedigree. It’s important that we consider what this Ceremony was perceived to represent at that time. While we might pose a different take on it today, based on what we now know about the atoning Blood Sacrifice of Jesus Christ, such was not remotely in the realm of their peripheral awareness! Casting Lots for What Reason? We ought also to consider why two identical goats were purposely selected, necessitating casting of lots to assign one to one fate and the other to the other. The individual goats are not left to our determination as to which one is to be which. Achieving Remission The ultimate purpose of this Ceremony is to address the matter of the need for and the means of achieving Remission of Sins. The whole point of this Ceremony is that sins must be completely atoned for. It offers no revealing function other than that. There are two clear aspects: the shedding of blood and the application of it, and also the assignment of certain other sins to a representing animal where no such sacrificial offering is applied. The two are not the same in actual effect! IF sins were all remitted with the sacrificed goat, what need would there be for the other? That’s a key question! So, are there sins which are NOT atoned for? And, if not, where does Jesus Christ fit into this picture where the ‘other ostracized goat’ is concerned? A Blood Remedy While it’s well established that: “without the shedding of blood there is no remission”, [1] we are left to explain the function and effectiveness of the Azazel goat. Are the sins placed upon its head atoned for? Is there remission of those sins? Can there be atonement without blood being applied? Why is it important that that goat be driven from contact with mankind, bearing its assigned sins with it? And is there a parallel situation associated with the future of humanity? Revelation 20 explains such a scenario! Satan is excluded from millennial society. Do Both Represent Christ? There are believers who identify both goats as representing Jesus Christ and His Atoning function. While it should be obvious that the Sacrificed goat is a clear representation of Him, it’s the identity of the other goat that is at issue. Death and shedding of blood are essential elements in the remission of sins. No other action can pay the penalty for committed and accumulated sins. The question is, what effect does removal of a stand-in representative indicate in the overall process? Where From? To address the question, we need to consider sin’s origins. One thing we know, we as the seed of Adam, do commit sin. It’s in our nature. But not only do we commit them, but the tendency remains in our nature despite the best of intentions. [2] We sin, but we ARE sinners! Though ‘cleansed’ of past guilt, the tendency remains in our natures. But that too requires an ongoing remission process. It must be covered by the blood of Jesus on an ongoing basis. 1st John 1:7-9 addresses this condition. [3] But there’s another aspect to consider. As we know, there is a spirit-world and a prominent being who broadcasts evil intentions and drives into un-suspecting people. There is that factor also. Satan can and constantly does hover around us waiting for the opportunity to inject a thought or motivate an action. It requires attentiveness and resistance on our part to maintain purity of conscience and spirit. So, we have a spirit influence in addition to our own carnal spirit that can affect a sinful condition! To correctly assess this Ceremonial representation, we need to factor-in both motivating forces. Who IS Azazel It isn’t as though people don’t know who he is. Ancient generations were aware of who this goat represented. They knew of the name and were clear as to his (its) identity. Let’s review some sources: From an internet comment: “Truly, the Old Testament rituals carry a depth and richness that only God could create. The Day of Atonement foreshadowed the ultimate atonement Christ provides. No longer do we need to sacrifice animals to cover our sins, nor do we need to impute our sins to a scapegoat to have them carried away. Jesus has been sacrificed and “scapegoated” for us. Our sins have been atoned for and removed. Now, this author fails to consider the efficacy of Christ’s Sacrifice. With our sins covered, what need would there be for the “scapegoating” action to assign “our” sins to the other animal? This poses that some of our sins still would need remediation in some manner. He also poses the idea that both goats represent Christ. This is what’s at issue! Additional Sources “As a side note, the name “Azazel” shows up in some Jewish mythology. While there are different versions in the Book of Enoch, the Book of the Giants, and other pseudepigraphal books, the story is essentially that Azazel was the name of one of the fallen angels who sinned in Genesis chapter 6. [4] As a curse on his sin, Azazel was forced to take the form of a goat-like demon. This myth is not recorded in the Bible. Regardless of the identity of Azazel, the Bible emphasizes the sufficiency and completeness of Christ’s sacrifice both to remove our sin and to reconcile us to God.” (OUR sins, note! But this Ceremony calls attention to the fact that there’s another sin-motivating source needing to be addressed.) Wikipedia has this: “In the Bible, the name Azazel (/əˈzeɪzəl, ˈæzəˌzɛl/; Hebrew: עֲזָאזֵל ʿAzāʾzēl) appears in association with the scapegoat rite; the name represents a desolate place where a scapegoat bearing the sins of the Jews during Yom Kippur was sent. During the end of the Second Temple period, his association as a fallen angel responsible for introducing humans to forbidden knowledge… In the Book of Enoch, His role as a fallen angel partly remains in Christian and Islamic traditions.” Wikipedia seems to present a more comprehensive explanation as to the identity issue. Traditional shallow-understanding Christian religions, oriented to the “Jesus did it all for you” thinking, obscures the true situation: That Azazel represents a motivational source for sin. Further, that view introduces us to the consideration that there is a body of sins that are not forgivable nor are to be forgiven! They must be ‘removed’ by other means. Enochic Literature [5] “In the Dead Sea Scrolls, the name Azazel occurs in the line 6 of 4Q203, The Book of Giants, which is a part of the Enochic literature found at Qumran. “The Book of Enoch brings Azazel into connection with the Biblical story of the fall of the angels, located on Mount Hermon, a gathering-place of demons of old. Here, Azazel is one of the leaders of the rebellious Watchers in the time preceding the Flood; he taught men the art of warfare, of making swords, knives, shields, and coats of mail, and taught women the art of deception by ornamenting the body, dyeing the hair, and