Thus it is easy to see how a scapegoat represents Christ in having blame falsely put on him when we are the ones who sinned.
I think there is more to it. And it's a bit confusing at first, but as I write and read more, I think I'm beginning to see more. I am no Hebrew or Arabic scholar. I'm not even an English scholar. But I know what I like.
Leviticus 16:7-11 says,
" 7And he shall take the two goats, and present them before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat. And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the Lord’s lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering. 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."
So the first goat would be offered as a sin offering. This is a direct type of Christ and east to read. The second goat, though, is the scapegoat and is allowed to wander off, free, into the wilderness.
This sounds fun and wonderful to have escaped the knife to the neck and the fire. But when you realize that all the sins of the people were put on the scapegoat and then he was cast out into the world of lions, wolves, jackals, bandits, cold and heat, waterless desert, and loneliness to die a horrible death, you have to admit that being killed quickly in a ceremony was probably nicer, if you had a choice. ("Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me. Nevertheless, thy will, and not mine, be done.")
I tried to find the definition of the word "scape" and a couple sites referred me to the word "escape" but I never found that satisfactory.
Then I happened upon the "Online Etymology Dictionary" at etymonline.com and found this entry which I personally as meaningful (please read all of this. It's worth it.):
"..."goat sent into the wilderness on the Day of Atonement, symbolic bearer of the sins of the people," coined by Tyndale from scape (n.) + goat to translate L.caper emissarius, itself a translation in Vulgate of Heb. 'azazel (Lev. xvi:8,10,26), which was read as 'ez ozel "goat that departs," but which others hold to be the proper name of a devil or demon in Jewish mythology (sometimes identified with Canaanite deity Aziz). Jerome's reading also was followed by Martin Luther (der ledige Bock), Symmachus (tragos aperkhomenos), and others (cf. Fr. bouc émissaire), but the question of who, or what (or even where) is meant by 'azazel is a vexed one. The Revised Version (1884) simply restores Azazel. But the old translation has its modern defenders:
Azazel is an active participle or participial noun, derived ultimately from azal (connected with the Arabic word azala, and meaning removed), but immediately from the reduplicate form of that verb, azazal. The reduplication of the consonants of the root in Hebrew and Arabic gives the force of repetition, so that while azal means removed, azalzal means removed by a repetition of acts. Azalzel or azazel, therefore, means one who removes by a series of acts. ... The interpretation is founded on sound etymological grounds, it suits the context wherever the word occurs, it is consistent with the remaining ceremonial of the Day of Atonement, and it accords with the otherwise known religious beliefs and symbolical practices of the Israelites. [Rev. F. Meyrick, "Leviticus," London, 1882]"
Bottom line: "scape" was used by Tyndale to represent the Latin "caper emissarius" which itself was used to represent the Hebrew "azazel" which became bastardized into "ez ozel" or "goat that departs" which some say is the personal name of a devil in apostate Jewish mythology, which is wrong. An older translation uses the word "azalzel", instead.
The interesting thing about Hebrew and Arabic is that they are missing vowels. You have to supply the correct ones and people who don't speak the languages or know how Jews and Arabs think, will use incorrect vowel sounds and completely change the meaning of words.
So this older translation (azalzal/azalzel) indicates a person who "removes by a series of acts".
Isn't that how the Savior atoned for our sins? He was perfect in the pre-mortal life as the Father's Firstborn. He offered freely to come here to suffer and die for us. He was born by the power of the Holy Ghost to Mary, as the Father's Only Begotten. He lived a perfect life, and then was falsely accused and convicted, then tortured and gave his life for us, after suffering the penalty for sin in the Garden of Gethsemane.
Through a series of perfect acts, he was saddled with our sins, just like the scapegoat, and sent off into the wilderness to suffer and die a horrible death.
He save us not only in the Garden and on the cross, but throughout his entire existence, by every single act he did.
He is The Scapegoat. The Azalzel. In Hebrew, the word or syllable "el" means God. He is God over and over again, through eternity. The House of Israel understood this. The Law of Moses was very specific about it. The ordinances of the priesthood were (and are!) very exact. There is no misunderstanding.
1 comment:
The Jewish tradition was to tie a red ribbon on the scapegoat and then that ribbon would turn white to offer to the people God’s reassurance that their sins had been cleansed. (Thus Isaiah’s reference to sins moving from scarlet or crimson to white as snow or wool, Isaiah 1:18.) However, in an obscure reference in one of the Talmud writings there is a reference to the practice being discontinued in approximately the year that Christ was crucified because God no longer turned the rag white…interesting to find such a clear indication that Christ had fulfilled the law of sacrifice and had cleansed the world of sin once and for all, with His act in the Talmud. Another interesting thing to note is that the Seventh Day Adventists believe that the scapegoat actually represents Satan with the blood sacrifice representing Christ, and that is why there are two animals. The sacrificed and the fallen. I do not agree. The scriptures in Leviticus 16 clearly state that what is being done with Azazel or the scapegoat is an atonement and a removal of sin and we know that Satan cannot do any such thing. I do find it interesting that Aaron is commanded to make the preparations totally alone and carefully purified, in this ritual. I see this as another similitude of the lone figure of the Savior. Probably the most beautiful part of this chapter of Leviticus to me is that laying of hands that Aaron must do before releasing the scapegoat. Brian, you opened my eyes to seeing Christ as a scapegoat in every, every act of His life and I love this image of Christ/Azazel/Savior/Son of God getting a Father’s blessing before he went forth into the wilderness to mentor and show us the path back to Father. Thank you so much for causing me to research and ponder and consider that I need to remember that in every moment of His life here on earth, Christ was atoning for me and for those I love. This is so awesome!
Post a Comment