Hi

This past Sabbath, me and some friends (also keepers of the faith) had prepared very well by watching Walter Veith's DVD on the Sanctuary subject.

However, after I started introducing the subject in quite some detail, I was interrupted when I mentioned the "investigative judgement", as I am not the SS teacher (new in this church), the actual teacher veered waaaay out of the subject and we were all quite frustrated becuase we were never able to get back on track.

Fortunatelly the lady who interrupted me, decided to sms me yesterday continuing the subject and asking further questions.

Straight away I decided to give her my e-mail address as this is a long story and not one that can be feasibly discussed via sms.

With the above in mind I am attaching the e-mail I sent her and asking viwers as well as the moderator/s to get involved and correct where I might have gone wrong by editing the pieces of the e-mail I am going to attach: I will try to differentiate by highlighting my answers in red.

Hi Fausto

I understand there is a lot of analogy (or type and anti-type) between the earthly sanctuary and the heavenly one. The candles, bread, altar, sacrifices etc all pointed to Christ in various ways. We do not need to explore this bit.

However, a pattern or shadow can only be a small reflection of the greater glory, and will not be an exact representation. Therefore what we find happening in the heavenly sanctuary can never be taken to be a replica of heaven.
A shadow will only show outlines, and even a 3D pattern will not be able to capture the full depth of meaning of something that also has a spiritual meaning (since God is spirit)

I have an particular issue with the statement: "In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered
the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus." (Part of Fundamental Belief #24).

The revelation of the New Testament gives us the explanations and descriptions of Jesus fulfilling the "things" of the Mosaic Covenant. No where in the NT that I am aware of does it even imply Jesus is involved in a two phase ministry, in fact the bible states many times that "now" he was seated at the right hand of God (and remember that the now used in the bible was long before 1844). Can dig them out if you need them.

Remember, there was no longer a 'Holy' and 'Most Holy' once Jesus died on the cross - cause the veil ripped in two, making it only one compartment ...

Fair enough, but that applied only to the earthly sacrificial system, the heavenly version of the sanctuary still has to fulfil its purpose which is to apply to the rest of humanity from that time on. The date 1844 however arrives from the fact that if you deduct 2300 days (prophecy of Daniel 8:13 and 14) from 1844 which gives you 456 B.C (date of the decree of Artaxerxes to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem)

Daniel 8:13 - Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot? 14: And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

The above verse caused the "great disappointment" in 1844 where people such as William Miller (a Southern Baptist) preached that Christ was to arrive then based on this scripture, when He did not arrive, a great disappointment arose, which led to many going in different directions (and beliefs). It was at this time that Ellen G. White and others went to study this matter further and arrived at the conclusion that it had to mean that Christ was still to perform the so called Investigative Judgement.

This simply means that from that date on (1844) Christ would enter the Most holy place to review the books (book of life and the book of rememberance), as this symbolises the "cleansing" which was done once yearly by using blood from the Lord's Goat. "Azazel" or scape goat (symbolising Satan) is not killed but all the sins for the year are placed upon his head and then it is realeased into the wilderness.

Lev 16: 8: And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat.
9: And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the LORD'S lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering.

10: But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness.

This is symbolic of what will happen to Satan during the millenium in the abyss (wilderness - earth laid desolate) so that he can "ponder" on his previous destructive work. He's bound by circunstances (symbolised by a chain).
At the end of this period, the work of Christ will be complete and the "probation" period will end. - as it points out in Rev 22: 10 - 12 after this

10: And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.

11: He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

12: And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

Also Rev 15:5 states: And after that I looked, and, behold, the temple of the tabernacle of the testimony in heaven was opened: 6: And the seven angels came out of the temple, having the seven plagues, clothed in pure and white linen, and having their breasts girded with golden girdles.

Rev 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. /19 : And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail.

(the temple referred to above is the celestial one)

The other part that disturbs me is the statement that Satan bears our sins. Again the bible does not tells us this anywhere.

