Subject: Leviticus16:8,10,20-22 |
Bible Note: Hey Brad, Just looking into this a little, not spending very much time at all, but I was curious as it seems you were too as to how the question was originally asked. Here is some info. “Some Jewish interpreters regard it as the name of a place some 12 miles east of Jerusalem, in the wilderness. Others take it to be the name of an evil spirit, or even of Satan. But when we remember that the two goats together form a type of Christ, on whom the Lord “laid the iniquity of us all,” and examine into the root meaning of this word (viz., “separation”), the interpretation of those who regard the one goat as representing the atonement made, and the other, that “for Azazel,” as representing the effect of the great work of atonement (viz., the complete removal of sin), is certainly to be preferred. The one goat which was “for Jehovah” was offered as a sin-offering, by which atonement was made. But the sins must also be visibly banished, and therefore they were symbolically laid by confession on the other goat, which was then “sent away for Azazel” into the wilderness.” – Easton’s Bible Dictionary “Azazel is the pre-Mosaic name of an evil personal being placed in opposition to Yahweh. Each goat, having been presented to Yahweh before the lots were cast, stood in a sacrificial relation to Him. “… “By this exppressive outward sign the sins were sent back to the author of sin himself, “the entirely separate one,” who was banished from the realm of grace.” – Albert Barnes “scape goat, heb, Azazel, that is, the goat gone away The hebrew has been supposed by some to be the name of a place, either a mountain or cliff, to which the goat was led. but no place of that name has ever been pointed out, except a mountain near Sinai, which was too distant for the goat to be conducted there from Jerusalem. Other learned men think it was the name of the devil, who was worshipped by the heathen in the form of a goat. But Bp. Patrick justly objects to this opinion for it is difficult to conceive, that when the other goat was offered to God, this should be sent among demons. The more probable opinion seems to be, that it was name given to the goat itself, on account of his being let go; from aiz, and goat, and azal, to depart…” – The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge I personally prefer Jeff’s take on it in post 210966. Stand in His grace, WOS |