Larger font
Smaller font
Looking Unto Jesus - Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font


    AFTER the ministry in the most holy place was accomplished, one thing more remained for the priest to do before the work was entirely finished. Having, by presenting before the law in the ark the blood of the appropriate offering, released from the sanctuary the sins for which that blood made atonement, those sins were canceled as related to the forgiven sinner, but were not even by this act destroyed. The high priest having performed the ministry which took them from the sanctuary, they were left for him to dispose of in a manner plainly pointed out. He came out of the sanctuary, and laying both his hands on the head of the scapegoat, held in waiting at the door, confessed over him “all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat.” Leviticus 16:21. This is a plain statement that the sins taken from the sanctuary were transferred to the goat. The goat, with these sins upon him, was then by the hand of a suitable person sent away into the wilderness, into a land not inhabited implying, probably, the destruction of the goat, in the death of which the sins of the people which he bore also perished.LUJ 257.1

    The ceremony of thus sending away the sins of the people in the type (Leviticus 16:20-22) has already been noticed. The question now arises, What service in the real ministry of Christ, in the more perfect tabernacle above, answers to this, and how is it to be performed?LUJ 257.2

    The principal question here to be decided is, What being shall we regard as the antitypical scapegoat? When the typical goat, anciently loaded with the sins of the people, went forth from the camp of Israel, to be heard of no more forever, what did it foreshadow to be fulfilled in this dispensation? Here again we are led to depart very materially from the views which have obtained on this subject.LUJ 258.1

    The idea very generally held is that the scapegoat typified Christ. Because John the Baptist said (John 1:29), “Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world,” and because it is said of the scapegoat that he “shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited,” it is, without further thought, concluded by some that the latter was a type of the former.LUJ 258.2

    From such a view we must dissent, for the following reasons:-LUJ 258.3

    1. If Christ, in bearing the sin of the world, fulfilled the antitype of the scapegoat, he must have filled this office at the time of the crucifixion: for Peter says of him, “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree” (1 Peter 2:24); and this is the only time when, and the only sense in which, he is said to have borne our sins. But in the type the scapegoat did not bear away the sins of the people till after the cleansing of the sanctuary; hence the antitype of this work cannot take place till after the cleansing of the antitypical sanctuary, which work, as has been proved, did not commence till the termination of the 2300 days in 1844. Daniel 8:14; Hebrews 9:23. It is therefore impossible to carry this work back to the crucifixion of Christ, which was even before he commenced his ministry in the heavenly sanctuary at all. Christ cannot therefore be the antitype of the scapegoat.LUJ 258.4

    2. The scapegoat, after being loaded with sin, was sent away by the priest. He could not therefore be the priest himself. But in this dispensation Christ is priest; he cannot therefore be the antitypical scapegoat to be sent away by the priest. Christ cannot send away himself. the conclusion is hence inevitable that the scapegoat must be some being whom Christ, after placing upon him the sins borne from the sanctuary, shall send away into a land not inhabited.LUJ 259.1

    3. The scapegoat was sent away from Israel into the uninhabited wilderness. If our Saviour is its antitype, he also must be sent away, not his body alone, as some suppose who refer it to his death, but his entire being (for the goat was sent away alive) from not to, nor into, his people; neither into heaven; for that is not a wilderness, or land not inhabited. But instead of thus being sent away, Christ is to dwell in the midst of his people, the true Israel of faith, forevermore.LUJ 259.2

    4. The scapegoat received and retained all the iniquities of the children of Israel; but when Christ appears the second time, he will be “without sin.”LUJ 259.3

    5. It is impossible that two goats, one of which was chosen by the Lord, and is called the Lord’s, while the other is not so called, but was left to perform an entirely different office, - it is impossible that these both should typify the same person. But the goat on which the Lord’s lot fell, the blood of which was ministered in the sanctuary, did certainly typify Christ. Just as surely the scapegoat did not typify him.LUJ 259.4

    It being thus proved by evidence which must be conclusive to every candid mind, that Christ cannot be the antitype of the Levitical scapegoat, the direct question, Who is the antitype of that goat? now presents itself for solution.LUJ 259.5

    1. The definition of the word is sufficient to suggest an application. In the common acceptation of the word, the term “scapegoat” is applied to any miserable vagabond who has become obnoxious to the claims of justice; and while it is revolting to all our conceptions of the character and glory of Christ, to apply this term to him, it must strike every one as a very appropriate designation for a certain character whom the Scriptures style, the accuser, adversary, angel of the bottomless pit, Beelzebub, Belial, dragon, enemy, evil spirit, father of lies, murderer, prince of devils, serpent, tempter, seducer, etc.LUJ 260.1

    2. We are not without direct evidence to the same purpose. The Hebrew word for scapegoat, as given in the margin of Leviticus 16:8, is Azazel. On this verse, Jenks, in his Comprehensive Commentary, remarks: “Scapegoat. See different opinions in Bochart. Spencer, after the oldest opinion of the Hebrews and Christians, thinks Azazel is the name of the devil; and so Rosenmuller, whom see. The Syriac has, Azzail, the ‘angel (strong one) who revolted.’” These authorities unmistakably point out Satan. Thus we have the definition of the Scripture term for scapegoat, in two ancient languages, with the oldest opinion of both Hebrews and Christians, in favor of the view that the scapegoat is a type of Satan.LUJ 260.2

    3. Charles Beecher says:-LUJ 260.3

    “What goes to confirm this is that the most ancient paraphrases and translations treat Azazel as a proper name. The Chaldee paraphrase, and the targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, would certainly have translated it if it was not a proper name, but they do not. The Septuagint, or oldest Greek version, renders it by apopompaios, a word applied by the Greeks to a malign deity sometimes appeased by sacrifices. Another confirmation is found in the book of Enoch, where the name Azalzel, evidently a corruption of Azazel, is given to one of the fallen angels, thus plainly showing what was the prevalent understanding of the Jews at that day.LUJ 260.4

    “Still another evidence is found in the Arabic, where Azazel is employed as the name of the Evil Spirit. In addition to these we have the evidence of the Jewish work Zohar, and of the Cabalistic and Rabbinical writers. They tell us that the following proverb was current among the Jews: ‘On the day of atonement, a gift to Samuel.’ Hence Moses Gerundinensis feels called to say that it is not a sacrifice, but only done because commanded by God.LUJ 261.1

    “Another step in the evidence is when we find this same opinion passing from the Jewish to the early Christian church. Origen was the most learned of the Fathers, and on such a point as this, Origen: ‘He who is called in the Septuagint, and in the Hebrew Azazel, is no other than the devil. ’LUJ 261.2

    “In view then of the difficulties attending any other meaning, and the accumulated evidence in favor of this, Hengstenberg affirms with great confidence that Azazel cannot be anything else but another name for Satan.” 1“Redeemer and Redeemed,” pp. 67, 68.LUJ 261.3

    On page 70, Mr. Beecher further says: “The meaning of the term [scapegoat] viewed as a proper name, was stated, in 1677, by Spencer, Dean of Ely, to be powerful Apostate, or mighty Receder.” Professor Bush is also quoted on page 72, as regarding Azazel as a proper name of Satan.LUJ 261.4

    It is but just to Mr. Beecher to remark that while he thinks that Azazel is the name for Satan, he does not regard the goat as representing Satan, but looks upon the ceremony as performed in some sense in reference to Satan. This he thinks implied in the words engraved on the lots which the high priest drew for the goats on the day of atonement; one, La-Yehovah, for Jehovah, the other La-Azazel, for Azazel, for the Devil; and he takes the transaction to signify that subjection of Christ to Satan which is implied in the sentence that the serpent should bruise the heel of the seed of the woman. But as this was done at the crucifixion, it can have no reference to the ceremony of the scapegoat, a ceremony not performed till the work in the sanctuary is finished. And inasmuch as the goat upon which the lot fell for the Lord, typified Christ himself, so the goat upon which the lot fell for Azazel, would typify Azazel,or Satan himself.LUJ 261.5