See : This simply means that from that date on (1844) Christ would enter the Most holy place to review the books (book of life and the book of rememberance), as this symbolises the "cleansing" which was done once yearly by using blood from the Lord's Goat. "Azazel" or scape goat (symbolising Satan) is not killed but all the sins for the year are placed upon his head and then it is realeased into the wilderness.

Lev 16: 8: And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat.
9: And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the LORD'S lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering.

10: But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat, shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a scapegoat into the wilderness.

Satan bears the sins of the unforgiven at the time of his "imprisonment" when he is cast into the abyss, as the sins of the forgiven have been "absorbed" by Christ, you are correct on having that doubt.

However it does make more sense to view this second goat as an earthly attempt to point towards the living mediator we have in the resurrected Christ. Unfortunately in our everyday world, his death and resurrection could not be represented by a single goat.

His death and resurrection is symbolised by a lamb, not a goat! The goat is only used once a year, when the sins of the nation are to be forgiven (this is symbolism), there are two goats one for the Lord (it is killed so that the priest can enter the Most Holy Place and cleanse it with this blood) and one which is not killed where the sins of the people are place upon his head and he is then released into the wilderness.

If you are able to point out, from the bible, where I am wrong then please do so, however people often use the words of Ellen White to support these ideas, but I hold what the bible teaches above the words of any other person. Mrs White herself said her words must be tested against the bible, and if she if wrong then reject her words.

Cool, I have tried and the verses are above, only this last sentence I just expain.

Hey guys

Is it too long? Did I answer properly? Nobody prepared to help out?

Hi, Fausto

That you are a newbie may be a reason another, or more, of the list [may] hesitate to engage your thoughts as forwarded in the above. I mean,

even I, ever adversarial, am reluctant to discuss your post - as you may be a new Xtian. Under these circumstances, I wait until you've posted sufficiently that I might first take your measure.

You'll probably find that, given a few days, if that, you'll have those who'll wish to respond.

Aside: is Fausto your name? or is there a play on Goethe's Faust? or is your intent to play upon the Latin 'lucky'?

(note: you'll also find that there is more traffic on the Townhall board)

Jasd

I thank you for the answer although I really am seeking support to respond in a helpful manner to someone whom is seeking, me being an adventist of about 10 or so years, I still need the confirmation at times that i am correct as I do not want to adversly steer someone, ifyou know what i mean.

As you can probably see, I use a bit of common sense as I sometimes struggle to express my doctrinal beliefs in scripture, I mean "straight off the bat" that is! So I relly on either books or lectures to get scriptural evidence top substantiate my claims.

All in all I am trying to help someone who is attending Sabbath School regularly but is not an adventist and obviously struggles with some concepts, specially critical doctrine like teh sabctuary and investigative judgement and whilt I did not at all quote Mrs. White, this lady refers to her herself as stating one cannot or should not just use her statements as she herself has said her words should be "measured" against the bible (good on her that means she has read the great controversy...but how did she miss the issues at hand?).

What exactly do you mean by new Xtian? In short if it is adventist history I was the Portuguese translator of the Pentecost 2000 adventist satelite african transmission and become a fully fledged adventist then, having been attending the church about 2 years prior to that event.

Yes, Fausto is my real name. There is indeed a play by Goethe, but I would rather not be that Faust as I never did nor ever will sell my soul to the devil in exchange for power and knowledge. Neither do I intend to play upon the latin Lucky or luxurious in any way as that is what it means.

I assume the above writer means that what we find happening in the earthly sanctuary can never be taken to be an exact replica of the heavenly sanctuary. Is that fair to say? Of course it is true that the early copy of the heavenly does not show us everything, but it does show us what God wants us to know.



This is quite true. I think everyone is agreed on this point.



It might well be argued that if the heavenly sanctuary does not consist of two compartments, then Moses failed follow the directions of God to "make all things according to the pattern shown" him.

What is the Bible evidence for a two-apartment sanctuary in heaven?

