Is Satan really the SCAPEGOAT? 

Thanks, you too!

@@dukeofkisii blessings to you. That's wonderful.

Thanks bro.

Fact

The Adventist are not stupid. They have no choice but to defend this doctrine because Ellen white said it was so...that's what makes them so cult like

ru-vid.comyXaTUWoXY-I?si=gSZWYCjsqPKxeAjq

Thank you

Blessings big brother. Their doctrines are so easily dismantled. They don't think these things through at all. All they want to do is argue for weeks on end trying to prove this false, egregious doctrine to be true.

@@ReverendThunder Amen and let's keep up exposing this false religion,, because that is exactly what we are all supposed to do: Eph 5:11 ESV Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

@@AcademyApologia Yes!! May God keep blessing our efforts and deliver His sheep.

Cant believe you still around 😂

But funny enough, she contradicted herself about the scapegoat too.

Blessings to you. I'm happy this short video helped. If you need much thorough breakdown and refutations of SDA doctrines and arguments, check out my books on Amazon "Adventism Made Easy" or Hiding In Plain Sight: The False Doctrines of Seventh-day Adventism Vol. 1-3.

@@ReverendThunder thank you. i actually just bought all 3 today. Very excited to read them ive heard many good things about the books you wrote.

@@happygolucky5855 wonderful. God bless you.

Amen. God bless you.

Truth

@@charnelallan7159 I did. I watched it in entirety. The usual drivel that reveals the confusing, any-convenient-position-holds nature of Adventism. His pitiful response video will not hinder the exposure of Adventism at all. In fact, it might even backfire on them, as they always do.

Good point. There's so many to unravel about the scapegoat that prove how wrong and blasphemous SDAs are on the issue.

Your reasoning is very faulty as it would logically mean that both goats, even the one representing Jesus in your view, would be sinful (which is horrendous) to begin with. Another point that shows the absurdity of your argument is to assume that the animals had moral and internal corruption. When we examine the levitical system, we see clearly that the PRIEST had to examine the EXTERNAL condition of BOTH goats to determine their fitness for the service. And not just those goats but ANY animal involved in the sanctuary services. This rubbishes your hodgepodge prooftexts and indiscriminate homogenisation of other unrelated things in order to make Satan your scapegoat and sin-bearer. Also, Colossians 2:16-17 rubbishes every argument you'll have created to assign parts of the Day of Atonement to Satan as your sin-atoner. The passage is indubitably clear that "festivals, new moons, and Sabbaths" are a shadow of Christ. Not Christ AND Satan. The Day of Atonement was A FESTIVAL. I'll stick with Scripture any day than to subscribe to your blasphemous, unscriptural meanderings in order to support a false prophet and false doctrine.

By the way, it's totally irrelevant when you become aware of me. I don't expect everyone in the world of Adventism to be cognizant of my existence.

