Official SDA website: "Satan will bear the sins of the righteous"

[tall73]

from: Azazel - Wikipedia

In the Bible, the name Azazel (/əˈzeɪzəl, ˈæzəˌzɛl/; Hebrew: עֲזָאזֵל‎ ʿAzāʾzēl; Arabic: عزازيل‎, romanized: ʿAzāzīl) 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 emerged due to Hellenization, Christian narrative, and interpretation exemplified in the Book of Enoch. His role as a fallen angel partly remains in Christian and Islamic traditions.​

This was already addressed:

The text describes the high priest confessing the sins of Israel on the live goat. Then the goat is removed from the camp.

The live goat is said to be for azazel. The meaning of this term is debated. Multiple views have been proposed, based on different etymologies. This post will review the different ideas regarding the meaning of azazel.

Regardless of which etymology and meaning is intended, the result is the same. The text shows the removal of sin from the people, from the camp. The high priest confesses the sins on the live goat which is sent away from the people, into the wilderness. And in fulfillment Jesusremoves sin from His people.

Jesus sheds His blood, represented by the Lord's goat, and makes blood atonement for sin.

But the scapegoat shows another aspect of His atonement, in that He still lives and removes all sin from His people:

Psalm 103:10He has not dealt with us according to our sins,
Nor punished us according to our iniquities.
11 For as the heavens are high above the earth,
So great is His mercy toward those who fear Him;
12 As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.


As to the various interpretations of the meaning of "azazel", here is an outline of some of the views:

Some see it as a combination of the Hebrew words for "goat" and "to go away".

Strongs:
‛ăzâ'zêl
az-aw-zale'
From H5795 and H235; goat of departure; the scapegoat: - scapegoat.

In this scenario the goat is sent away from the people, showing their sins being removed from them. All the sins are confessed on the goat, and they are then removed from the people.

Another suggested meaning is "total removal", based on the word for removal and what is seen to be a reduplicated intensive.

Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, Unabridged - H5799
H5799. Azazel; עֲזָאזֵל noun [masculine] entire removal (reduplicated intensive (Ges§ 30 n. Sta§ 124 a), abstract, √ [עזל] = Arabic remove, see BährSymb. ii. 668 Winii. 659 ff. Me SchenkelBL. i. 256;


This has the same effect as the above, the goat is for total removal from the camp of the sins, showing the sins departing.

Another view is that the word is related to the term for rough ground. This seems to tie in with a later tradition, that shows the goat led to rough ground or a mountain that it is cast down from and killed. If one takes the view of the goat being cast off in the wilderness it still is removal of sin from the camp, where the goat cannot return. But since this is not referenced in the text, this doesn't seem likely to me.

Another view is that azazel is not derived from a word or combination of words, but is a proper name of a demon in the desert. Therefore one goat is "for" the Lord and one goat "for Azazel." This view notes that the later work, the book of Enoch, mentions a demon named Azazel. Though this in itself is debated (see later). The notion that azazel is a proper name is not stated in the text of Scripture, but rather inferred.

If Azazel is a proper name it is also important to note that the goat is not the demon, but is FOR azazel, and sent to him. So again it is picturing removal of the sins of the people from the camp, to the wildnerss where Azazel dwells. Sin is removed from God's people, and sent outside the camp, to the place of uncleanness where the demons dwell, in the desert.

An explanation of this view:

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary:

The two he-goats he was to place before Jehovah (see Lev_1:5), and “give lots over them,” i.e., have lots cast upon them, one lot for Jehovah, the other for Azazel. The one upon which the lot for Jehovah fell (עָלָה, from the coming up of the lot out of the urn, Jos_18:11; Jos_19:10), he was to prepare as a sin-offering for Jehovah, and to present the one upon which the lot for Azazel fell alive before Jehovah, עָלָיו לְכַפֵּר, “to expiate it,” i.e., to make it the object of expiation (see at Lev_16:21), to send it into the desert to Azazel.

So again they see it as sending the sins out of the camp, away form God's people, to the land of Azazel, the desert, land of demons. All sin would be removed from the people by Christ. So even in this view satan would not be the goat, and satan wouldn't be bearing the sins of the righteous, as Adventists indicate. Rather the sins would be separated from the people, and sent to the place where sin and satan and the demons are now relegated.

So whichever of the above views is taken this work involves removal of the sins of the people, which is done by the high priest who represents Jesus. Jesus removes sin from His people, and from the camp.

But the idea that Satan IS the goat is ruled out by the text. The goat is for azazel however it is defined. Both animals involved were sacrificial animals, and represent some aspect of the work of atonement. The scapegoat has atonement made upon it. satan has no part in the atonement of the sins of God's people.

The sins that are confessed are all the sins of the people of Israel. Those sins are seen as removed from the camp, removed from the people. Their sin is taken away.

Much of the discussion of azazel as a name for a demon is in dispute. For instance, some doubt the connection to the book of Enoch.

From De-Demonising the Old Testament, JM Blair.

Moreover, a number of the scholars who hold to the view that azazel is a proper name are approaching the text from a critical view, often looking to other near eastern rites or literature, and proposing that this was borrowed and inserted into the text, not being from God, or mosaic in origin.

Again from the article:

 

[BobRyan]

The Lord's goat was slain, showing blood atonement. But atonement is also involved in the scapegoat, and this is also the work of Jesus to remove sin from us.