I find the Bible evidence for it compelling. Consider:

1) The book of Revelation portrays Christ, dressed as High Priest, as being in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks (Rev. 1:13). The candlesticks were a part of the first apartment, not the second.

Interestingly, the first glimpse into the second apartment does not occur until Rev. 11: 18, 19. And the context is "the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou [God} shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldst destroy them which destroy the earth." That is obviously the time just before the Second Coming of Christ.

Notice that this is when John first catches a glimpse of the second apartment where the ark of the covenant sits. (See Hebrews 9: 3,4.) In Rev. 11: 19, John's and our attention is drawn to it for the first time. Until then John's attention had been focussed on the first apartment where Christ ministered up until the judgement referred to in Rev. 11: 18, 19. This judgment was still future at the time of Paul (Acts 24: 25).

2) Another piece of evidence that the heavenly sanctuary has two apartments, or sections, which are symbolic of the different phases of God's work, is shown in the fact that God's throne in both Daniel and Revelation is represented as having wheels. There is only one reason for anything to have wheels, and that is, of course, if the thing MOVES from one location to another.

3) With that in mind, look carefully at Daniel 7: 9-14, 21-27. Judgment occurs only after the throne of God moves, and the Son of God "came to the Ancient of Days." If we put Rev. 11: 19 and Daniel 7 together, it becomes apparent, therefore, that in both chapters the judgment is taking place, and the judgment occurs only after God's throne is moved from the first apartment, where the golden candle-stick is, to the second apartment, in which is the ark of God's covenant.

Why is this important? Because Christ mediates his blood before the Father for sinners from the time of his ascension until the end of human probation, which occurs shortly before the Second Coming. (It should be pointed out that Christ could not be our High Priest and mediate his blood before the Father until He had first lived a perfect life and shed His blood on calvary.) This mediation, which has been taking place since Christ's ascension, is represented by the work of the earthly High Priest in the first apartment throughout the year, as he takes the blood of the sacrificial animals into the Holy Place, and as the incense goes up from the altar of incense.

The Day of Atonement represented the events connected with the judgment scene as we have them in Daniel 7 and 8; Rev. 11: 18, 19 and 14: 7. It describes the process by which all those who have made a sincere and honest profession of trust in Christ are found to be ready for either the Second Coming or the resurrection. This is referred to by Seventh-day Adventists as the Investigative, or Pre-Advent, Judgment. It is necessary in order to resolve the problem of sin prior to Christ's return. When it is finished, everyone will have decided either for God or against Him. It brings to an end all of those issues regarding sin and righteousness that must be finished before Christ can return in glory for His Bride.

Jesus declared, "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." Rev. 22: 12.

Jesus' bride has at last made herself ready and is so settled into the Truth that she can't be moved. Rev. 19:7.

Study well GC 482-486.

Notice that the "scapegoat" is not slain. It is not a sacrifice; does not shed its blood. It does not bear the sins of the righteousness. Only Christ bears our sins and is our Savior. The ceremony in which the goat was led off into the desert only points to fact that it will be shown at last that Satan-- not God-- is responsible for sin.

John

I thank you from the bottom of my heart for the answer given, even though I am pretty solid in terms of my beliefs in this matter, I fail to discribe biblical refrences to my satisfaction...man, sometimes I think I should do bible school just to get things right!

But yeah, let me say your answer is superb, I just hope she will see it and understand it!

Thank you, Fausto!

Of course, as you must know, it often takes a long time for people to see these truths. God bless in your efforts to share these things with others. Like Tyndale prayed, "Lord, open the king's eyes."

John

Its true, we have so much work to do! And as Ps. Robert Cox puts it, the more you fill up with God's truth the more it overflows, teh more you want to shout it from the roof tops!

John or anyone else forthat matter...I'm not getting through, unfortunatelly the saga continues:

John 317 wrote ....
It might well be argued that if the heavenly sanctuary does not consist of two compartments, then Moses failed follow the directions of God to "make all things according to the pattern shown" him.