@@ReverendThunder I went out of my way to be respectful to you in my initial response and will continue to do so here. I politely ask that you respond in kind. By the way, when I stated that I had never heard of you until recently, it was as a precursor to my next statement which, in summary, was that I could make no judgment as to you sincerity or purpose and would, therefore, make no assumptions. That being said, I will attempt to address your response point by point. First, I ask that you point out where in my last statement you perceive that I stated that both or either goat was sinful. I have reread my last comment and I don't see such a statement or insinuation anywhere, but would like to understand which statement led you to surmise that. Either way, let me now clarify. Can a goat be sinful? Can a goat be righteous for that matter? I think we would both clearly answer 'no' to those questions. Therefore, you would logically understand that I neither stated nor implied that idea in my last response. You highlighted the word EXTERNAL in your last response and, though I did not capitalize it as you did, I believe this clearly was the point of my statement as well. The goats were indistinguishable from one another externally. And, though goats have no character to exalt or condemn, they did represent something, or someone. And the Person the Lord's goat represented is righteous while the person the scapegoat represents is not. One was chosen by God to die in the place of the people and that blood would be for the cleansing of the sanctuary. This is an important point which helps distinguish the purpose of the Lord's goat from that of the scapegoat. The blood of the Lord's goat was taken into the Most Holy Place for the purpose of cleansing and the people were to be "afflicting their souls" (confessing their sins) while the High Priest was doing this work. When the High Priest came out of the Most Holy Place after having completed the cleansing ritual, the sins that, up until the day of atonement had been 'transferred' (for lack of a better word) to the sanctuary through confession and sacrifice were now transferred to the High Priest. He then transfers them to the scapegoat who is taken to the the wilderness, or, in other words, is cast out of the camp. This is the same fate of those who did not 'afflict their souls', or confess and forsake sin, during the atonement ceremony; according to Leviticus 23, they too were cast out. To be separated from God and His people was representative of death, the final and real death that satan and those who are lost will experience in the final judgment. Though you call them 'hodgepodge prooftexts', I gave the biblical examples I gave in my last response to show that satan often palms off his deceptions as something pure and righteous, to appear righteous and deceive many. Like Absalom pretending to have the best interests of the people at heart when, in actuality, he was harboring pride and murderous intent in his heart. Satan likewise presents himself and his ideas as righteous when, in his heart, there is only murder and hatred. This deception is intended to deceive and ensnare people, particularly those who claim to believe in Jesus. This is why I pointed out that God was the One to determine which goat was for the Lord and which was the scapegoat. Not because the goats themselves were either evil or righteous, but as a reminder to the people that the Lord alone knows the heart; it is part of a lesson of symbolism which comprised much of the sanctuary service. Finally, I will briefly address your statement regarding Colossians 2. First, let me state clearly that neither I, nor anyone I have known, has referred to satan as our "sin-atoner" as you put it. You should know that putting words in the mouths of others is not the work of a Christian so I assume that was not purposeful on your part. Now, to your point concerning Colossians. You are correct and I agree that the articles of the sanctuary and the ceremonies thereof represent Jesus and the phases of His ministry on behalf of His people. And I think the latter half of that sentence is what applies here: some of the things are not directly representing Jesus, but representative of His ministry and aspects thereof. For example, the people outside of the sanctuary confessing their sins, though part of the sanctuary service, were not shadows, or representative, of Jesus. Recall Jesus said that "ye search the scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life and they are they which testify of Me." Did Jesus mean that every single person and event in the Old Testament Scriptures was a representative of Him? Obviously not. Some people represented and characterized satan. Likewise, the scapegoat in the sanctuary service, while being an integral part of said service, does not represent Jesus, but rather represents the final disposition of satan and the sins that he influenced God's people to commit. I would like to close by clarifying that I don't post these things to engage in arguments. I will leave that to other people because I don't believe that is what Christians are called to do. I believe Jesus calls His people to declare truth and allow the Light of His truth to dispel error. So, I am not arguing with you or anyone else for that matter. I am simply attempting to show what is truth so God's people don't love and believe a lie.

@@concerneddisciple8273 arguing that Satan is your scapegoat makes him your sin-atoner. Atonement is inextricably tied to the roles and function of BOTH goats in the ritual. Leviticus 16:5 makes it clear that BOTH goats were a single SIN OFFERING. Also, later in the chapter Aaron made "atonement" over the goat in transfering the sins from himself to the goat. So all your rambling to prove that Satan is your scapegoat comes full circle to what I'm saying. Both goats were two sides of the same coin, one SIN OFFERING. One died as propitiation and the other was sent away to bear the sins as expiation. Both of their roles were equal and necessary because one goat couldn't do both things. So if you want Satan to be your sin offering, unblemished innocent victim that atones for and expiates your sins, have your fill of it. But I won't. What you've said about Colossians 2 is ridiculous. Jesus is clear in John 2 that the Temple is His body. It typified Him. The festivals and Sabbaths of the Old Covenant and what they taught by way of typology and symbology typified Jesus. Not Jesus and Satan. The Day of Atonement ritual at its core teaches propitiation, expiation, and reconciliation to God. All of that points to Jesus. Not to Jesus and Satan. Furthermore, everyone, even Satan will bear their OWN sins if they are forgiven and borne by Jesus by embracing His vicarious sacrifice. Forgiveness is possible for us because JESUS took our place, bore the punishment, separation from God, and removed our sins. Satan does not nor can do any of that. But if you want him to do that for you despite these clear Scriptural teachings, have your fill of it. I've been dealing with you stubborn and delusional SDAs for years, so your ramblings and false piety don't faze me one bit. You hold heretical teachings and you need to repent of them. Simple. If you don't like my approach and straight talking, you're free to abstain from engaging me and keep me outside of your knowledge of existence as before.