Without the shedding of blood NO forgiveness of sin Heb 9
In Lev - ALL sin offerings require death of the atoning sacrifice

By contrast to that sin offering:
The scapegoat is NEVER called "the atoning sacrifice" or "THE sin offering" or called "A sin offering" in all of scripture

Lev 16: 10 But the goat, on which the lot fell to be the ahazel (or Azazel), shall be presented alive before Avinu, to make an atonement with him, and to let him go for a ahazel (or Azazel) into the wilderness.

from: Azazel - Wikipedia

In the Bible, the name Azazel (/əˈzeɪzəl, ˈæzəˌzɛl/; Hebrew: עֲזָאזֵל‎ ʿAzāʾzēl; Arabic: عزازيل‎, romanized: ʿAzāzīl) 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 emerged due to Hellenization, Christian narrative, and interpretation exemplified in the Book of Enoch. His role as a fallen angel partly remains in Christian and Islamic traditions.​

NET Bible translation - foot notes Leviticus 16
look up the verse in the NET and here is the footnote for the word "Azazel":

(3) The most common view among scholars today is that it is the proper name of a particular demon (perhaps even the Devil himself) associated with the wilderness desert regions. Levine has proposed that it may perhaps derive from a reduplication of the ז (zayin) in עֵז combined with אֵל (’el, “mighty”), meaning “mighty goat.” The final consonantal form of עֲזָאזֵל would have resulted from the inversion of the א (aleph) with the second ז. He makes the point that the close association between עֵז and שְׂעִירִים (shя’irim), which seems to refer to “goat-demons” of the desert in Lev 17:7 (cf. Isa 13:21, etc.), should not be ignored in the derivation of Azazel, although the term ultimately became the name of “the demonic ruler of the wilderness.” The latter view is supported by the parallel between the one goat “for (לְ, lamed preposition) the Lord” and the one “for (לְ) Azazel” here in v. 8. The rendering as a proper name has been tentatively accepted here (cf. ASV, NAB, NRSV, TEV, CEV). Perhaps a play on words between the proper name and the term for “goat” has occurred so that the etymology has become obscure. Even if a demon or the demonic realm is the source for the name, however, there is no intention here of appeasing the demons. The goal is to remove the impurity and iniquity from the community in order to avoid offending the Lord and the repercussions of such (see esp. vv. 21-22 and cf. Lev 15:31).​

By contrast to that scapegoat demon/fallen-angel -

"Repentance, confession, and restitution are all required. But these cannot atone for the sin; for God has been wronged in the person of His saints. The Lord Jesus alone is able to atone for sin, by the application of His blood, shed for the guilt of the sinner. His blood cleanses from all sin. 17LtMs, Ms 47, 1902, par. 12 “Lessons From the Eighteenth of Matthew.” UL 106.6​

​

"The blood of Christ was shed to atone for sin and to cleanse the sinner; and we must take hold of the merits of Christ's blood, and believe that we have life through his name". ST March 24, 1890, par. 1​

​

"The blood of Jesus Christ alone can atone for our transgressions. We must claim His righteousness by living faith, and depend on Him and abide in Him alone. We are always to feel our continual dependence upon God. This will scatter our self-sufficiency, our pride and vanity, to the winds." 1888 364.1​

And of course as we see in Heb 9 "without the shedding of blood there is NO forgiveness of sin" --
In Lev 16 ALL sin offerings are a burnt offering - they are all slain.

BobRyan said:

So we know that Christ was perfect and sinless, and Ezek 28 says even Lucifer was created perfect and sinless - yet you are confused that both start as without spot in Lev 16. Figuring that easy one out is left as an exercise for the reader.​

​

In Rom 3 we find that God is BOTH just and merciful in His solution to the sin problem.​

In the Lev 16 solution to sin "Day of Atonement" we find BOTH justice and mercy.​

​

Where sin is punished in full BOTH in the case of the wicked and in the case of the saints and we find that the camp of the saints is purified with all sin removed. Which includes the false claims of the wicked returned upon their own heads and as Dan 7 points out "judgment is passed in favor of the saints". The wicked removed and the saints singled out and blessed as Romans 2 predicts.​

The points above - already posted...

Tall73 said
Since you are only re-posting what was already addressed in detail, there is no need to answer it again.

Will check "again" to see if you were able to solve the problem that the above details cause for your suggestions.

 

[BobRyan]

Tall73:

I noted the two goats represent two aspects of atonement. One makes blood provision for atonement. The other has atonement made over it, and carries away the sins of the people. But satan cannot do either of those. And he cannot be represented by an unblemished animal.



No Bob, because in the type the two goats are sinless, one dies for blood atonement, and one has the sins of the people placed on him. That is not in fact the history of satan. Rather, satan was sinless, then sinnned, and will be cast in the lake of fire for his own sin.

The unblemished animal in the type did not have sins on it until the sins of the people were placed on it. So it is not picturing satan.

Nor is satan able to have the sins of the people placed upon him. But in the type that is what happens with the scapegoat. The sins of the people are confessed on him and then removed from the camp:

Leviticus 16:21 Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, confess over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, concerning all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and shall send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a suitable man. 22 The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to an uninhabited land; and he shall release the goat in the wilderness.​

It is not satan who removes sin from the people, but the Lord:

Psalm 103:10 He has not dealt with us according to our sins,​

Nor punished us according to our iniquities.​

11 For as the heavens are high above the earth,​

So great is His mercy toward those who fear Him;​

12 As far as the east is from the west,​

So far has He removed our transgressions from us.​

And the text indicates that atonement is made upon the scapegoat:

Leviticus 16:10 But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the Lord, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness.​

Atonement, and removing the sins of His people is the work of the Lord, not satan.



Indeed, and the means for that was Jesus.



All sin is removed by Christ, not by satan

Yet Ezek 28 calls Satan/the devil -- "PERFECT in the day you were created".. (as already noted on this thread)

If you ignore enough Bible details you can suggest just about anything.

. satan is punished for his own sins. Sinners are punished for their sins.

It is indeed nice - that we can agree on something.

Yet you keep "skimming past the detail" that Satan is responsible BOTH for his own sins and his sin in tempting others and the the sin of tempting his OWN followers is not as great as his torment and work on Christ's followers who are shown in the final analysis to have rejected Satan totally.