    Another reason for considering the scapegoat a type of Satan, is the very striking manner in which the ceremony of sending away the goat into the wilderness, harmonizes with the events to transpire in connection with the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, so far as revealed to us in the Scriptures of truth.LUJ 262.1

    Thus in the type we see the following acts performed:LUJ 262.2

    1. The sin of the transgressor is imparted to the victim. 2. That sin is borne by the priest in the blood of the offering into the sanctuary. 3. On the day of atonement, the priest, with the blood of the sin-offering for the people, removes all these sins from the sanctuary, and lays them upon the head of the scapegoat. 4. The goat is then sent away into a land not inhabited.LUJ 262.3

    Answering to these several events in the type, we have in the antitype the following: 1. The great offering for the world was made on Calvary. 2. The sins of all those who avail themselves of the offer of Christ’s blood by faith in him, are represented in that blood, with which he entered into the sanctuary on high (Hebrews 9:12), and are through that transferred to that sanctuary. 3. After Christ, the minister of the true tabernacle (Hebrews 8:2), has finished his ministration, and by the atonement has released the sins of this people from the sanctuary, he will lay them upon the head of their author, the antitypical scapegoat, the Devil. 4. The Devil will then be sent away, loaded with these sins, into a land not inhabited.LUJ 262.4

    And we apprehend that we find a description of this latter event in plain terms in Revelation 20:1-3: “And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit, and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years should be fulfilled.”LUJ 262.5

    This is just such a movement in reference to Satan as we might expect to occur on the supposition that he is the antitype of the ancient scapegoat. Looking upon him as such antitype, we watch for some transaction which will correspond to the sending away of the goat anciently loaded with sins, into the waste wilderness.LUJ 263.1

    And as we reach a point just subsequent to the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, when, in the order of the sanctuary work, the scapegoat should be sent away in antitype, lo, an angel comes down from heaven, lays hold upon Satan, binds him, and casts him into the bottomless pit for a thousand years. And as we look upon this scene, we can but involuntarily exclaim, Here is the sending away of the antitypical scapegoat.LUJ 263.2

    With this view, we can show the relation of the scene described in Revelation 20:1-3, to other events, and give a reason why it occurs. Without this, it comes in abruptly; and who can tell why just this disposition, instead of some other, is at this time made of the Devil?LUJ 263.3

    This scene occurs at just the right time to fulfil the antitype; for it is immediately after Christ has finished his work as priest. Secondly, the right agent is employed. The goat anciently was not led away by the high priest, but by the hand of another person. So here it is not Christ, our great High Priest, who casts Satan into the bottomless pit, but an angel; which admirably answers to the type. Thirdly, he is cast into the right place. Anciently, the goat was sent away into a waste wilderness, a land not inhabited. the Devil is cast into the bottomless pit, corresponding most fittingly to the former, as we shall see.LUJ 263.4

    This word (abussos), “bottomless pit,” signifies an “abyss, bottomless, deep, profound.” It seems to be used to denote any place of darkness, desolation, and death. Thus in Revelation 9:1, 2, it is applied to the barren wastes of the Arabian desert, and in Romans 10:7, to the grave. In Genesis 1:2 the same word is rendered “deep” in the declaration, “and darkness was upon the face of the deep;” and here it must apply to the whole earth in its state of primeval chaos. And we have reason to believe that it means precisely this in Revelation 20:3, when it is made the dreary prison-house of Satan. At this time, let it be borne in mind, the earth is a vast charnel-house of desolation and death. The voice of God has shaken it to its foundations (Revelation 16:17, 18); the islands and mountains have been moved out of their places (Revelation 6:14); the great earthquake has leveled to the earth the mightiest works of man (Hebrews 12:26, 27); the seven last plagues have left their withering and blasting footprints over all the fair face of nature (Revelation 16); the burning glory attending the coming of the Son of Man has borne its part in accomplishing the general desolation (2 Thessalonians 1:7, 8); the wicked have been given to the slaughter, and their putrefying flesh and bleaching bones lie unburied and unlamented from one end of the earth to the other. Jeremiah 25:32, 33. Thus is the earth made empty and waste, and turned upside down. Isaiah 24:1. Thus is it brought back again to its original state of chaos; for Jeremiah, describing the scenes of the last days, says, “I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and cold; and the heavens, and they had no light.” Jeremiah 4:23-25. And what better term could be used to describe it rolling on in its disorganized condition of darkness and desolation for a thousand years, than the term “abyss” or “bottomless pit” which was used to describe it in the beginning?LUJ 264.1