@@ReverendThunder I am interested to know why you feel it necessary to be rude to one who hasn't been rude to you. I am not one to dismiss a person's argument simply due to their demeanor or disposition, but your approach is pretty off-putting and speaks more of one who has a contentious spirit than one who is seeking to teach and lead people to Christ. Prayerfully, I leave you with that. I began this discussion by stating that I had no interest in arguing and I will hold to that. It is clear that you've dug your heels in and I remain unconvinced by your tenuous argument so I guess we've come to an impasse.

Well said. You've nailed it. Where Scripture is concerned, the ENTIRE Old Testament Scriptures, the Law, and the sanctuary and it's services REPRESENT Jesus Christ and the multifaceted aspects of His life, ministry, and saving work.

@@ReverendThunder exactly and this is one of the many reasons why i am no longer an adventist. My response was what i believed even when i was an adventist. Even then i couldn't understand how they were drawing certain conclusions when they were OBVIOUS to me unbiblical. As a teen to adult i was constantly harping about context and historical accuracy but it flew right over their heads, the truth constantly being overshadowed by the egwhite lens. Trust me her follies where known to me for years .i just never had the full scope and i didn't realize the depth and degree of her dishonesty. My conclusion. She is wicked and her cohorts too to present, to keep perpetuating this level of deception of hoodwinking honest, genuine believers. Mi wah lash out at this injustice. Give them all you've got. I pray daily that persons will wake up to the real truth that is/is inChrist.

@@doneciawhittaker4676 I totally understand sis. A lot of people have experiences similar to yours. I'm glad that you developed the courage to do the right thing. Don't be surprised at the actions of SDA leaders and apologists. Scripture speaks about such things over and over..

@@ReverendThunder That is the truth. Continue to share the gospel my brother and i pray that your ministry will continue to bear fruits.

People are confused about Azazel in Leviticus 16 because of these LATER mythologies surrounding Azazel. However, in Leviticus 16, uninfluenced by them and written WAY BEFORE them, Azazel is simply "sending away" or "scapegoat" that was an integral part of the Day of Atonement, one sin offering along with the other goat (vs. 5), it made atonement (vs. 10), bore away the sins and iniquities of the people (vs. 18-20), and was a part of this "cleansing" ceremony (vs. 30). Scripture is clear that the Old testament festivals, New Moons, and Sabbaths are "shadows" pointing to Jesus and that He is the substance (Col. 2:16-17). The Day of Atonement was a festival, and therefore a shadow of Christ.

Thank you. Yes, Ivor is like that. I understand your point. However, "is Azazel" or "for Azazel" is immaterial when you get to the root of it. Azazel was simply a type. And at it's root, the word means for sending away, removal, expiation. So the scapegoat is literally the goat for removal, expiation (Azazel).

From Hiding In Plain Sight Vol. 1, p. 262-3: Because the text says one goat “for Azazel,” Adventists think that this proves that Azazel was Satan himself who a goat was being sent to in order to appease him and thus make atonement for Israel.245 But this is a horrendous conclusion. There are better explanations and conclusions than that. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia aptly notes: Both goats, according to Leviticus 16:5, are to be regarded as a single sin-sacrifice, even should we interpret Azazel as demon or Satan, and we are accordingly not at all to understand that a sacrifice was brought to these beings. This too is made impossible by the whole tenor of the Old Testament in general, as of Leviticus 16 in particular, so that in 16:8 the two members introduced by the preposition [le-] would not at all be beings of exactly the same importance. Both goats, so to say, represent two sides of the same thing. The second is necessary to make clear what the first one, which has been slain, can no longer represent, namely, the removal of the sin, and accordingly has quite often aptly been called the hircus redivivus. But what is to be represented finds its expression in the ceremony described in 16:20f.246 The author went on to justify that “for Azazel” should best be translated as “removal,” “sending away,” “releasing” or “dismissal.”247 Therefore, “for Azazel” should be understood as “for removal,” “for sending away,” “for releasing,” or “for dismissal,” and not “for Satan.” Adventists insisting that the scapegoat symbolizes Satan makes absolutely no sense because if the scapegoat is already Satan, how can it be “sent to Satan” (“for Azazel”) to bear away sin? Satan (the scapegoat) being sent away to Satan to atone for sin is ludicrous and heretical on many levels. But this is the logical end of the Adventist belief.