Fausto, this is a 'straw man' - there is absloutely no argument that Moses did make the earthly sanctuary with two apartments as God commanded.

Why did the sanctuary Moses build have two apartments - it was because people at that time had not been shown Gods way into the Most Holy Place (Heb 7& 8), but this changed with the cruicifixion.

The question should be - how many apartments are there after Christ died on the cross?

My belief is ONE - and is this why ...
We are told the veil was torn in two at the time of his death (so now there is no longer the division into two apartments)

In Revelations, I do not know of any reference where John talked about the VEIL? If there is no veil, then there is only one apartment and all the items of both the first and second apartments will be visible, so seeing Christ by the candlestick etc does not 'prove' there is still two apartments.

John317 also referred to the wheels on Gods throne - I could not find any reference to this in Revelation, but definitely in Daniel 7:9. Ezekiel 1 & 10 talks about wheels under the creatures/cherubim, but that isn't related (okay I'm getting carried away in my searching now)

anyway, yes we have a flaming throne with wheels in Daniel. But where does it say Gods throne was ever in the first apartment -?if this is correct please give me scipture to demonstrate Gods throne was in the first apartment before the dividng veil was torn. If the bible does not say this, then why should I believe it was ever was in the first apartment, as God's presence is in the Most Holy Place - appearing in the cloud over the atonement cover (Lev 16:2)

As it stands written, the above means that there is no argument or evidence that Moses made the two apartments as God commanded. However, I have difficulty believing that this is the meaning intended, because the Bible is so clear that such a position is in error. Yet the reference to it as a "straw man" seems to point to the writer's acceptance of the truth that God did tell Moses to make the sanctuary with two divisions.

Just in case there is any disagreement over this point, Exodus 26: 33 says directly and plainly that it was God Himself who directed Moses to show by a vail the separation between the two apartments. "And thou shalt hang up the vail under the clasps, that thou mayest bring in thither within the vail the ark of the testimony: and the vail shall divide unto you between the holy place and the most holy."

Notice that the vail did not make the division. The vail simply made the division obvious.

I would also submit the clear teaching of Exodus 36: 43, which states: "And Moses did look upon all the work (of the construction and arrangement of the earthly sanctuary], and, behold, they had done it as the Lord had commanded, even so had they done it."

Exodus 40: 1-5 and 21 also show very clearly that it was the Lord who told Moses to put the vail between the two apartments.

Therefore, if we accept the Bible testimony, there can be no valid denial that Moses made the earthly sanctuary with two apartments just as God commanded.

I'll deal with the rest of the points in separate posts as I have opportunity.

Thanks John

This is becoming a tough nut to crack, so far I have already been called blasphemer as I am saying that the scape goat (and I showed her from Wikipedia what Azazel mean't) symbolizes the devil, including two whole pages of the GC.

She would like me to show her with scripture where does it say the scape goat symbolizes Satan, now I can't find any directly saying that, so it is due to translation that one can say it is, can you suppoort this?

I intend to continue participating here but I sure wish we could see a lot of members talking about what the Bible teaches on Christ's heavenly ministry.

I love this teaching! I see Jesus from beginning to end of it. Even if I were no longer to be an Adventist, this illustration from the OT would bring out love from me for my Saviour.

Yeah, more people would have been nice, although sometimes I think this lady has her mind set and when I absolutelly prove one point she simply "jumps" to the next, however I'd like to help her find the reality of all these beliefs because they are truth.

and as it is written, "Truth stes us free"

I agree.

Studying Jesus' work in the heavenly sanctuary helps open our eyes about what He is actively doing right now. It also helps us understand why He hasn't come yet. He sends the power of the Holy Spirit to us from there. It's the very center of His work of salvation.

I would keep studying with her about it as long as she shows interest in discussing it.