Christ paid for the sins of His own people, making blood atonement, then removes all sin from His people.

1 John 2:2 "the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and not for OUR sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD"

 

[tall73]

Yet you keep "skimming past the detail" that Satan is responsible BOTH for his own sins and his sin in tempting others and the the sin of tempting his OWN followers is not as great as his torment and work on Christ's followers who are shown in the final analysis to have rejected Satan totally.

I noted that the Scriptures has the wicked atoning for their own sins, and satan for his. His sin includes temptation of others.

The one who has no sacrifice for his sin atones by his own life in the type:

Numbers 35:33 So you shall not pollute the land where you are; for blood defiles the land, and no ]atonement can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it.

His own blood was shed to make atonement for the polluted land.

satan makes atonement for this sin by experiencing the punishment for it, as do sinners, since they have no substitute.

But Jesus, as the Lord's goat, sheds His blood to make atonement for the sins of His people, and as the scapegoat totally removes all sin from His people, and out of the camp.

The wicked pay for their own sins with their own life, and their own blood removes the pollution.

But Ellen White has satan bearing the sins of God's people, which he cannot do:

Spiritual Gifts Volume 1:​

They must prevent all they could from receiving salvation purchased for them by Jesus. By so doing Satan could still work against the government of God. Also it would be for his own interest to keep from Jesus all he could. For the sins of those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ, and overcome, at last will be rolled back upon the originator of sin, the Devil, and he will have to bear their sins, while those who do not accept salvation through Jesus will bear their own sins.​

​

​

Early Writings:​

Satan and his angels suffered long. Satan bore not only the weight and punishment of his own sins, but also of the sins of the redeemed host, which had been placed upon him; and he must also suffer for the ruin of souls which he had caused. Then I saw that Satan and all the wicked host were consumed, and the justice of God was satisfied; and all the angelic host, and all the redeemed saints, with a loud voice said, "Amen!"​

 

[tall73]

Will check "again" to see if you were able to solve the problem that the above details cause for your suggestions.

You put a jumbled mess of re-quotes. Then you went back and edited it later. And this was all addressed already:

Leviticus 16:9 And Aaron shall bring the goat on which the Lord’s lot fell, and offer it as 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 atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness.

Leviticus 16:21 Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, confess over it all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions, concerning all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and shall send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a suitable man. 22 The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to an uninhabited land; and he shall release the goat in the wilderness.

Jesus shed his blood to make blood atonement for the people as the Lord's goat.

The scapegoat, also represented by an unblemished animal had atonement made over it with the sins of the people being confessed on the animal, and then removed the sins from the camp, away from the people.

Jesus is the one who both shed His blood to make atonement, AND lives to remove sins from His people.

Psalm 103:10He has not dealt with us according to our sins,
Nor punished us according to our iniquities.
11 For as the heavens are high above the earth,
So great is His mercy toward those who fear Him;
12 As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.

from: Azazel - Wikipedia

In the Bible, the name Azazel (/əˈzeɪzəl, ˈæzəˌzɛl/; Hebrew: עֲזָאזֵל‎ ʿAzāʾzēl; Arabic: عزازيل‎, romanized: ʿAzāzīl) 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 emerged due to Hellenization, Christian narrative, and interpretation exemplified in the Book of Enoch. His role as a fallen angel partly remains in Christian and Islamic traditions.​

This was already addressed:

The text describes the high priest confessing the sins of Israel on the live goat. Then the goat is removed from the camp.

The live goat is said to be for azazel. The meaning of this term is debated. Multiple views have been proposed, based on different etymologies. This post will review the different ideas regarding the meaning of azazel.

Regardless of which etymology and meaning is intended, the result is the same. The text shows the removal of sin from the people, from the camp. The high priest confesses the sins on the live goat which is sent away from the people, into the wilderness. And in fulfillment Jesusremoves sin from His people.

Jesus sheds His blood, represented by the Lord's goat, and makes blood atonement for sin.

But the scapegoat shows another aspect of His atonement, in that He still lives and removes all sin from His people:

Psalm 103:10He has not dealt with us according to our sins,
Nor punished us according to our iniquities.
11 For as the heavens are high above the earth,
So great is His mercy toward those who fear Him;
12 As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.


As to the various interpretations of the meaning of "azazel", here is an outline of some of the views:

Some see it as a combination of the Hebrew words for "goat" and "to go away".

Strongs:
‛ăzâ'zêl
az-aw-zale'
From H5795 and H235; goat of departure; the scapegoat: - scapegoat.

In this scenario the goat is sent away from the people, showing their sins being removed from them. All the sins are confessed on the goat, and they are then removed from the people.

Another suggested meaning is "total removal", based on the word for removal and what is seen to be a reduplicated intensive.

Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, Unabridged - H5799
H5799. Azazel; עֲזָאזֵל noun [masculine] entire removal (reduplicated intensive (Ges§ 30 n. Sta§ 124 a), abstract, √ [עזל] = Arabic remove, see BährSymb. ii. 668 Winii. 659 ff. Me SchenkelBL. i. 256;


This has the same effect as the above, the goat is for total removal from the camp of the sins, showing the sins departing.

Another view is that the word is related to the term for rough ground. This seems to tie in with a later tradition, that shows the goat led to rough ground or a mountain that it is cast down from and killed. If one takes the view of the goat being cast off in the wilderness it still is removal of sin from the camp, where the goat cannot return. But since this is not referenced in the text, this doesn't seem likely to me.

Another view is that azazel is not derived from a word or combination of words, but is a proper name of a demon in the desert. Therefore one goat is "for" the Lord and one goat "for Azazel." This view notes that the later work, the book of Enoch, mentions a demon named Azazel. Though this in itself is debated (see later). The notion that azazel is a proper name is not stated in the text of Scripture, but rather inferred.

If Azazel is a proper name it is also important to note that the goat is not the demon, but is FOR azazel, and sent to him. So again it is picturing removal of the sins of the people from the camp, to the wildnerss where Azazel dwells. Sin is removed from God's people, and sent outside the camp, to the place of uncleanness where the demons dwell, in the desert.

An explanation of this view:

Keil and Delitzsch Commentary:

The two he-goats he was to place before Jehovah (see Lev_1:5), and “give lots over them,” i.e., have lots cast upon them, one lot for Jehovah, the other for Azazel. The one upon which the lot for Jehovah fell (עָלָה, from the coming up of the lot out of the urn, Jos_18:11; Jos_19:10), he was to prepare as a sin-offering for Jehovah, and to present the one upon which the lot for Azazel fell alive before Jehovah, עָלָיו לְכַפֵּר, “to expiate it,” i.e., to make it the object of expiation (see at Lev_16:21), to send it into the desert to Azazel.

So again they see it as sending the sins out of the camp, away form God's people, to the land of Azazel, the desert, land of demons. All sin would be removed from the people by Christ. So even in this view satan would not be the goat, and satan wouldn't be bearing the sins of the righteous, as Adventists indicate. Rather the sins would be separated from the people, and sent to the place where sin and satan and the demons are now relegated.

So whichever of the above views is taken this work involves removal of the sins of the people, which is done by the high priest who represents Jesus. Jesus removes sin from His people, and from the camp.

But the idea that Satan IS the goat is ruled out by the text. The goat is for azazel however it is defined. Both animals involved were sacrificial animals, and represent some aspect of the work of atonement. The scapegoat has atonement made upon it. satan has no part in the atonement of the sins of God's people.

The sins that are confessed are all the sins of the people of Israel. Those sins are seen as removed from the camp, removed from the people. Their sin is taken away.

Much of the discussion of azazel as a name for a demon is in dispute. For instance, some doubt the connection to the book of Enoch.

From De-Demonising the Old Testament, JM Blair.

Moreover, a number of the scholars who hold to the view that azazel is a proper name are approaching the text from a critical view, often looking to other near eastern rites or literature, and proposing that this was borrowed and inserted into the text, not being from God, or mosaic in origin.

Again from the article:

 

[tall73]

So we know that Christ was perfect and sinless, and Ezek 28 says even Lucifer was created perfect and sinless - yet you are confused that both start as without spot in Lev 16. Figuring that easy one out is left as an exercise for the reader.

​

Of course Bob that ignores the text. The sins of the Israelites are placed on the unblemished goat.

satan was already a sinner before any human sinned at all, let alone the Israelites, as he was tempting Adam in the garden. So he is not the scapegoat.

Jesus is the Lord's goat that shed his blood to make blood atonement for the sins of His peple. And He is the one that is risen and lives to remove sins from His people.

Psalm 103:10 He has not dealt with us according to our sins,
Nor punished us according to our iniquities.
11 For as the heavens are high above the earth,
So great is His mercy toward those who fear Him;
12 As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.

 

[BobRyan]

I noted that the Scriptures has the wicked atoning for their own sins, and satan for his. His sin includes temptation of others.

And of course no scripture ever says that.

Rather Satan and the wicked are punished for their own sins.

As noted the many details you have skimmed over in my previous posts the Bible concept of atonement includes not only the forgiveness of sins but also the punishment for sins - a complete removal of sin from the camp. Removal of the wicked in symbolism and atonement of sin for the people of God.

This is the view we find in the Bible ... and it is the SDA doctrinal view.

You are of course free to reject it just as you do.

It is left as an exercise for the reader to "note the details".

 

[tall73]

And of course no scripture ever says that.

Rather Satan and the wicked are punished for their own sins.

The one who has no sacrifice for his sin dies for his sin.

Numbers 35:33 So you shall not pollute the land where you are; for blood defiles the land, and no ]atonement can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it.

His own blood was shed to make atonement for the polluted land.

satan makes atonement for this sin by experiencing the punishment for it, as do sinners, since they have no substitute.

But Jesus, as the Lord's goat, sheds His blood to make atonement for the sins of His people, and as the scapegoat totally removes all sin from His people, and out of the camp.

 

[tall73]

As noted the many details you have skimmed over in my previous posts

I have not skimmed over any details, but responded to them, until you started making a jumbled mess of reposts and then editing them later. Who knows what you were even saying in those, so there was no need to reply. But now that you edited them I edited the responses as well.

the Bible concept of atonement includes not only the forgiveness of sins but also the punishment for sins - a complete removal of sin from the camp. Removal of the wicked in symbolism and atonement of sin for the people of God.

The type shows the sins that the scapegoat has confessed over it are all the sins of the people of Israel. Jesus removes those, not satan.

As to the wicked bearing their own sin and experiencing the punishment, this is not represented by the scapegoat. This too was addressed on the first page before you posted in the thread:

Some did not benefit from the ministration of the high priest in the blood atonement, etc. because they did not participate in the rite.

Those who did not afflict themselves during the day of atonement were cut off, and therefore would not benefit from the ministration of the high priest.

Leviticus 23:26 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 27 “Also the tenth day of this seventh month shall be the Day of Atonement. It shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire to the Lord. 28 And you shall do no work on that same day, for it is the Day of Atonement, to make atonement for you before the Lord your God. 29 For any person who is not afflicted in soul on that same day shall be cut off from his people.

It is in this cutting off that we see the fate of the wicked, also put out of the camp, away from God's people. They do not benefit from the atoning for sin and removal of sin from the camp. Rather they too are put out of the camp, as is the sin of the people.

But it is Jesus who removes the sins of His people, not satan. satan cannot be the scapegoat.

This is the view we find in the Bible ... and it is the SDA doctrinal view.

You are of course free to reject it just as you do.

The Adventist view is that satan bears the sins of the righteous, which of course he does not. He can only bear his own sins, and be punished for them. Even though you ignore Ellen White and the website of the Adventist church, they still say what they say.

Spiritual Gifts Volume 1:​

They must prevent all they could from receiving salvation purchased for them by Jesus. By so doing Satan could still work against the government of God. Also it would be for his own interest to keep from Jesus all he could. For the sins of those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ, and overcome, at last will be rolled back upon the originator of sin, the Devil, and he will have to bear their sins, while those who do not accept salvation through Jesus will bear their own sins.​

​

Early Writings:​

Satan and his angels suffered long. Satan bore not only the weight and punishment of his own sins, but also of the sins of the redeemed host, which had been placed upon him; and he must also suffer for the ruin of souls which he had caused. Then I saw that Satan and all the wicked host were consumed, and the justice of God was satisfied; and all the angelic host, and all the redeemed saints, with a loud voice said, "Amen!"​

 

[tall73]

And here is a recap of the various statements that Bob's church teaches, that Bob won't address:


Official Adventist website, Adventist.org website article "What Adventists Believe About Christ’s Ministry in the Heavenly Sanctuary" elaborating on Fundamental Belief #24.

In the earthly Day of Atonement service, there was a scapegoat (Leviticus 16). This animal symbolically received the sins from the sanctuary and carried them into the wilderness. In the final cleansing of sin from the universe, there will be a final scapegoat. Satan, the arch-deceiver, will bear the sins of the righteous. When the sanctuary in Heaven is cleansed, those sins will be transferred to Satan.​

​

Ellen White statements


Great Controversy.

It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed. When the high priest, by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, removed the sins from the sanctuary, he placed them upon the scapegoat. When Christ, by virtue of His own blood, removes the sins of His people from the heavenly sanctuary at the close of His ministration, He will place them upon Satan, who, in the execution of the judgment, must bear the final penalty.​

Letters and Manuscripts — Volume 16 (1901)

Satan is a diligent student of the Scriptures. He understands what is symbolized by the Jewish service. He sees that the day of atonement has a bearing on his life; that the scapegoat chosen to bear the sins of the people represents himself; that he must bear the sins of all who come to Jesus; and that those who continue in transgression must bear their own sins.​

Great Controversy

The wicked receive their recompense in the earth. Proverbs 11:31. They “shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts.” Malachi 4:1. Some are destroyed as in a moment, while others suffer many days. All are punished “according to their deeds.” The sins of the righteous having been transferred to Satan, he is made to suffer not only for his own rebellion, but for all the sins which he has caused God's people to commit. His punishment is to be far greater than that of those whom he has deceived. After all have perished who fell by his deceptions, he is still to live and suffer on. In the cleansing flames the wicked are at last destroyed, root and branch—Satan the root, his followers the branches. The full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah.​

​

Spiritual Gifts Volume 1:

They must prevent all they could from receiving salvation purchased for them by Jesus. By so doing Satan could still work against the government of God. Also it would be for his own interest to keep from Jesus all he could. For the sins of those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ, and overcome, at last will be rolled back upon the originator of sin, the Devil, and he will have to bear their sins, while those who do not accept salvation through Jesus will bear their own sins.​

Early Writings:

Satan and his angels suffered long. Satan bore not only the weight and punishment of his own sins, but also of the sins of the redeemed host, which had been placed upon him; and he must also suffer for the ruin of souls which he had caused. Then I saw that Satan and all the wicked host were consumed, and the justice of God was satisfied; and all the angelic host, and all the redeemed saints, with a loud voice said, "Amen!"​

Patriarchs and Prophets:

And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess 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, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness: and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities into a land not inhabited." Not until the goat had been thus sent away did the people regard themselves as freed from the burden of their sins. Every man was to afflict his soul while the work of atonement was going forward.​

Later in the chapter:

At the door of the tabernacle he laid his hands upon the head of the scapegoat and 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." And as the goat bearing these sins was sent away, they were, with him, regarded as forever separated from the people.​

​

Later in the chapter:

​

Christ's work for the redemption of men and the purification of the universe from sin will be closed by the removal of sin from the heavenly sanctuary and the placing of these sins upon Satan, who will bear the final penalty.​

 

[tall73]

Ellen White says again and again that satan is the scapegoat. And Bob agrees.

Bob, why is Ellen White telling this woman to pray much that her sins may be confessed on the head of satan?

Lt 8, 1850

m.egwwritings.org

Much love to your dear father and to your sisters and brother. Tell them to be faithful to serve God. I have often prayed for them. Tell them to pray much that their sins may be confessed upon the head of the scape goat and borne away into the land of forgetfulness. ​

 

[BobRyan]

Belief 10 does say this --
In Christ's life of perfect obedience to God's will, His suffering, death, and resurrection, God provided the only means of atonement for human sin, so that those who by faith accept this atonement may have eternal life, and the whole creation may better understand the infinite and holy love of the Creator. This perfect atonement vindicates the righteousness of God's law and the graciousness of His character; for it both condemns our sin and provides for our forgiveness. The death of Christ is substitutionary and expiatory, reconciling and transforming. The resurrection of Christ proclaims God's triumph over the forces of evil, and for those who accept the atonement assures their final victory over sin and death. It declares the Lordship of Jesus Christ, before whom every knee in heaven and on earth will bow. (John 3:16; Isa. 53; 1 Peter 2:21, 22; 1 Cor. 15:3, 4, 20-22; 2 Cor. 5:14, 15, 19-21; Rom. 1:4; 3:25; 4:25; 8:3, 4; 1 John 2:2; 4:10; Col. 2:15; Phil. 2:6-11.)
Belief 4 says this

Belief 4. Son:
God the eternal Son became incarnate in Jesus Christ. Through Him all things were created, the character of God is revealed, the salvation of humanity is accomplished, and the world is judged. Forever truly God, He became also truly man, Jesus the Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. He lived and experienced temptation as a human being, but perfectly exemplified the righteousness and love of God. By His miracles He manifested God's power and was attested as God's promised Messiah. He suffered and died voluntarily on the cross for our sins and in our place, was raised from the dead, and ascended to minister in the heavenly sanctuary in our behalf. He will come again in glory for the final deliverance of His people and the restoration of all things. (John 1:1-3, 14; Col. 1:15-19; John 10:30; 14:9; Rom. 6:23; 2 Cor. 5:17-19; John 5:22; Luke 1:35; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 2:9-18; 1 Cor. 15:3, 4; Heb. 8:1, 2; John 14:1-3.)