@@ReverendThunder So basically their whole premise about Azazel being a “demon” is bunk. I see. So though in English there seems to be a difference, it’s not really any difference in what the type truly represented. Did I understand you right?

@@ReverendThunder thank you for this! So much here. That part in verse 26 where you point out that it seems ludicrous to sent Satan to Satan…. That’s exactly why I was telling Ivor that saying the goat is Azazel cannot be the same thing as saying the goat is Azazel because how can you send Azazel to Azazel. And that’s kind of how the whole circle jerk got started. lol It’s amazing to me I used to believe this garbage.

@@blueticks8423 You're welcome. I understand and know the feeling. Lol. When critical thinking and contextual exegesis is applied to their doctrines and arguments, they easily crumble.

Both represent Jesus and His ministry. However, they represent different aspect of His atonement. The dead one represents His death and the scapegoat represents His taking upon and bearing the sins and experiencing separation from God for us.

@@ReverendThunder Where else did Jesus needed to be represented in two images? Or is only if two goats are put together that when they can represent a single Lamb? When the bible is talking about him (Jesus )as a lamb, it is said behold a (one) lamb of God who taketh away the sins of the Lord... Why didn't the bible said behold the lamb who died for the sins of the world and an other Lamb who taketh away the sins of the world?

@@landrykasongo7918 the services of the sanctuary involved several sacrifices and animals that represent Jesus. Leviticus 14 has a similar ritual for cleansing lepers that involved two birds, one died, and one was released into the field. But it was one ceremony of cleansing. The Book of Hebrews makes it clear that the entire sacrifice system, animals, high priests, physical compartments, etc, represent Jesus. The text doesn't have to read the way you want it to in order for it to convey Christ as our sacrifice and sin bearer. Nothing in Scripture explicitly says "behold the goat of the Lord that died for our sins," yet Jesus is that goat that died for sins on the Day of Atonement and not simply lambs that died on a weekly basis. Antitypes do not have to be one-to-one with their types.

@@CarlosDiaz-mz6bn the Day of Atonement involved THREE ANIMALS for that SINGLE RITUAL of cleansing. Lev 16:5 KJV And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats for a sin offering, and one ram for a burnt offering. Lev 16:30 KJV For on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the LORD.

@@ReverendThunder your right,but what's the point your making with this?

@@ReverendThunder how about this,,Jesus and barrabas stand before pilot to be judged ,,Jesus is killed ,,barrabas set free,,do you think this is a coincidence??

@@CarlosDiaz-mz6bn how about that has nothing to do with the Day of Atonement ritual in Leviticus 16. Pilate wasn't a high priest, he didn't confess the sins of the people on Barabbas, Barabbas wasn't spotless, Barabbas wasn't an innocent victim that was taking the blame and punishment of the guilty. How about that?

@@CarlosDiaz-mz6bn I'm making the point that the passage makes.

Only the day of atonement ..in the year 31 April 25th!

You cannot argue with adventist concerning the bible, we are people of the book... Seek Holy Spirit to guide you to truth not trying to fight adventist... You won't win against the truth

@@tolbertoyugi4451 okay how do you get to 1844 in the fall with.,2300? The reason you say you can't win against you! is because you lie about it! That'll be taken care of on your judgment day!. We don't have to win. Jesus will do it for us! Jesus address that subject. in John 8:44 to the very people that you are!

Ok boy. Keep telling urself Ur people of thé Book yet u believe thé atonement IS ongoing when thé Book says Romans 5 11 WE Joy in thé Lord in whom WE have now Received thé atonement. When was that ? Ur proving adventism IS a psuedo Christian cult​@@tolbertoyugi4451

Both goats are for the Lord. They both made one sin offering (Lev. 16:5). The phrase "for the Lord" referred to one goat being killed or sacrificed for propitiation and "for Azazel/scapegoat/sending away" referred to the one that would bear the sins and be sent away to demonstrate the expiation of sins. Azazel simply means "removal, send away."

No the translation of azazel literally means Demon aren’t you a theologian ?

Leviticus 22:20. Was the requirement for any sacrifice!