I think a lot of people possibly don't talk about this subject because they feel unsure of themselves and also because they are afraid of being asked questions they may not be able to answer. I believe that God allows us to be faced with questions, etc., in order to encourage us to study and find out what we believe and why.

I would not directly engage your post were you a brand new Xtian. The fact that you were new to Xtian thought would impose a responsibility upon me and upon how I respond. It is not a thing I might bear... well, responsibly. I’m hardly

the nourishing type.

It may be that your friend, also, may have a contribution or two that may be worth dwelling upon; for instance, does Writ state that one of the Atonement goats was called Azazel? and, if one of the goats was meant to symbolize Satan – why were both to be without spot or blemish? Would ‘without spot or blemish’ be descriptive of Satan? Perhaps, it is that

both goats were meant to represent two different functions of the Atonement, two aspects of the ministry of Jesus Christ.

The above stated, my participation would probably be superfluous at this point as – you and John317 are doing quite nicely.

Am I correct in assuming that "Xtian" means Christian?

(Just as "Xmas" means Christmas?)

I guess I was sleeping, of course that makes perfect sense now!



You like to use acronims don't you? By writ you mean bible, right?

Then yes, it actually does, although you will find it translated, but essentially that is what scape goat means.

So...to me, once you get the meaning of azazel, it should be pretty obvious! But I guess that is just me! Why would the Lord be sent into the wilderness, and if you use parallelism you see it happening again to Satan, after the second coming, he is thrown into the abyss, a desolate earth...pretty much wilderness to me!

Its like a "no-brainer", right?

>>"Xtian" means Christian?<<

Yes, with a slight liberty taken...

Well, now you know my real name is Fausto and I'm a Xtian (for about 10 years at least as before that I thjought I was but I was actually far from it).

Next we could start some interesting exchange don't you agree?

Specially if you can help me with this slight dillema!

The Bible tells us that God commanded Moses to make a "holy place" and a "most holy place," after which Moses was also instructed by God to clearly divide these two apartments by a vail (Exodus 26:33). The first and largest apartment was made for the candlestick, the bread, and the altar of incense. The Most Holy Place was made to be the place where the Ark of the Covenant, containing the law of God, was to be kept.

Hebrews 9: 8, 9 says that the heavenly sanctuary could not go into service until the earthly sanctuary had fulfilled its purpose. This was shown by the fact that there was an endless round of yearly ceremonies which obviously had no power to make anyone "perfect as pertaining to conscience."

We know from Hebrews 8: 5 that the sanctuary service foreshadowed, or pointed forward, to the work of the Messiah, and its two apartments also illustrated the two-phased ministry of the Messiah in the heavenly sanctuary. In the heavenly sanctuary, there is a work of mediation for sinners, and, finally, a work of judgment, typified by the day of Atonement.




In Heb. 8: 2, speaking of the heavenly sanctuary, the author tells us that Jesus ministers in "the sanctuary, the true tabernacle set up by the Lord." It is important to note that the Greek word for "sanctuary" here is in the plural form, that is, "holies," meaning "holy places." It consists of two separate divisions, or rooms. Significantly, a few verses later, in verse 5, we are told that the earthly sanctuary is a "copy and shadow of what is in heaven."

Hebrews 9: 23, 24 also call the heavenly sanctuary "the heavenly things" and "holy places," respectively. These references clearly imply the existence of more than a single apartment in the heavenly sanctuary.

106 times the Greek translation of the Old Testament uses the same Greek word, ta hagia, which is plural, to refer to the entire sanctuary.

This is in complete harmony with Hebrews 8: 5 and Exodus 25: 40, that the heavenly sanctuary was the pattern for the one which Moses built.



The tearing of the veil did not do away with the distinction between the Holy Place and the Most Holy. What the tearing of the vail showed was that the Most Holy Place was no longer sacred and that animal sacrifices were no longer needed because the real Lamb of God had been slain. Thus all barriers between man and God were broken, and from then on, mankind could draw near boldly before God, because of the work of Christ. People thereafter no longer need a human priest or mediator to approach God.