“As the cross of Calvary, with its infinite sacrifice for the sins of men, was revealed, they saw that nothing but the merits of Christ could suffice to atone for their transgressions; this alone could reconcile man to God. With faith and humility they accepted the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world. Through the blood of Jesus they had “remission of sins that are past.” {GC 461.1}

"(Satan) must suffer for all the evil that he has done and be punished for the sins that he has caused to be committed. GC 660.2

The mastermind that organizes the story robber and also his team of robbers -- must all be punished for the part they play in the crime. This is no different. One does not expiate punishment for another. Obviously

"(Satan) will be declared guilty of all the evil which he has caused them to commit. And as the scapegoat was sent away into a land not inhabited, so Satan will be banished to the desolate earth, an uninhabited and dreary wilderness.{GC88 657.3}{GC 658.1}

All sin offerings are slain - but the scapegoat is not a sin offering, it does not pay debt on someone else's behalf. It is not killed according to Lev 16 so as to make it clear that it is not an atoning sacrifice, not a propitiation for the guilt of another.

 

[tall73]

Belief 10 does say this --
In Christ's life of perfect obedience to God's will, His suffering, death, and resurrection, God provided the only means of atonement for human sin, so that those who by faith accept this atonement may have eternal life, and the whole creation may better understand the infinite and holy love of the Creator.

The only means of atonement....

Leviticus 16:10 But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness. (NKJV)​

The live goat is used to make atonement.

Jesus is the One who removes the sins of the people.

Psalm 103
12 As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

Belief 10 does say this --
In Christ's life of perfect obedience to God's will, His suffering, death, and resurrection, God provided the only means of atonement for human sin, so that those who by faith accept this atonement may have eternal life, and the whole creation may better understand the infinite and holy love of the Creator.

The only means of atonement....

Leviticus 16:10 But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness. (NKJV)​

When Lev 16 uses the term "the goat of the Sin offering" Lev 16:15 it refers to the Lord's goat "alone" not the scapegoat - as we both know.

When the actual part of the scapegoat comes in - (in vs 21) it is only AFTER all the work of making atonement for the people, the sanctuary and the altar has been completed - via the atoning sacrifice (the blood of the goat of the sin offering" has done all the work -- as we both know.

All sin offerings are slain - burnt offerings according to Leviticus -- as we both know

The scapegoat symbol does NOT represent a sin offering, or an "atoning sacrifice" -- as we both know.

The Full Bible context for the term "Atonement" does including what the scapegoat represents (the punishment of the wicked for sin) because they pay their own debt of sin in the lake of fire --- As some of us know. This is a key part of dealing with sin -- but it is not an act that saves the lost -- rather they are cast into the lake of fire and do not die a substitutionary atoning death at all. Nor does the scapegoat - as a symbol of them -- die in the Lev 16 model.

 

[tall73]

The only means of atonement....

Leviticus 16:10 But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness. (NKJV)​

The live goat is used to make atonement.

Jesus is the One who removes the sins of the people.

Psalm 103
12 As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.

When Lev 16 uses the term "the goat of the Sin offering" Lev 16:15 it refers to the Lord's goat "alone" not the scapegoat - as we both know.

When the actual part of the scapegoat comes in - (in vs 21) it is only AFTER all the work of making atonement for the people, the sanctuary and the altar has been completed - via the atoning sacrifice (the blood of the goat of the sin offering" has done all the work -- as we both know.

No, atonement is made in the sanctuary by the blood of the slain goat. But it is also stated to be made upon the live goat:

Leviticus 16:10 But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness. (NKJV)​

AND

It is even said to be made by the burnt offering after both of those had already taken place, in verse 24:

Leviticus 16:23-24 23 “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. 24 And he shall bathe his body in water in a holy place and put on his garments and come out and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people and make atonement for himself and for the people. (ESV)​

Atonement is being pictured throughout the process. All of the ceremonially clean animals refer to the same thing--Jesus.

He is the One that both pays the price of sin at the cost of His life, AND the One who removes sin completely from the camp.

The scapegoat symbol does NOT represent a sin offering, or an "atoning sacrifice" -- as we both know.

The text says atonement is made over the scapegoat. It was part of atonement, removing sins from the camp.

The Full Bible context for the term "Atonement" does including what the scapegoat represents (the punishment of the wicked for sin) because they pay their own debt of sin in the lake of fire --- As some of us know.

You earlier said that satan was pure in the beginning, so he could be represented by ceremonially clean animal. This, of course, ignores that satan is certainly not pure by the time the sin offering is presented, and the scapegoat follows that in the service. He cannot be represented by a pure animal in the type.

But you go beyond even that and say the wicked are part of the scapegoat. Bob, tell me how the wicked are represented by a ceremonially clean animal in the type.

Now you have serial killers, child molesters, and thieves represented by a ceremonially clean animal, in addition to satan!

I don't think you will find many buying that notion.