​@@JamieElison this shows how biblically illiterate these SDAs are, and how much they hate Scripture as it exposes their cultic doctrines, that they do not want to let go. He's willing to blasphème God's Word and the sanctuary services in order to uphold a heretical teaching. Pitiful. If he'd type up "without blemish" or "blemish" in any Bible up in Leviticus, he'd see how clear and repetitive this is and how asinine his question and arguments are.

@@ReverendThunder I notice you could not show me biblically where it says both goats are unblemished!! Also if you are such a Bible student then who is the strong man who leads the goat to the wilderness? You believe that the scape goat is the Lord right? Who can carry the Alpha and Omega out the sanctuary? Also are you saying Jesus has another name? Transliteration: ‛ăzâ'zêl Pronunciation: az-aw-zale' Definition: From H5795 and H235; goat of departure; the scapegoat: - scapegoat. The Bible clearly says one is the Lord!! How can both be the Lord? Do you say we have 2 Lords? “And he shall take the two goats, and present them before the LORD at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the LORD, and the other lot for the scapegoat.” ‭‭Leviticus‬ ‭16‬:‭7‬-‭8‬ ‭KJV‬‬ Answer the question professed Christian

@@stormready-2029 you are too ignorant and brainwashed with heresies for your own good. Suggesting that the goats for the Day of Atonement service were blemished reveals that. If have this basic fact so wrong, I don't know why you'd think you can teach anyone anything. If you want Satan to be the innocent scapegoat that atones for your sins, bears your sins, and ultimately saves you, you are free to have him. If you want to believe that Jesus is a blemished goat that died for your sins so that the unblemished innocent Satan goat can save and atone for you, how your fill of that. But as for me and other Christians, we won't subscribe to such outrageous blasphemy.

Ur comment shows u spend more Time Reading thé Great Controversy than thé bible? U would not Ask which scriptures says thé goats were unblemished

The intent of the ritual is not to teach a symbolism for EVERY ASPECT of the ritual. The symbols and types are never one-to-one equivalents with their reality of antitypes. The underlying crux of the scapegoat is its FUNCTION, which is to be a "sin offering" along with the other goat, to make atonement, bear the sins AWAY, and cleanse. If for you every aspect must be equivalent, then neither Jesus nor Satan would be any part of the ritual because they are not literal goats to begin with.

@@ReverendThunder I believe everything is symbolic. I also want to hear what others are thinking

@@kenisharobert2369 that's a misguided belief, no typology or symbol will ever be exactly equivalent to whatever it points to. It's good to desire to understand what others have to say on a subject.

@@ReverendThunder I can also say your belief is misguide seeing it makes little sense to me. That is why I listen to all the evidence before coming to a solid conclusion

@@kenisharobert2369 👌🏿

Those SDAs do not say that Satan is the scapegoat?

What I shared were observations from the sanctuary service Day of Atonement, obviously. Where does Scripture ever teach that the DAY of Atonement is a shadow of Christ and Satan?

Study a shadow ? Hebrews 7 12 for thé priesthood being changed There is therefore a necessity for thé Change of Thé Law

@@charnelallan7159 what they can never understand is that we rejected Adventism AFTER properly studying Scripture.

You're blind and delusional. Did you even bother to watch the video?

@@ReverendThunder You seem too like name calling. Calling me blind I can accept and perhaps open my eyes. I don't know how to become non delusional. Perhaps you might have tips for me. And yes, I watched the video and was amazed at the weakness of your argument, hence my response.

@@diasco4869 I call it as I see it. And your responses prove it. You claim to watch the video but haven't offered a single contextual refutation to any of the points, yet you were quick to rant without any substance and concluded that my points are weak. Too funny. The weakness of my points should actually make a super easy for you to refute them, but you've done none of that, proving my point about how blind and delusional you are. Dunning-Kruger Effect on full display.

@@ReverendThunder Generally if some tries to convince me that the grass is blue when I know it's green, I consider it a waste of time to engage them. No need to refute any of their points. So this is a case of you thinking that the grass is blue. Perhaps one day you will come around to see that it is actually green. Be blessed bro.

@@diasco4869 👌🏿

Somebody that takes your place!