painting the face and the eyebrows, and also revealed to the people the secrets of witchcraft and corrupted their manners, leading them into wickedness and impurity until at last he was, at Yahweh’s command, bound hand and foot by the archangel Raphael and chained … where he is to abide in utter darkness until the great Day of Judgment, when he will be cast into the fire to be consumed forever.” “The whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin.” — Book of Enoch 10:8 “According to the Book of Enoch, Azazel (here spelled ‘ăzā’zyēl) was one of the chief Grigori, a group of fallen angels… “The souls of men [made] their suit, saying, “Bring our cause before the Most High; […] Thou seest what Azazel hath done, who hath taught all unrighteousness on earth and revealed the eternal secrets which were in heaven, which men were striving to learn.” God sees the sin brought about by Azazel and has Raphael “bind Azazel hand and foot and cast him into the darkness: and make an opening in the desert – which is in Dudael [6] – and cast him therein. And … cover him with darkness, and let him abide there forever, and cover his face that he may not see light.” Azazel’s fate is foretold near the end of Enoch 2:8, where God says, “On the day of the great judgement he shall be cast into the fire.” He (Satan) will be delivered to the angels of punishments. “Several scholars have previously discerned that some details of Azazel’s punishment are reminiscent of the scapegoat rite. Thus, Lester Grabbe points to a number of parallels between the Azazel narrative in Enoch and the wording of Leviticus 16, including “the similarity of the names Asael and Azazel; the punishment in the desert; the placing of sin on Asael / Azazel; the resultant healing of the land.” Daniel Stökl also observes that “the punishment of the demon resembles the treatment of the goat in aspects of geography, action, time and purpose.” Thus, the place of Asael’s punishment designated in Enoch as Dudael is reminiscent of the rabbinic terminology used for the designation of the ravine of the scape-goat in later rabbinic interpretations of the Yom Kippur ritual. Stökl remarks that “the name of place of judgment (Dudael) is conspicuously similar in both traditions and can likely be traced to a common origin.” Whose Sins are to be Borne? Among those who ascribe to the “Jesus paid it all” mentality is the view that the ‘other goat’ bears our sins also. Taking this position can distract us from a more comprehensive awareness of the real lesson of this Atonement Ceremony. Such an idea suggests that sin can achieve remission without the shedding of blood, as this ‘other goat’ is specifically exempted from that fate. But, if that’s actually so, we must ask, forgiven by what remedial means? “The historic view poses that Azazel is to be chained to the rough and jagged rocks of [Ha] Dudael (= Beth Hadudo), where he is to abide in utter darkness until the great Day of Judgment, when he will be cast into the fire to be consumed forever.” (see footnote 6) Is it plausible that Satan can be held fully responsible for his own sins and the sins he inspired in men? Somehow, this doesn’t factor into some people’s thinking. Are those sins placed upon his head right-fully his own? Unforgiven Sins? What we need to consider is IF there are sins which are not covered by the blood of Christ. This consideration seems to escape people’s notice when assigning the Azazel goat’s identity to Christ. Are we to allege that Jesus is to spend eternity in Dudael (or Tartaros)? That would be a necessary conclusion if we are to carry the identification to its fullest application. As we consider what was anciently understood, we are drawn further and further from identifying Jesus Christ as being who that other goat represents. By the Hand of a Fit Man And have we considered who the ‘fit man’ represents? It must be an individual with greater position that Azazel himself. If we want to assign any role in this second goat action to Jesus Christ, wouldn’t it be more logical that He would occupy the ‘fit man’ function, rather than having our unforgiven sins placed upon Himself? Being that Azazel is regarded as representing the one who introduced sin into humanity as found in the early days of the Mosaic writings, why would we disregard their understanding? Azazel is driven out of inhabited areas, no longer in contact with mankind. When we assign the identity of that other goat to Christ, indirectly it alleges that some of our sins are not remitted by the application of His blood. That too should be problematical. It would be far more logical to acknowledge that we were subjected to additional motivating forces not of our own. That there is an influence that originated from another source! And, in what circumstance is Jesus consigned to ‘outer darkness’ as is this Azazel? His future ‘judgment’s’ negative sentence further reaffirms that there are sins not forgiven that must be borne by the perpetrator/recipient himself in the Day of Judgment. If those sins borne by the other goat were in some way forgiven, then such ‘Judgment’ would be inappropriate! That is the lesson of this illustration. A High Level Insult? We know that the birth date of Jesus was mis-assigned to the actual birth celebration of another supposed deity; that His name has been employed in connection with things that He has no interest in; that His Message has been ignored and replaced with another. Is it inconceivable that He would wrongly be identified in the Atonement Ceremony? And, if wrongly identified, have we considered the level of offense when making such a misassignment? That Azazel (Satan) is in reality Christ! Think about the offense factor: when it’s alleged that Jesus blood pays the penalty for Satan’s sins. Being reserved to a Day of Judgment as he is makes it obvious that they are not forgiven! ———————————————————————– Reprinted with permission from: Golden Sheaves https://www.goldensheaves.org/ ———————————————————————– [1] Hebrews 9:22 [2] Romans 7:22-23 “For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.” [3] 1st John 1:7-9 “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” [4] Why would we exempt the chief of demons? [5] https://www.gotquestions.org › Azazel-scapegoat.html [6] Dudael is also implied to be the prison of all the fallen angels, especially the evil Watchers, the entrance of which is located to the east of Jerusalem. The way this place is described, Dudael is sometimes considered as a region of the underworld, comparable to Tartarus or Gehenna. Compare 2nd Peter 2:4 “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, (#5020 Tartaros) and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;..” |
Views: 20
Sign up to Receive [The "New" Church of God Messenger] weekly newsletter: