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

[tall73]

There is not one SDA fundamental belief that says the Satan is a sin offering paying the debt of sin for anyone but himself. (As all who are SDAs already know - but it may come as a surprise to those reading snip-quotes from your op).

We do not claim that Satan is a sin offering at all and most certainly that he makes no atoning sacrifice for anyone not the saints and not the wicked.


IN SDA doctrine those are rejected sins - which means it is those sins that someone asks for Christ's blood to cover - but are not covered by the atoning sacrifice of Christ because the person is not a true Christian and of course "God is not mocked". Matt 7 depicts the cases of those who say to Christ "Lord Lord" but in fact are not born-again Christians.

So then those sins are returned back out of that sanctuary event -- back to the wicked who then pay their own debt for their own sins. Not as a "sin offering" but as a guilty sinner. Since the judgment has identified who is a child of God and who is not.

Which means that even Satan's own guilt for his own sin of tempting someone who is in God's kingdom and not at all one of his own loyal subjects - is a greater debt owed by Satan than merely tempting one of his own followers that chose him over Christ.


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

All of which would come as somewhat of a surprise to anyone reading your snip results offering a partial presentation for the benefit of those who don't have the background material.

I prefer the full context.

Bob, why did you change your argument from rejected sins from those not actually saved, to satan's own sins, and the part he played in temptation?

You claim I am presenting something other than Adventist doctrine, when I quote from Adventist sources, including the website for the denomination, and Ellen White's writings.

But you have presented conflicting views, neither of which is in line with the actual statements. This is because you are deflecting from the actual statements.

 

[HARK!]

MOD HAT ON

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[tall73]

Satan bears the guilt of his own sin in causing someone else to sin.

Satan's own guilt would not be in the sanctuary, as it was the people of God who's sins were in the sanctuary.

His sin would already be on him, and wouldn't need to be placed there.

The Adventist website says as scapegoat satan will "bear the sins of the righteous. And it is why Ellen White says what he bears is:

-"the sins of the truly penitent"
-"the sins of His people"
-"the sins of all who come to Jesus"
-"the sins of the redeemed host"

 

[tall73]

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.

Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1

m.egwwritings.org

In yet another statement Ellen White does not say that satan will have to bear just his own sin in causing others to sin, as Bob claims. In fact, his plan, per Ellen White, was to tempt even more in order to reduce his burden of suffering! Because, according to Ellen White, He had to bear the sins of all those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ and overcome.

I will add this statement to the OP as well, and update our list of statements Bob needs to clarify:

-"the sins of the truly penitent"
-"the sins of His people"
-"the sins of all who come to Jesus"
-"the sins of the redeemed host"
- "the sins of those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ, and overcome"

 

[The Liturgist]

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.

Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1

m.egwwritings.org

In yet another statement Ellen White does not say that satan will have to bear just his own sin in causing others to sin, as Bob claims. In fact, his plan, per Ellen White, was to tempt even more in order to reduce his burden of suffering! Because, according to Ellen White, He had to bear the sins of all those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ and overcome.

I will add this statement to the OP as well, and update our list of statements Bob needs to clarify:

-"the sins of the truly penitent"
-"the sins of His people"
-"the sins of all who come to Jesus"
-"the sins of the redeemed host"
- "the sins of those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ, and overcome"

In the phrase “the sins of His people”, does that refer to God’s people?

 

[tall73]

In the phrase “the sins of His people”, does that refer to God’s people?

Yes, all the quotes are listed in the OP, but that one refers to:


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.

 

[BobRyan]

Bob, why did you change your argument from rejected sins from those not actually saved, to satan's own sins, and the part he played in temptation?

Both are in play -- for those who are familiar with the Investigative Judgment.

The "added" condemnation applicable to Satan for his "added guilt" in tempting people not of his own kingdom is applicable at that time and is not "atoning" for anyone.

The returned debt for those who made claims to the blood of Christ but turned out not to be saved at the end of that process. so that is returned to them.

So then following the details - it is both. You may have known this at one time in your life

You claim I am presenting something other than Adventist doctrine

I find that to be the case a lot.

, when I quote from Adventist sources

part of the truth... not has helpful as the whole truth

But you have presented conflicting views, neither of which is in line with the actual statements.

not true

This is because you are deflecting from the actual statements.

false accusation - noted

 

[BobRyan]

In the phrase “the sins of His people”, does that refer to God’s people?

It is debt he owes for tempting God's people to sin - those deemed not to be his own followers.

You might find this to be helpful

There is not one SDA fundamental belief that says the Satan is a sin offering paying the debt of sin for anyone but himself.

We do not claim that Satan is a sin offering at all and most certainly that he makes no atoning sacrifice for anyone not the saints and not the wicked.

IN SDA doctrine those are rejected sins - which means it is those sins that someone asks for Christ's blood to cover - but are not covered by the atoning sacrifice of Christ because the person is not a true Christian and of course "God is not mocked". Matt 7 depicts the cases of those who say to Christ "Lord Lord" but in fact are not born-again Christians.

So then those sins are returned back out of that sanctuary event -- back to the wicked who then pay their own debt for their own sins. Not as a "sin offering" but as a guilty sinner. Since the judgment has identified who is a child of God and who is not.

Which means that even Satan's own guilt for his own sin of tempting someone who is in God's kingdom and not at all one of his own loyal subjects - is a greater debt owed by Satan than merely tempting one of his own followers that chose him over Christ.

 

[BobRyan]

Satan's own guilt would not be in the sanctuary,

The sanctuary contains the books of record - as those who actually study this topic in the Ellen White sources you seem to want people here to be studying. The record of sin and guilt , and debt owed is determined from those books as Rev 20 states clearly.

details matter.

 

[tall73]

tall73 said:
Bob, why did you change your argument from rejected sins from those not actually saved, to satan's own sins, and the part he played in temptation?

Both are in play -- for those who are familiar with the Investigative Judgment.

The "added" condemnation applicable to Satan for his "added guilt" in tempting people not of his own kingdom is applicable at that time and is not "atoning" for anyone.

The Bible text says atonement is made over the scapegoat Bob.

Leviticus 16:10 but the goat on which the lot fell for azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.

So by indicating that satan is the scapegoat youa are saying atonement is made over satan.

And Ellen White also indicates:

Patriarchs and Prophets

"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."

Moreover, it was not just for his "added guilt" in tempting. You still have not explained the relevant statements, or given the context you said would explain them, despite me linking to them.

Early Writings (numbers added by me for illustration purposes)

Satan bore not only the weight and punishment of (1)his own sins, but also of (2)the sins of the redeemed host, which had been placed upon him; and he must also suffer for (3)the ruin of souls which he had caused.

1. His own sin
2. the sins of the redeemed host
3. the ruin of souls which he caused

So His own sin of temptation, his own sin of working to the ruin of souls, is added to by "the sins of the redeemed host." You indicated satan did not bear that penalty which Jesus already bore, but that is precisely what is said there.

And this is also made clear in 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.

Rather than hold off tempting because it would increase his burden of guilt, under your proposed rubric, he instead doubles down, becuse if he can cause them to be lost them he won't have to bear their guilt anymore as those who are "redeemed by the blood of Christ, and overcame". If they do overcome then their sin is rolled back on him. If they don't overcome, they bear their own sin.

Which also answers your second part:

The returned debt for those who made claims to the blood of Christ but turned out not to be saved at the end of that process. so that is returned to them.

It is not returned to them by being placed on satan. They bear their own sin and are cut off for it, as those who do not avail themselve of the atonement made by the High Priest are cut off.


tall73 said:
You claim I am presenting something other than Adventist doctrine, when I quoted from Adventist sources, including the website for the denomination, and Ellen White's writings.

part of the truth... not has helpful as the whole truth

You have not even bothered to do what you said and go through and show how each is out of context, though I provided the links to the sources for you.

Which is fine, the statements stand, because they say what they say. And your claim of taking them out of context has in no way been demonstrated. In fact, we find a consistency across all the statements.

Per the various statements of Ellen White satan will bear:

-"the sins of the truly penitent"
-"the sins of His people"
-"the sins of all who come to Jesus"
-"the sins of the redeemed host"
-"the sins of those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ, and overcome"

And per the official website of the denomination satan will bear:

-"the sins of the righteous"

I am confident that people can read the statements for themselves. And they may freely read the entire context, linked to in this thread. And apparently the denomination is confident that people can understand Ellen White's writings, because they urge people to gift her writings regularly.

If you won't say how the statements are different than what they plainly say, I will continue to point out what they plainly say. And of course, I have read the context. And I know it doesn't change what they say.

So the reader must ask, how did I make up this Adventist teaching that is published on the denomination website?

How did I make up this Adventist teaching and plant it on the White Estate servers in Ellen White's writings?

Of course, the answer is obvious. It is what Adventists teach. I have simply posted the comments, and linked to the context of each statement.


tall73 said:
satan's own guilt would not be in the sanctuary

The sanctuary contains the books of record - as those who actually study this topic in the Ellen White sources you seem to want people here to be studying. The record of sin and guilt , and debt owed is determined from those books as Rev 20 states clearly.

details matter.

Details matter, and you are posting some very unsubstatiated "details."

satan is already in the lake of fire before the judgment in Revelation 20 is conducted from the books, per Rev. 20:

10 The devil, who deceived them, was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone where the beast and the false prophet are. And they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. 11 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before [God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. 14 Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. 15 And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.

But of course, that is not the judgment you are looking for anyway in the Adventist scheme. If satan has his own sins placed on him from the sanctuary then they have to be there for the IJ. And that is ruled out by the description of the IJ.

Great Controversy, Chapter 28:

In the typical service only those who had come before God with confession and repentance, and whose sins, through the blood of the sin offering, were transferred to the sanctuary, had a part in the service of the Day of Atonement. So in the great day of final atonement and investigative judgment the only cases considered are those of the professed people of God. The judgment of the wicked is a distinct and separate work, and takes place at a later period.

So Bob, is it your proposal that satan:

a. is a professed follower of God?
b. came before God with confession and repentance, through the blood of Christ?

No, in fact, satan gets judged before.

John 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out.

Revelation 12:7 And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, 8 but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them in heaven any longer. 9 So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. 10 Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, “Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down. 11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death. 12 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time.”

satan already knew his time was short.

You really should have read the context of the various statements. Because Spiritual Gifts Volume 1 acknowledges this right before saying that he would redouble his efforts to tempt so that he wouldn't have to bear the sins of so many "of those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ, and overcome".

Spiritual Gifts Volume 1

Satan did not then exult as he had done. He had hoped that he could break up the plan of salvation; but it was laid too deep. And now by Jesus’ death, he knew that he must finally die, and his kingdom be taken away and given to Jesus. He held a council with his angels. He had prevailed nothing against the Son of God, and now they must increase their efforts, and with their cunning and power turn to Jesus’ followers.

satan was already cast out. He already knew he had lost.

And of course, Ellen White doesn't have him pleading his own case in the Most Holy place. She has him in Early Writings answering prayers in the holy place for deceived Christians, and breathing out an unholy power on them, and in Great Controversy has him at the same time accusing saints in the most holy place at the investigative judgment that they hadn't thought up yet when she had him in the holy place answering prayers at the same time.

Now Bob, you still haven't addressed a number of points:

-you have not explained how satan can be interchangeable with Jesus, when lots were cast to see whether satan or Jesus would redeem sinners by blood, or explained how satan can be represented by an unblemeshed sacrificial animal. The two goats were unblemished sacrificial animals. And satan cannot be represented by such.

-the Scriptures say atonement is made on the scapegoat. But you have satan as the scapegoat. You are including satan in a work of atonement.

-You haven't explained how satan is the one who removes our sins from us when the Scriptures say Jesus does:

-You have not explained how satan represents the scapegoat when the scapegoat didn't die, but satan does. Jesus of course did act both as a sin offering for blood atonement AND continue to live to remove our sins from us.

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand. 11 He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, For He shall bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,And He shall divide the spoil with the strong, Because He poured out His soul unto death, And He was numbered with the transgressors, And He bore the sin of many,And made intercession for the transgressors.

He is the one who removes our sins:

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.

If @The Liturgist wishes he may review both responses.

 

[BobRyan]

These details ... remain

You did not in fact find any statement from scripture or from SDA fundamental beliefs or from Ellen White saying that
1. Satan is a sin offering
2. Satan provides an atoning sacrifice for sin
3. The scapegoat (once designated, selected in Lev 16) is "the sin offering"
4. The scapegoat is slain as an offering for sin.

A good example in Lev 16 where the phrase "the sin offering" does NOT refer to the scapegoat at all - once they are selected/chosen

Lev 16:
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

ONLY the goat that is FOR THE LORD is then a sin offering, only IT is slain for sin. The other goat - the scapegoat is presented ALIVE by contrast. And as Heb 9 points out "without the shedding of blood there is NO FORGIVENESS of sin" -- the scapegoat is not for "forgiveness" only the sin offering provides payment for penalty of sin.

Obviously.


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.

only the sin offerig is slain only it is said to be "for the people" and "for the Lord"

The problem with your various threads of speculations -- is in snip quotes and lack of attention to detail

My claim is exactly as stated - SDAs have NO STATEMENTs in our fundamental beliefs or in Ellen White's statements nor in the Bible saying
1. The scapegoat is a sin offering
2. The scapegoat is paying the debt of sin on behalf of someone else
3. Satan pays the debt of sin on behalf of someone else; instead of Christ OR in addition to Christ

Period.

"Now the event takes place foreshadowed in the last solemn service of the Day of Atonement. When the ministration in the holy of holies had been completed, and the sins of Israel had been removed from the sanctuary by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, then the scapegoat was presented alive before the Lord; and in the presence of the congregation the high priest 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. In like manner, when the work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary has been completed, then in the presence of God and heavenly angels and the hosts of the redeemed the sins of God’s people will be placed upon Satan; he 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." {GC 658.1}​

Satan bears the guilt of his own sin in causing someone else to sin.

Ellen White (because Tall loves to quote snips from her without the full context which can lead to misrepresentation)

"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​

This provides the dead-end to your various suggestions

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

As for your method of losing sight of these clear statements and then trying to use extreme inference and inuendo with other statements - as I said before - your issue is with your lack of attention to detail. Statements like the above place a "limit" to how much extreme inference and inuendo you can insert into the various cherry picked snips you find at times.

 

[tall73]

These details ... remain

Those details remain rebutted, since you just copied your post 15, which was responded to in post 18.

I will go ahead and reproduce my post rebutting these assertion. And then you have a number of other points following that you have not addressed.

A good example in Lev 16 where the phrase "the sin offering" does NOT refer to the scapegoat at all - once they are selected/chosen

Lev 16:
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

First you did not post verse 5, and have not explained how it could ever apply to satan:

Leviticus 16:5 And he shall take from the congregation of the people of Israel two male goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering.

satan could not be represented by an unblemished sacrificial animal. Please explain how satan is symbolized by the same symbol as Jesus. Jesus is sinless, and satan is full of sin.

Next, regarding verse 7-10

7 Then he shall take the two goats and set them before the Lord at the entrance of the tent of meeting. 8 And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel.

No lots were cast between the Son of God and satan to determine who would be the Lord's goat. Explain how satan could possibly be interchangeable with the Son of God.

9 And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord and use it as a sin offering, 10 but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel.

One is now specifically designated as a sin offering for blood atonement. However, the other, is also said to have atonement made over it in vs. 10. And as we will see from the explanation in verses 20-22, this is atonement for the sins of the people, removing the sins entirely from the people:

Leviticus 16:21 And Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the live goat, and confess over it all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins. And he shall put them on the head of the goat and send it away into the wilderness by the hand of a man who is in readiness. 22 The goat shall bear all their iniquities on itself to a remote area, and he shall let the goat go free in the wilderness.

The live goat bears all the iniquities away. That is the work of God, not satan.

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

ONLY the goat that is FOR THE LORD is then a sin offering, only IT is slain for sin. The other goat - the scapegoat is presented ALIVE by contrast. And as Heb 9 points out "without the shedding of blood there is NO FORGIVENESS of sin" -- the scapegoat is not for "forgiveness" only the sin offering provides payment for penalty of sin.

There was shedding of blood because two identical animals represent two aspects of the atonement process. One animal could not both die and be alive to remove sins. But Jesus could, because though his life was an offering for sin he shall prolong His days. He is raised. He sees the labor of His sould, and He justifies many, for He shall bear their iniquities.

Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand.
11 He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, For He shall bear their iniquities.

only the sin offerig is slain only it is said to be "for the people" and "for the Lord"

The live goat is for removal, and the live goat has atonement made over it. And that atonement involves all the sins of the Israelites, as shown.

Now turning to your list of claims you indicate are not in the statements, you had to word this carefully to avoid the actual issues, and substitute other issues.

The problem with your various threads of speculations -- is in snip quotes and lack of attention to detail
My claim is exactly as stated - SDAs have NO STATEMENTs in our fundamental beliefs or in Ellen White's statements nor in the Bible saying
1. The scapegoat is a sin offering

You give no answer at all as to how satan can be represented by an unblemished sacrificial animal interchangeable with Christ. He cannot be. And the type specifies that. And your answer as to how the live goat has atonement made over it changes the statements, as we will see below.

2. The scapegoat is paying the debt of sin on behalf of someone else
3. Satan pays the debt of sin on behalf of someone else instead of Christ OR in addition to Christ

Ellen White says precisely that satan bears not only the punishment of his own sins, but also the sins of the redeemed host which had been placed on him.

Early Writings:

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.

Now Bob, you say I am taking this statement out of context. I provided a link to all the context. But it still says what it does. She says he must bear the punishment of the sins of the redeemed host.

Now you do go through only one of the other statements provided to show context. So let's look at that with the empahsis Bob applied:


Now the event takes place foreshadowed in the last solemn service of the Day of Atonement. When the ministration in the holy of holies had been completed, and the sins of Israel had been removed from the sanctuary by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, then the scapegoat was presented alive before the Lord; and in the presence of the congregation the high priest 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.

Tall73 commentary: Note, she says all the sins of the people are placed on the goat, referring to the text which also says that.

In like manner, when the work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary has been completed, then in the presence of God and heavenly angels and the hosts of the redeemed the sins of God’s people will be placed upon Satan;

Tall73 commentary: She says the sins of God's people will be placed on satan.


he 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. {GC 658.1}

Tall73 commentary: She indicates he is declared guilty of all the evil he caused them to commit.

Now Bob conclues the following from this:

Satan bears the guilt of his own sin in causing someone else to sin.

She stated the sins of all the people will be put upon him in this statement.

And you only gave the context for one statement because you wanted to highlight the aspect of temptation in his guilt. But she says all the sins are placed upon him. Meanwhile you avoided the other statements which spell out more clearly what he is suffering for.

Also from the Great Controversy:

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.

She indicates he must pay the final penalty for the sins of God's people.

And in Early Writings she specifically lists three things he bears the punishment for:

Satan bore not only the weight and punishment of (1)his own sins, but also of (2)the sins of the redeemed host, which had been placed upon him; and he must also suffer for (3)the ruin of souls which he had caused.

1. His own sin
2. the sins of the redeemed host
3. the ruin of souls which he caused

Temptation and ruin of souls is separately listed from the sins of the redeemed host which were placed upon him, and for which he also bears punishment.

In the Bible text the sins are all of the sins of the people in Leviticus 16. And satan did not make you commit every sin you have committed.

James 1:14 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. 15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.

Moreover, you previoulsy claimed that what was put on the goat was "rejected" sins for those who Jesus did not atone for. Now you have claimed what was put on him to be only his own guilt, for tempting. You changed the argument. And the reason is because one deflection from what she actually says is as good as another, but if you are going to try to go by her actual context, then there is nothing about "rejected" sins being involved.

Ellen White (because Tall loves to quote snips from her without the full context which can lead to misrepresentation)

There was no misrepresentaton, and you did not go back and put context for the quotes you wished to avoid, even though the full source was linked to in a post for folks to read.

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

This provides the dead-end to your various suggestions

Not at all. It shows a dead-end to relying on Ellen White when she contradicts herself on such an important issue as the atonement.

Leviticus 16:10 says that the live goat has atonement made over it. She says that live goat is satan.

But then she says only Jesus can atone for sin. I certainly agree with her that only Jesus can atone for sin. And that is why satan cannot be represented by an unblemished sacrificial animal, and cannot be involved in the atonement. He does not remove our sins from us. He does not bear th sins of the righteous. But Ellen White says he bears:

-"the sins of the truly penitent"
-"the sins of His people"
-"the sins of all who come to Jesus"
-"the sins of the redeemed host"

in the various quotes. And you did not in fact go back and show from the context how these meant the opposite.

 

[tall73]

Now Bob, you still haven't addressed a number of points:


-you have not explained how satan can be interchangeable with Jesus, when lots were cast to see whether satan or Jesus would redeem sinners by blood, or explained how satan can be represented by an unblemeshed sacrificial animal. The two goats were unblemished sacrificial animals. And satan cannot be represented by such.
-the Scriptures say atonement is made on the scapegoat. But you have satan as the scapegoat. You are including satan in a work of atonement.
-You haven't explained how satan is the one who removes our sins from us when the Scriptures say Jesus does:
-You have not explained how satan represents the scapegoat when the scapegoat didn't die, but satan does. Jesus of course did act both as a sin offering for blood atonement AND continue to live to remove our sins from us.
Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand. 11 He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, For He shall bear their iniquities. 12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,And He shall divide the spoil with the strong, Because He poured out His soul unto death, And He was numbered with the transgressors, And He bore the sin of many,And made intercession for the transgressors.
He is the one who removes our sins:
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.

 

[tall73]

And here is a recap of the various statements Bob is ignoring:

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!"

1LtMs, Ms 15, 1850, par. 8

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.

 

[BobRyan]

These details ... remain

You did not in fact find any statement from scripture or from SDA fundamental beliefs or from Ellen White saying that
1. Satan is a sin offering
2. Satan provides an atoning sacrifice for sin
3. The scapegoat (once designated, selected in Lev 16) is "the sin offering"
4. The scapegoat is slain as an offering for sin.

A good example in Lev 16 where the phrase "the sin offering" does NOT refer to the scapegoat at all - once they are selected/chosen

Lev 16:
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

ONLY the goat that is FOR THE LORD is then a sin offering, only IT is slain for sin. The other goat - the scapegoat is presented ALIVE by contrast. And as Heb 9 points out "without the shedding of blood there is NO FORGIVENESS of sin" -- the scapegoat is not for "forgiveness" only the sin offering provides payment for penalty of sin.

Obviously.


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.

only the sin offerig is slain only it is said to be "for the people" and "for the Lord"

The problem with your various threads of speculations -- is in snip quotes and lack of attention to detail

My claim is exactly as stated - SDAs have NO STATEMENTs in our fundamental beliefs or in Ellen White's statements nor in the Bible saying
1. The scapegoat is a sin offering
2. The scapegoat is paying the debt of sin on behalf of someone else
3. Satan pays the debt of sin on behalf of someone else; instead of Christ OR in addition to Christ

Period.

"Now the event takes place foreshadowed in the last solemn service of the Day of Atonement. When the ministration in the holy of holies had been completed, and the sins of Israel had been removed from the sanctuary by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, then the scapegoat was presented alive before the Lord; and in the presence of the congregation the high priest 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. In like manner, when the work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary has been completed, then in the presence of God and heavenly angels and the hosts of the redeemed the sins of God’s people will be placed upon Satan; he 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." {GC 658.1}​

Satan bears the guilt of his own sin in causing someone else to sin.



Ellen White (because Tall loves to quote snips from her without the full context which can lead to misrepresentation)

"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​

This provides the dead-end to your various suggestions

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

As for your method of losing sight of these clear statements and then trying to use extreme inference and inuendo with other statements - as I said before - your issue is with your lack of attention to detail. Statements like the above place a "limit" to how much extreme inference and inuendo you can insert into the various cherry picked snips you find at times.

You did not in fact find any statement from scripture or from SDA fundamental beliefs or from Ellen White saying that
1. Satan is a sin offering
2. Satan provides an atoning sacrifice for sin
3. The scapegoat (once designated, selected in Lev 16) is "the sin offering"
4. The scapegoat is slain as an offering for sin.

A good example in Lev 16 where the phrase "the sin offering" does NOT refer to the scapegoat at all - once they are selected/chosen

Lev 16:
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

ONLY the goat that is FOR THE LORD is then a sin offering, only IT is slain for sin. The other goat - the scapegoat is presented ALIVE by contrast. And as Heb 9 points out "without the shedding of blood there is NO FORGIVENESS of sin" -- the scapegoat is not for "forgiveness" only the sin offering provides payment for penalty of sin.

Obviously.


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.

only the sin offerig is slain only it is said to be "for the people" and "for the Lord"

The problem with your various threads of speculations -- is in snip quotes and lack of attention to detail

My claim is exactly as stated - SDAs have NO STATEMENTs in our fundamental beliefs or in Ellen White's statements nor in the Bible saying
1. The scapegoat is a sin offering
2. The scapegoat is paying the debt of sin on behalf of someone else
3. Satan pays the debt of sin on behalf of someone else; instead of Christ OR in addition to Christ

Period.

"Now the event takes place foreshadowed in the last solemn service of the Day of Atonement. When the ministration in the holy of holies had been completed, and the sins of Israel had been removed from the sanctuary by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, then the scapegoat was presented alive before the Lord; and in the presence of the congregation the high priest 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. In like manner, when the work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary has been completed, then in the presence of God and heavenly angels and the hosts of the redeemed the sins of God’s people will be placed upon Satan; he 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." {GC 658.1}

Satan bears the guilt of his own sin in causing someone else to sin.



Ellen White (because Tall loves to quote snips from her without the full context which can lead to misrepresentation)

"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

This provides the dead-end to your various suggestions

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

As for your method of losing sight of these clear statements and then trying to use extreme inference and inuendo with other statements - as I said before - your issue is with your lack of attention to detail. As for your method of losing sight of these clear statements and then trying to use extreme inference and inuendo with other statements - as I said before - your issue is with your lack of attention to detail. Statements like the above place a "limit" to how much extreme inference and inuendo you can insert into the various cherry picked snips you find at times.

Those details remain rebutted,

Just not in real life. In real life you found nothing saying that -
1. Satan is a sin offering
2. Satan provides an atoning sacrifice for sin
3. The scapegoat (once designated, selected in Lev 16) is "the sin offering"
4. The scapegoat is slain as an offering for sin.

YET you make those very false accusations - while having nothing!

since you just copied your post 15

Which is the result of you failing to refute it and then claiming "Success" as if we just would not "notice"

, which was responded to in post 18.

First you did not post verse 5

Vs 5 does not help you so how is that a problem with anything I said above.

Leviticus 16:5 And he shall take from the congregation of the people of Israel two male goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering.

Sadly the "detail" you skimmed over - and that I DID include is that once the scapegoat is identified it is NEVER called "the sin offering" . And this is so true in fact that in vs 15 the "THE SIN OFFERING" is specific because the Scapegoat is NOT considered as a sin offering by vs 15.

15 “Then he shall slaughter the goat of the sin offering, which is for the people, and bring its blood inside the veil

You skim over details then imagine that we are simply "not supposed to notice"???!!

That is the sign of an incredibly weak argument that effectively "rebutts nothing". How is this even a little confusing for you??

9 And Aaron shall present the goat on which the lot fell for the Lord and use it as a sin offering,

Exactly! It is a sin offering once selected and so much so that in vs 15 we have 'THE goat of THE Sin offering" -- as a reference to the Lord's goat ALONE. And as Lev informs us ALL SIN OFFERINGS are SLAIN.

My point is that your responses only work for those ignoring very obvious details. So when you bring this to me - it simply does not work. How is this even a little bit confusing??

 

[BobRyan]

Now Bob, you still haven't addressed a number of points:


-you have not explained how satan can be interchangeable with Jesus,

1. I never claimed he was --
2. you never show a text saying that he is.

Your arguments keep resting on "ignoring details and hoping we simply will not notice".

when lots were cast to see whether satan or Jesus would redeem sinners by blood,

There is no scapegoat and no Lord's goat UNTIL AFTER The lots are cast. Another DETAIL you ignore to make that story work. But how in the world do you expect someone who pays attention to the details to NOT NOTICE that weak point in your argument??

That makes no sense to me.

Heb 9 "without the shedding of blood there is NO FORGIVENESS of sins" -- only the Lord's goat in Lev 16 is a SIN offering and ALL Sin offerings are slain as scripture dictates. (more details to be "ignored"??)

This is not even a little bit confusing.

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".

4. Lev 17 - 6 The priest shall sprinkle the blood on the altar of the Lord at the doorway of the tent of meeting, and offer up the fat in smoke as a soothing aroma to the Lord. 7 And they shall no longer offer their sacrifices to the goat demons



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.​

The punishment of the wicked is most definitely NOT a sin offering, not a substitutionary atonement that we see in the case of the sin offering of Lev 16:15 “Then he shall slaughter the goat of the sin offering," -- ALL sin offerings in Lev are slain.

Of course the Day of Atonement symbols in Lev 16 are "symbols" used to illustrate some aspect of the solution to sin - we don't' take them so far as to argue that both goats are born to animals as a result of procreation and that this somehow says something about Christ or the devil -- which it does not.

 

[tall73]

Vs 5 does not help you so how is that a problem with anything I said above.

Leviticus 16:5 And he shall take from the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats as a sin offering, and one ram as a burnt offering.​

It does indeed cause a problem for you. Because both goats have to be the type of animal used in a sin offering, which is clean, unblemished. And satan is not unblemished. You won't address it, and just keep skipping over it. Neither of these unblemished animals can represent satan.

Jesus is the one who is unblemished. And the two goats represent aspects of His work.

Sadly the "detail" you skimmed over - and that I DID include is that once the scapegoat is identified it is NEVER called "the sin offering".

I did not skip over it. 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.

tall73 said:
-you have not explained how satan can be interchangeable with Jesus,

1. I never claimed he was --
2. you never show a text saying that he is.

The two animals are both sacrificial unblemished animals. Lots are cast to show which goat will fill which role.

Both are aspects of the work of Christ, providing atoning blood through death, and removing the sins from the people. But satan is not capable of either.

This is not even a little bit confusing.

What is not even a little confusing is that you won't explain how satan is represented by an unblemished animal.

Also, you have not addressed the other list of points either:

The two goats were unblemished sacrificial animals. And satan cannot be represented by such.
-the Scriptures say atonement is made on the scapegoat. But you have satan as the scapegoat. You are including satan in a work of atonement.
-You haven't explained how satan is the one who removes our sins from us when the Scriptures say Jesus does:
-You have not explained how satan represents the scapegoat when the scapegoat didn't die, but satan does. Jesus of course did act both as a sin offering for blood atonement AND continue to live to remove our sins from us.

 

[BobRyan]

Your arguments keep resting on "ignoring details and hoping we simply will not notice".

There is no scapegoat and no Lord's goat UNTIL AFTER The lots are cast. Another DETAIL you ignore to make that story work. But how in the world do you expect someone who pays attention to the details to NOT NOTICE that weak point in your argument??