Not in hebrew,the hebrew word for scapegoat means departure goat,,has nothing to do with English version of the word,,check the word in the concordance

@@CarlosDiaz-mz6bn the word might mean departure (but where it goes to)!!!( that's what the Bible says)!!! Zechariah 14: 5 ..the (concordance is man)! the Bible is bible..so I follow the Bible!!! scapegoat in itself ,,means somebody that is taking your place,,( or takes the punishment for somebody else).! responsibility for somebody else!. Which is Jesus Christ! On the cross 1st Peter 2:24!. All Bible say it is the place that the goat ( goes to)!

@@JamieElison not sure what your point in zach14:5,,this speaks of Azel,,not Azazel ,,and what do you mean by the (concordance is man)?

@@JamieElison leviticus 16:8,,2 goats ,1 for the Lord,,1 for the scapegoat,,,why people insist that both are for the lord inspite of this verse baffles me a bit,but I'll walk you through it,,hopefully it helps,, leviticus 16:8-9,,here lots are cast to determine which goat will be witch,,now if there both for the lord ,,what would be the point of casting lots to make a determination of which goats which,,I'm gonna flip a coin,heads you get 10$,,tails you get 10$,,,see the logic here??now second point,,scapegoat receives sins on its head,,,psalm 7:16,,we see Satan receiving all of his mischief placed on his head,,what mischief??,well is he not responsible for being the one that introduced sin here on earth,,is he not partly responsible for every sin that has been committed yes,,and so he bears this himself,,Christ did not die for his sins,,,notice in leviticus 16,,that by the time priest gets to scapegoat,,are sins have already been atonement for by the goat that represents Jesus,,through this sanctuary service God reveals to us how he's dealt with sin,regarding us and satan,,,hope this helps

Leviticus 22:20 ( just tell me is the second Goat that devil?)

You're brainwashed beyond reason.

@@ReverendThunder By the way this is an old question!! The reformers have taught who ăzâ'zêl Pronunciation: az-aw-zale' Definition: From H5795 and H235; goat of departure; the scapegoat: - scapegoat Is!! What denomination are you can I ask?

@@ReverendThunder ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-95hpbIkYaSg.htmlsi=HAtRu3KQ5FoBK9-d

@@stormready-2029 I could care less who or what Reformer want to believe that Satan is Azazel. They are not infallible nor inspired. I could care less how rabid you SDAs want Satan to be your savior. I won't subscribe to that. My denomination is Reformed, a conglomerate of Congregational, Disciples of Christ, and Presbyterian.

You mean like the lie (that got you started). that you can get to 1844 with 2300 in the fall?

Let's look at types even in the Levitical system. ‭Leviticus 10:17 ESV‬ [17] “Why have you not eaten the sin offering in the place of the sanctuary, since it is a thing most holy and has been given to you that you may bear the iniquity of the congregation, to make atonement for them before the Lord? Notice that the Priest bears the iniquity of the sin offering. Now on the day of Atonement, ‭Leviticus 16:22 ESV‬ [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 goat bears the iniquities as well. In this type would you consider the Priest, Satan? We say everything represents Jesus EXCEPT the scapegoat even though this scapegoat is in the midst of the atonement of the people and the priest. If we actually look at the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16 you will see that the priest and people are not atoned for until verse 24 after the burnt sacrifice. The main issue I see with all of these arguments is the transfer of sins through the blood to the sanctuary. We say the confessed sins are transferred to the sanctuary. The bible does not speak of such a thing. Atonement is always final and complete both in the daily and Day of Atonement. Not partial. The sins are done away with. As a collective people and as individuals, the day of Atonement cleanses everything in one shot, so there is a period when his people are completely reconciled unto Him. This day accomplishes that. No where in scripture will you find anyone but Christ bearing the sin and guilt. We have read this into scripture. We also say Satan has to pay for the sins he caused. I believe that completely! His will pay for His sin of causing me to sin, but he will NEVER bear or pay for my sins. CHRIST already bore my sins. It takes away from Christ's sacrifice and technically if Satan is bearing my sins again and dying in part because of them he is definitely taking away (as they still existed when Christ did it 2000 years ago) and dying for my sins. That is ludicrous. Furthermore there are two destinations for the sacrifices/offerings, one for God and one for Azazel. In this narrative of Azazel being Satan there has to be a vehicle (the goats) for both. So either way Christ is the vehicle as the Scapegoat to takes the sins to Azazel if we stay in your storyline. Obviously I don't believe Jesus does that but in that narrative He is STILL the scapegoat. Thoughts?