The division of the two apartments does not depend on the existence of the veil alone. The fact of the two apartments is owing to the two phases in the ministry of the priest. There was the daily work of the priest, and there was the yearly ceremony (cf. Lev. 4 and Lev. 16). That is the essence of the division. It corresponds to two different phases in the heavenly ministry of Christ: (1) the first consists in Christ's mediation of His blood, which mediation has continued since His ascension; (2) the second consists in cleansing of the sanctuary, specifically, the judgment prior to Christ's return (Daniel 7: 26; Rev. 14:7).

In summary, then, the emphasis on the earthly sanctuary as a copy of the heavenly, together with the discussion of the two apartments of the earthly (9: 1-7), suggests that the author of Hebrews understood that the heavenly sanctuary is a structure consisting of two sections.



It is true that John the Revelator does not mention the veil by name, yet it could be argued that Rev. 11: 19 does imply its existence. However, verse 19 could also be understood to mean that in the context of the judgment prior to Christ's return, the attention of the universe is drawn to the ark of the covenant, which is the only thing in the Most Holy Place.

In any case, we cannot logically conclude that simply because it isn't mentioned by name in the book of Revelation, the veil therefore cannot exist.

Ellen White mentions a veil in the heavenly sanctuary, and while the NT does not say in so many words that the heavenly sanctuary has a veil, Ellen White is not contradicting the Bible by saying it was represented to her as existing in the sanctuary in heaven. (See Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, pp. 159-161; GC 414, 415.)

>>...we could start some interesting exchange don't you agree?<<

Well, perhaps with a few aspects.



>>Then yes, it actually does, although you will find it translated, but essentially that is what scape goat means.<<

For consideration only:

I’ve always had a problem with treating the ‘scapegoat as a Proper Noun – as there is no capitalization in the Hebrew script. Azazel-as-Proper – seems to be a thing inferred by expositors taking license. For it to have been inferred would have required an interpretive bias – to begin. I mean,

two goats were selected on the Day of Atonement – one to serve, by lot (read: chance) – as representing the Lord’s redemptive sacrifice. Selection by lot would mean that both goats would have had to have been without spot or blemish. That would have had the ‘scapegoat – representing other than either Satan or the angel Azazel. Without spot or blemish is not representative of either Satan or Azazel.

It seems that a more suitable exposition of the passage is required than that the – ‘scapegoat symbolized other than – a particular portrayal of the Mashiach/Redeemer.

1 Pet 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree,

>>So...to me, once you get the meaning of azazel,<<

The root of azazel seems to indicate a function of removal, as it were. The passage might be read, “one for the Lord and one for removal.”

>>Why would the Lord be sent into the wilderness,<<

Ahh, the supposed ‘wilderness of Azazel (Enoch’s contribution)’.

Speaking of ‘wilderness’, let’s consider:

1 Pet 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

This references the sojourn of Jesus Christ – in

the ‘wilderness/desolation of the grave’.

However, quoting..., “But I guess that is just me!”

>>...and if you use parallelism you see it happening again to Satan, after the second coming, he is thrown into the abyss, a desolate earth...pretty much wilderness to me!<<

Parallelism might work – except, one has to first embroider the scenario with the fact that your and my sins are laid upon Satan - rather than upon Jesus Christ. I’ve not found in Writ that our sins are borne by other than Jesus Christ, have you? That still leaves the question of

– the Biblical location of the saints immediately “after the second coming” – obtaining.

>>Its like a "no-brainer", right?<,

It’s, at least, individual, yes?

Consider several important points:

1) Azazel was not slain as a sacrifice. Why is this important? Because it is SOLELY by the shedding of blood that we have remission, or forgiveness. Heb. 9: 22. Therefore the "scapegoat" is not, nor ever was, a means of bringing anyone forgiveness. That only comes through the shed blood of Jesus Christ.