That makes no sense to me.

Heb 9 "without the shedding of blood there is NO FORGIVENESS of sins" -- only the Lord's goat in Lev 16 is a SIN offering and ALL Sin offerings are slain as scripture dictates. (more details to be "ignored"??)

This is not even a little bit confusing.

Leviticus 16:5 And he shall take from the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats as a sin offering, and one ram as a burnt offering.​

It does indeed cause a problem for you. Because both goats have to be the type of animal used in a sin offering, which is clean,

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 punishment of the wicked is most definitely NOT a sin offering, not a substitutionary atonement that we see in the case of the sin offering of Lev 16:15 “Then he shall slaughter the goat of the sin offering," -- ALL sin offerings in Lev are slain. The scapegoat is NOT.

Of course the Day of Atonement symbols in Lev 16 are "symbols" used to illustrate some aspect of the solution to sin - we don't' take them so far as to argue that both goats are born to animals as a result of procreation and that this somehow says something about Christ or the devil -- which it does not.

 

[tall73]

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.

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.

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.

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

Indeed, and the means for that was Jesus.

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.

All sin is removed by Christ, not by satan. satan is punished for his own sins. Sinners are punished for their sins. Christ paid for the sins of His own people, making blood atonement, then removes all sin from His people.

The punishment of the wicked is most definitely NOT a sin offering, not a substitutionary atonement that we see in the case of the sin offering of Lev 16:15 “Then he shall slaughter the goat of the sin offering," -- ALL sin offerings in Lev are slain.

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.

Of course the Day of Atonement symbols in Lev 16 are "symbols" used to illustrate some aspect of the solution to sin - we don't' take them so far as to argue that both goats are born to animals as a result of procreation and that this somehow says something about Christ or the devil -- which it does not.

And of course, an unblemished animal does not point to satan, but to Christ. The unblemished animal had the sins of the people place on it. That is not satan's history. satan caused sin. He was not unblemished, then had the sins of others placed on him.

The scapegoat represents part of the atonement of Christ.

 

[BobRyan]

These details ... remain


You did not in fact find any statement from scripture or from SDA fundamental beliefs or from Ellen White saying that
1. Satan is a sin offering
2. Satan provides an atoning sacrifice for sin
3. The scapegoat (once designated, selected in Lev 16) is "the sin offering"
4. The scapegoat is slain as an offering for sin.

Ok so that is easy and obvious

A good example in Lev 16 where the phrase "the sin offering" does NOT refer to the scapegoat at all - once they are selected/chosen

Lev 16:
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

ONLY the goat that is FOR THE LORD is then a sin offering, only IT is slain for sin.

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.

Not "one OF the Sin offering goats" but rather 'THE goat of the sin offering" -- which is the case as soon as the distinction is made to identify the scapegoat vs "THE sin Offering" as vs 15 clearly requires

The other goat - the scapegoat is presented ALIVE by contrast. And as Heb 9 points out "without the shedding of blood there is NO FORGIVENESS of sin" -- the scapegoat is not for "forgiveness" only the sin offering provides payment for penalty of sin.

Obviously.


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.

only the sin offerig is slain only it is said to be "for the people" and "for the Lord"

My claim is exactly as stated - SDAs have NO STATEMENTs in our fundamental beliefs or in Ellen White's statements nor in the Bible saying
1. The scapegoat is a sin offering
2. The scapegoat is paying the debt of sin on behalf of someone else
3. Satan pays the debt of sin on behalf of someone else; instead of Christ OR in addition to Christ

Period.

"Now the event takes place foreshadowed in the last solemn service of the Day of Atonement. When the ministration in the holy of holies had been completed, and the sins of Israel had been removed from the sanctuary by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, then the scapegoat was presented alive before the Lord; and in the presence of the congregation the high priest 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. {GC 658.1}

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.​

The punishment of the wicked is most definitely NOT a sin offering, not a substitutionary atonement that we see in the case of the sin offering of Lev 16:15 “Then he shall slaughter the goat of the sin offering," -- ALL sin offerings in Lev are slain.

Of course the Day of Atonement symbols in Lev 16 are "symbols" used to illustrate some aspect of the solution to sin - we don't' take them so far as to argue that both goats are born to animals as a result of procreation and that this somehow says something about Christ or the devil -- which it does not.

"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.

In real life you found nothing saying that -
1. Satan is a sin offering
2. Satan provides an atoning sacrifice for sin
3. The scapegoat (once designated, selected in Lev 16) is "the sin offering"
4. The scapegoat is slain as an offering for sin.

YET you make those very false accusations - while having nothing!