Why was an atonement ie réconciliation made on thé scapegoat ? Did any text in leviticus 16 state thé unblemished goat was responsible for Israël sins ?

Does this question make sense to you!? Is the Day of Atonement ritual and scapegoat about Satan BEFORE his fall and rebellion or is it AFTER his fall, blemished nature, and rebellion?

@@ReverendThunder or should I ask you this: how’s Satan Will be find guilty at the end of age? When God judge him and kill him, is that a forever separation or will Satan enter to heaven again? Since the scapegoat is free in the wild. Let see what the scripture says wild. “And when an unclean spirit gone out of a man, he walked through dry place or in the wild and seek rest and fine none”( Matthew 12:43). How about when Jesus was tempted in wild and who’s live there? Jesus or Satan? “Matthew 4: 1 Then was Jesus led of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.“ Does it make sense for Jesus to live in the wilderness and forever separate from God? You Answer your statement. Good questions! It’s foreshadowing what will happen at the end of age. Noticed the blemished ram was sacrificed first and then the scapegoat was after. Will you answer 4 of my questions above also, please?

@@Pkonreaction the goats and the ritual of the Day of Atonement are not and should not be interpreted as being one-to-one equivalents with Jesus, Satan, nor reality. If that's the case neither Jesus nor Satan would fit ANYTHING there because Jesus and Satan are not LITERAL goats nor literal animals. The Day of Atonement was simply a ritual that at its core sought to teach forgiveness of sin, expiation of sin, and reconciliation with God. It's through Christ vicarious sacrifice that those happen.

@@ReverendThunder oh really? What happened to Issac was about to sacrificed, but God intervened and gave Ram to kill instead? ( Genesis 22:13 “And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.”) What about John 1:29 “ the next John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said “behold! The Lamb of God, which take away the sin of the world”?” Who gave you the authority that the scripture should not interpret as you mentioned? The Bible or yourself? Also you haven’t answer my 4 questions I asked ? Since im lack of knowledge, please help understand it better? Help me clarify or the Bible teach how Satan is kill or how will be forever separated?

​@@Pkonreaction ask those four questions to me? I'm waiting on you!

Are you going to tell Paul to stop preaching also? If you were there at the time?

@@JamieElison no comparison, Paul spoke truth, not just hearing it and responding to it on feelings. We're told to be like the Bereans.

So why aren't you a berean?​@@fernmunroe9483

So if you have the holy Spirit guiding you,, tell me how did the sins get( in) Jesus Christ 1 Peter 2:24? and what did He do with those sins on the same day?

Now that you've vented that off your chest, can you actually deal with any point I raised in the video?

For me: I have this against you: A shadow of things to come is not a shadow of things done away with at the time and when Paul was writing to Colossians. Apostle Paul was encouraging the believers to look forward for the fulfillment of those things which are “ a shadow of things to come,” Things which shall be fulfilled and completed at their appointed time - future not past Ponder this brother! Your theology is faulty- reconsider your argument. Argument: the the goat for Azzael was not not for the Lord, Biblically!!!! If it is not for the Lord, then it is for something else Why are you trying to question the Bible????

Because what you said is not in the Bible !!and it's clear if you would have listened to what he said ..(there's no way you can make the second Goat be anything other than a( location )where they go( to) as ( Azazel) if you'd (actually read more than one Bible )!you're going to see it's telling you( Azazel) is a place that goes ( to). Which that represents( Isaiah 43:25). God! (Presented before the Lord) as it says ( in Leviticus 1610!!!!) For the ( atonement) the ( atonement is only done by Jesus Christ!!.).. that never happens for you!!!! it's impossible.. so tell me where did the sins go that are( in )Jesus Christ 1 Peter 2:24 ?how did those sins get (in) Jesus Christ ??if He's only the first Goat..( because the first Goat does not bear any sins).!!!!!... so what did He do with those sins? and how did they get there?

@@Creationist432 in all your rambling, you've not refuted a single point in the video.

​@@ReverendThunderGod bless!!!!!!! you keep up the good work!! this needs to be done every week!!!. They will attack you.. and that's the best thing that can happen.. because you'll draw attention to the subject ..and SDA higher up is not going to like this! Which will only help show them the truth!

​@@ReverendThunderGod bless you make one of these every week