2) The sanctuary was not cleansed at all by the death of Azazel. The sanctuary was cleansed on the Day of Atonement by the blood of the Lord's goat (representing Christ), and that occurred BEFORE Azazel was brought into the ceremony. (See Lev. 16: 20).

I believe that Satan is simply shown at the end to be the one responsible for sin, and he is finally punished as the instigator of sin. He is merely a created being, and therefore, even if he had never sinned, Satan could not possibly save anyone. ONLY Christ could be a substitutionary atonement for human beings, and ONLY He bears our sins-- completely, perfectly, and once for all-- in order that we might be saved.

Simply because both goats must be perfect should not be interpreted to mean that both goats represent perfect beings. As you point out, either goat could be selected by lot to be the Lord's goat or Azazel. The difference did not lie in the condition of the goats. Everything related to the sanctuary service was supposed to be perfect on account of God's holiness.

It makes sense that since the Lord's goat represented a person, the other goat would also represent a person rather than an abstract idea, etc. The way it is expressed, in marked antithesis between "for Azazel" and "for YHWH" does not leave any doubt that both have reference to a personal being.

It is of interest to note that both early Jewish and Christian scholars understood Azezel to refer to a personal, evil being, or demon.

Also, J. B. Rotherham, translator of the Emphasized Bible, says, "It seems impossible to dissent from the opinion that Azezel... is the name or title of an evil Being, opposed to Yahweh."

Consider several important points:

>>1) Azazel was not slain as a sacrifice.<<

Absolutely not. The azazel was the means by which our sins were delivered to that Far Country.

>>Why is this important? Because it is SOLELY by the shedding of blood that we have remission, or forgiveness. Heb. 9: 22.<<

Agreed, in part. I would qualify SOLELY. Consider:

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

>>Therefore the "scapegoat" is not, nor ever was, a means of bringing anyone forgiveness. That only comes through the shed blood of Jesus Christ.<<

Agreed, again, in part. Re Lev 16:10.

The Atonement ritual was, by nature, duo-fold.

>>2) The sanctuary was not cleansed at all by the death of Azazel. The sanctuary was cleansed on the Day of Atonement by the blood of the Lord's goat (representing Christ), and that occurred BEFORE Azazel was brought into the ceremony. (See Lev. 16: 20).<<

Agreed. However, note that the demise of the Lord’s goat occurred BEFORE... Why?

What then may have been the function of the azazel goat?

1 Pet 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

>>I believe that Satan is simply shown at the end to be the one responsible for sin, and he is finally punished as the instigator of sin.<<

And you are proposing that a goat [typifying him] delivering the sins of the congregation into the wilderness accomplishes that?

>>ONLY Christ could be a substitutionary atonement for human beings, and ONLY He bears our sins-- completely, perfectly, and once for all-- in order that we might be saved.<<

Ahh, another kettle altogether...

>>It makes sense that since the Lord's goat represented a person,<<

The Person, Jesus Christ.

>>...the other goat would also represent a person rather than an abstract idea, etc.<<

Again, the Person, Jesus Christ together with the “abstract idea”...

The two goats would have served a duo-fold function: one sacrificial, one bearing the sins of the congregation. The duo-fold symbology could hardly have obtained were there only the one goat – and it already sacrificed. I mean,

how then, without the ‘scapegoat, could the aspect of Jesus Christ bearing the sins of the congregation to that Far Country – have been represented?

>>The way it is expressed, in marked antithesis between "for Azazel" and "for YHWH" does not leave any doubt that both have reference to a personal being.<<

That is why I proffered for consideration...



>>It is of interest to note that both early Jewish and Christian scholars understood Azezel to refer to a personal, evil being, or demon.<<

Jewish ‘scholars’ believe Lilith was Adam’s first wife.


Strong’s #1593 –azazel
1) entire removal, scapegoat
a) refers to the goat used for sacrifice for the sins of the people
b) meaning dubious


>>Also, J. B. Rotherham, translator of the Emphasized Bible, says, "It seems impossible to dissent from the opinion that Azezel... is the name or title of an evil Being, opposed to Yahweh."<<

Per Azezel: The Book of Enoch concurs. Otherwise,

the three times azazel is mentioned in Writ contributes more to numinosity than to Rotherham, et al.