Now I already pointed out that the blood of the wicked is shed for their own sin, and that is atonement--but not saving. And I actually put a text to it:

Numbers 35:33 So you shall not pollute the land where you are; for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it.​

​

The sinners own blood was shed to make atonement for the polluted land. satan makes atonement for his sin by experiencing the punishment for it, as do sinners, since they have no substitute.

But the scapegoat removes the sins of the people from the camp, which neither satan, nor sinners could do. They can only pay for their own sins.

Nor can they be represented by a clean animal, which points to Christ and His work. He died for their sins to make atonement, and ministered Sacrifice, but also is the One who removes sins from them completely, and out of the camp.

As for the wicked, they are represented, but not by the scapegoatL

​

Leviticus 23:26 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 27 “Also the tenth day of this seventh month shall be the Day of Atonement. It shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire to the Lord. 28 And you shall do no work on that same day, for it is the Day of Atonement, to make atonement for you before the Lord your God. 29 For any person who is not afflicted in soul on that same day shall be cut off from his people.​

​

Some did not benefit from the ministration of the high priest in the blood atonement, etc. because they did not participate in the rite.
Those who did not afflict themselves during the day of atonement were cut off, and therefore would not benefit from the ministration of the high priest.

​

It is in this cutting off that we see the fate of the wicked, also put out of the camp, away from God's people. They do not benefit from the atoning for sin and removal of sin from the camp. Rather they too are put out of the camp, as is the sin of the people. They did not avail themselves of the atonement made for God's people.

​

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:
When Lev 16 uses the term "the goat of the Sin offering" Lev 16:15 it refers to the Lord's goat "alone" not the scapegoat - as we both know.

When the actual part of the scapegoat comes in - (in vs 21) it is only AFTER all the work of making atonement for the people, the sanctuary and the altar has been completed - via the atoning sacrifice (the blood of the goat of the sin offering" has done all the work -- as we both know.

No, atonement is made in the sanctuary by the blood of the slain goat.

Read Lev 16 "Day of ATonement " and come back with an actual quote that says what you claim.

You seem to say "No" then proceed to agree with everything I said above about the goat of the sin offering - the Lord's goat (NOT the scapegoat) completing all the atonenment work in the Sanctuary, for the people, for the altar, for the holy place for the sanctuary BEFORE the scapegoat's participation even happens in vs 21.


In the mean time --

15 “Then he shall slaughter the goat of the sin offering, which is for the people, and bring its blood inside the veil and do with its blood as he did with the blood of the bull, and sprinkle it on the atoning cover and in front of the atoning cover. 16 He shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the impurities of the sons of Israel and because of their unlawful acts regarding all their sins; and he shall do so for the tent of meeting which remains with them in the midst of their impurities. 17 When he goes in to make atonement in the Holy Place, no one shall be in the tent of meeting until he comes out, so that he may make atonement for himself and for his household, and for all the assembly of Israel. 18 Then he shall go out to the altar that is before the Lord and make atonement for it; he shall take some of the blood from the bull and some of the blood from the goat, and put it on the horns of the altar on all sides. 19 With his finger he shall sprinkle some of the blood on it seven times and cleanse it, and consecrate it from the impurities of the sons of Israel.

In this example I am just making the claim that I can read. But am also curious as to how it is you oppose that section of the chapter (if that really is your intent).

 

[BobRyan]

Your own post shows that you could find no objection to this statement -

When the actual part of the scapegoat comes in - (in vs 21) it is only AFTER all the work of making atonement for the people, the sanctuary and the altar has been completed - via the atoning sacrifice (the blood of the goat of the sin offering" has done all the work -- as we both know.

So you simply resort to Leviticus 16:23-24 23 -- which of course is after vs 21 -- just as I noted above.

The section before vs 21 deals with the "atoning sacrifice" of the Lord's goat - slain in vs 15 All sin offerings are slain according to Leviticus.

========================

The full Bible concept of Atonement goes BEYOND the "Atoning Sacrifice" in actual scripture -

But to understand that - one would need to accept the Adventist view of the full scope of Atonement - and I think you are on record as rejecting Adventist doctrine in general and that idea of atonement in particular.

 

[tall73]

Read Lev 16 "Day of ATonement " and come back with an actual quote that says what you claim. You seem to say "No" then proceed to agree with everything I said above about the goat of the sin offering - the Lord's goat (NOT the scapegoat) completing all the atonenment work in the Sanctuary, for the people, for the altar, for the holy place for the sanctuary BEFORE the scapegoat's participation even happens in vs 21.

Incorrect. The "no" was in regards to your assertion which attempted to limit the atonement to the portion that related to the goat offered as a sin offering, and say all the atonement happened before verse 21.

I disagree with your assertion that all of the atonement for the people is complete by the time the goat of the sin offering portion is completed.

Atonement is referenced throughout.

It is stated of the goat for the sin offering.

Leviticus 16:15-20 15 “Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering, which is for the people, bring its blood inside the veil, do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bull, and sprinkle it on the mercy seat and before the mercy seat. 16 So he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, for all their sins; and so he shall do for the tabernacle of meeting which remains among them in the midst of their uncleanness. 17 There shall be no man in the tabernacle of meeting when he goes in to make atonement in the Holy Place, until he comes out, that he may make atonement for himself, for his household, and for all the assembly of Israel. 18 And he shall go out to the altar that is before the LORD, and make atonement for it, and shall take some of the blood of the bull and some of the blood of the goat, and put it on the horns of the altar all around. 19 Then he shall sprinkle some of the blood on it with his finger seven times, cleanse it, and consecrate it from the uncleanness of the children of Israel.​

20 “And when he has made an end of atoning for the Holy Place, the tabernacle of meeting, and the altar, he shall bring the live goat. (NKJV)​

​

But this is not the end of making atonement. It is also stated regarding the live goat that atonement is made upon it:

Leviticus 16:10 But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness. (NKJV)​

​

Verse 10 speaks of the scapegoat, live goat, portion, which happens AFTER the sin offering in the sanctuary. It is still stated to be atonement.

And it is stated about the burnt offerings, which happen after the sin offering in the sanctuary, as well.

Leviticus 16:23-24 23 “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. 24 And he shall bathe his body in water in a holy place and put on his garments and come out and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people and make atonement for himself and for the people. (ESV)​

It is throughout.

 

[tall73]

Your own post shows that you could find no objection to this statement -

When the actual part of the scapegoat comes in - (in vs 21) it is only AFTER all the work of making atonement for the people, the sanctuary and the altar has been completed - via the atoning sacrifice (the blood of the goat of the sin offering" has done all the work -- as we both know.

So you simply resort to Leviticus 16:23-24 23 -- which of course is after vs 21 -- just as I noted above.

Of course that is not true at all Bob. You just ignored verse 10. It comes before verse 21, but describes the live goat portion after the sin offering in the sanctuary.

You ignoring it doesn't make it go away:

Leviticus 16:10 But the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat into the wilderness. (NKJV)​

As to the verses about the burnt offering, that is also after the sin offering in the sanctuary, but is still about atonement:

Leviticus 16:23-24 23 “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. 24 And he shall bathe his body in water in a holy place and put on his garments and come out and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people and make atonement for himself and for the people. (ESV)​

Your attempt to limit atonement to only the events in the sanctuary do not match what the text describes. The live goat is also part of atonement, per the text. And the burnt offerings are as well.

They are all clean animals, which point to Jesus.

========================

The full Bible concept of Atonement goes BEYOND the "Atoning Sacrifice" in actual scripture -

But to understand that - one would need to accept the Adventist view of the full scope of Atonement - and I think you are on record as rejecting Adventist doctrine in general and that idea of atonement in particular.

I think you need to show an actual official statement by the denomination that supports your claim, which is ludicrous, that the scapegoat points also to the Christ-rejecting-wicked.

You have unrepentant murderers, child rapists and drug dealers represented by a clean animal. Even Ellen White didn't say that.

 

[BobRyan]

BobRyan said:

Your own post shows that you could find no objection to this statement -

When the actual part of the scapegoat comes in - (in vs 21) it is only AFTER all the work of making atonement for the people, the sanctuary and the altar has been completed - via the atoning sacrifice (the blood of the goat of the sin offering" has done all the work -- as we both know.

So you simply resort to Leviticus 16:23-24 23 -- which of course is after vs 21 -- just as I noted above.

Of course that is not true at all Bob. You just ignored verse 10. It comes before verse 21

of course my statement is true -- vs 10 is not a case where the scapegoat is doing anything at all.

We can see that since we can read of course.

8 Aaron shall cast lots for the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for the scapegoat. 9 Then Aaron shall offer the goat on which the lot for the Lord fell, and make it a sin offering. 10 But the goat on which the lot for the scapegoat fell shall be presented alive before the Lord, to make atonement upon it, to send it into the wilderness as the scapegoat.

Vs 10 tells the priest about vs 21 where the scapegoat is actually going to be used for something - but nothing happens in vs 10 other than informing the priest about the vs 21 event. As we all know.

I am a little puzzled at this point - since you know we all can read that -- why are you so focused on trying to turn vs 10 into some action when vs 21 is the first time the scapegoat actually does something or is used for something.

Care to explain??

As to the verses about the burnt offering, that is also after the sin offering in the sanctuary, but is still about atonement:

Leviticus 16:23-24 23 “Then Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting and shall take off the linen garments that he put on when he went into the Holy Place and shall leave them there. 24 And he shall bathe his body in water in a holy place and put on his garments and come out and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people and make atonement for himself and for the people. (ESV)​

ahh yes - more focus on verses after vs 20 - which is the point where all the atonement for the sanctuary, the people, the altar etc has been completed with the "Atoning sacrifice" the "the goat of the sin offering" alone completes it.

We saw you do that previously as well.

So then... "noted".

I think you need to show an actual official statement by the denomination that supports your claim, which is ludicrous, that the scapegoat points also to the Christ-rejecting-wicked.

the scapegoat is not a sin offering as Leviticus points out - all sin offerings are slain.

So then "The goat of the sin offering" as noted prior to vs 21 - is a reference to the Lord's goat - not the scapegoat as we see in vs 15 - this is irrefutable. Apparently you keep ignoring this point - because you also know it is irrefutable.

============================

I can't find a Bible scholar with their salt that refuses to admit that the atoning sacrifice work of the actual sin offering - is fully complete by vs 20. I am guessing you simply speculate against that Bible observation without actually showing us any reason for it.

Meanwhile --

"The unanimous conclusion of Seventh-day Adventist scholars has been that the scapegoat, or Azazel, represented Satan. The many reasons for this conclusion are discussed rather extensively by the early SDA writers. ( See Uriah Smith, The Sanctuary [Battle Creek, Mich., 1877], p. 308; J. H. Waggoner, The Atonement [Oakland, Calif., 1884], p. 232.) Inasmuch as the atonement for the sanctuary was already completed before the confessed sins were transferred, in figure, to the scapegoat ( Lev. 16:20 , 21 ), they concluded that Christ must therefore have completed the work of atonement before Satan—the antitypical scapegoat—could suffer the fate reserved for him as set forth in Rev. 20:9 , 10 . The identification of the scapegoat also involved the meaning of the word “Azazel” ( ibid. , pp. 234–237). On this point many non-Adventist scholars, such as Jenks, Spencer, Charles Beecher, and Matthew Henry, were quoted extensively. It was pointed out that both the Hebrews and the early Christians considered Azazel as the name of the devil, or a demon, and that the Syriac Azzail paralleled this usage."