    Here is a desolate wilderness, or “land not inhabited,” well befitting the great antitypical scapegoat. And what more fitting retribution could at this point overtake the author of all our woe, than that he should, through all these slow-circling thousand years, be confined amid the ruin which his own hands have directly and indirectly wrought, unable to flee from his habitation of woe, or to repair in the least degree its hideous wretchedness.LUJ 265.1

    But it may be asked if Paul does not show by the expression that Christ “appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself,” that he did put it away upon the cross. The answer is that that must be understood only as making provision for the putting away of sin; for sins cannot be put away in advance, and millions of those who will be saved, were yet unborn when Christ suffered.LUJ 265.2

    But what seems to some a still stronger objection to the view here advocated, that Satan is the antitype of the scapegoat, is urged from the expression used in reference to that goat in Leviticus 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.” How, it is asked, can the scapegoat be a type of Satan when an atonement was made with him? does Satan make the atonement? does he have any partnership in that work? - Assuredly not; and a careful reading of the passage will show that no such idea is presented in the text. It does not read that the goat should be presented alive before the Lord that he might make an atonement for the sins of the people, or to assist in making the atonement.LUJ 265.3

    But the goat shall be “presented alive before the Lord,” by whom? - By the priest. “To make an atonement with him.” Who to make an atonement? - The priest. Then the atonement is all made by the priest. No one shares with him in this work. But in making the atonement, or in carrying out, or completing, the work of the atonement, the high priest has something to do with the scapegoat, and that is to heap upon him the foul load of the sins of the people, and send him away to the waste wilderness.LUJ 266.1

    So, as the antitype, Satan has nothing to do of himself in making the atonement. He has no share in the work; but our High Priest has something to do with him in carrying out the result of his work, by making him bear away the sins which have been taken from the sanctuary, that he may perish with them, and thus a final disposition be made of both them and him. It will be seen that the atonement is all made, and every case decided before Satan comes into the program. And all that is then done with him, is to confine him in the bottomless pit for a thousand years; and when the judgment of the wicked is finished, that is, when the sentence to which each one is entitled, is decided, then to destroy him with the sins which belong to him, and sinners with the sins which belong to them, and so make an end of the great controversy. So far, therefore as concerns the relation which Satan bears to the atonement, no objection exists to the view advocated in this work.LUJ 266.2

    While Satan is passing his thousand years upon this desolate earth, bound, that is, restrained by the very circumstances of his position from carrying forward his nefarious work, the righteous being in heaven, and the wicked in their graves, and so all being beyond his power, the saints are accomplishing that work of judgmentLUJ 266.3

    which they perform in connection with Christ in heaven (1 Corinthians 6:2; Revelation 20:4); that is, apportioning to the wicked the punishment due to each one, to be executed upon them at the end of the thousand years.
    LUJ 267.1

    This work being accomplished, the thousand years expire, the wicked dead are raised, Satan is loosed, for he now has something to do, and he goes out to deceive those wicked multitudes that are brought out of their graves. Having gathered them around the holy city, which has then come down out of heaven, fire descends from God and devours them all, root and branch, Satan and all his followers. Here the wicked receive in their own persons the punishment due to their sins while Satan suffers under the accumulated load of the sins of all the righteous, which, at the beginning of the thousand years, were laid upon him as the antitypical scapegoat.LUJ 267.2

    Larger font
    Smaller font