Great to see your posts on this thread, JASD. Just wondering if you want to edit out all the repetition in your post #174926. It's up to you of course. I tried to send a PM about it but couldn't.

Thanks. Dinner call. :-o

The main point I would make is that it is through the shedding of Christ's blood that we have remission, not through anything that happened to either of the goats. The goats are symbolic of the plan of salvation, but by themselves, apart from the shed blood of Jesus Christ, they are incapable of resulting in forgiveness.

Lev. 16: 20 says that the scapegoat only entered into the picture after the "end of reconciling" by the Lord's goat. The latter's blood has been shed and used to cleanse the sanctuary of the uncleanness of the people (vv. 15-17).

>>The goats are symbolic of the plan of salvation, but by themselves, apart from the shed blood of Jesus Christ, they are incapable of resulting in forgiveness.<<

Ahh, yes, the mnemonic cursors. But what do those goats really represent then – if Forgiveness, Atonement, and Redemption occurred during the first month of Nisan, at the cross – and the Day of Atonement occurs in the seventh month Tishri? If I recall correctly,

the feasts of Trumpet, Atonement, and Tabernacles occur in the seventh month.

What’s with that!? How is it that the ‘Atonement’ has begun in the heavenlies – without there first being a fulfillment of the Feast of Trumpets? and what was its fulfillment? And,

didn’t Jesus Christ completely fulfill the [L]aw at the cross?

Heeehaaa, this thread is cooking!

I am so glad, I'll soon post something for her to read from here, but she indicated that the last stuff i sent her (all from here by the way) she is still busy "digesting".

There will be a lot more coming, as I have time. We've so far just scratched the surface. I plan to reply to JASD before I add anything more.

Scratch or not, so far she has quitened down, and I think she has been given enough material to study and absorb!

Now, I have a question, what happens to the veil divinding the two compartments in heaven? Is it there, or not? To me I think it is because the earthly one was a copy of the original heavenly one! Am I off track?

The "Lord's goat" represented Christ and His work, and Azazel represented Satan.

I realize that the more prevalent view today is that both goats represented different aspects of the work of Christ. We can go on to discuss in more detail on a later post the pros and cons of these various understandings.

The forgiveness of God for humanity was always granted provisionally on the basis of Christ's shed blood. God sent His Son-- and His Son volunteered-- to die, because of God's love and mercy, but if Christ had not died for us, there never would have been forgiveness. God could not forgive sin without upholding His law. Therefore, it is accurate to say that forgiveness occurred when Christ died.




Feast of Trumpets-- first day of the seventh month-- Tishri

Day of Atonement-- tenth day of the seventh month

Feast of Tabernacles, or Booths-- from the 15th to the 21st day of the seventh month, with a solemn assembly on the 22nd.



These all represented various aspects in the history of the Jews as well as pointed to the future work of God in behalf of the salvation of all mankind.



The feast of the trumpets put the people on notice to prepare for Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. In the type, it occurred on the first day of Tishri, 10 days before the Day of Atonement. About 10 years before 1844, the message went out to the world that the time of God judgment was about to happen. The call to prepare for judgment continues to be given even today. I believe we are living in the antitypical day of Atonement right now, a time for afflicting our souls in humility, repentance, and faith.



Yes, Christ's death on the cross certainly fulfilled all the sacrifices. Christ also perfectly obeyed God's moral law. There will never need to be any more shedding of blood. That was done once and for all, never to be repeated. The Father totally accepted Christ's sacrifice. Jesus Christ fulfilled the whole law in the sense that it all pointed forwarded to His life and work, including His work that is going on now in our behalf in the heavenly sanctuary.

Hebrews 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus [His life, which is our old life laid down in death], 20 by