Satan as Scapegoat

[Pavel Mosko]

Satan as the Scapegoat

This Blogstyle post was written to explain to the Adventists that hung around one of my Facebook groups why Christians find their doctrine of the Scapegoat objectionable.


1) Animals in the Old Testament were supposed to be "without defect", foreshadowing and symbolizing Christ "being without sin". Satan does not fit this, only in his early days "as a ministering Cherub" before his Fall would he fit this. In his actual state, Satan is the antithesis of this important Biblical theological motif.


2)"The Divine Economy of Romans 5:12-21"
King James Version
12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the [a]offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man’s [c]offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.) 18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. 20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
This passage has been summarized by great saints like Gregory of Nazianus and Athanasius as "that which is not assumed is not healed"and"that which is not united to his Divinity is not saved."

 

[Pavel Mosko]

This is why the Adventist Scapegoat is considered so blasphemous by Christians. We see in the previous passage what is called an "Economia" (Economy). In the ancient world this term describes a way of doing things, it literally was used to describe something like a "mode of operations", of how you run your household. And I would argue the above is a lot of what the ancient Jewish sacrificial system was about had to do with this foreshadowing and symbolizing the transfer of sin by transposing of hands by the priest on the offering, to the one that needed the sin offering. It was noted by ancient Christians ages ago, for instance that the shape of the transposed hands looks a bit like a Greek Cross, or a X which in Greek would have been the letter Chi, which also stood for Christ, being the first letter of the Greek term Messiah, and also looking like a cross.

But back to the point, the ramifications of the doctrine is blasphemous when the Scapegoat's significance is considered from a larger perspective of things, namely those two above points and their ramifications, aka "What is not assumed is not saved" a law that God himself established in the Bible to point to Christ. Satan is definitely not without defect, nor did he assume our humanity to pay for our sin.
I think Adventists find the Scapegoat doctrine appealing because of the fact the goat ends up with the name of a Fallen Angel/ Demon in Jewish Tradition, and of course Satan gets wiped out in the end of the book of Revelation, and having this new insight come from a Revelation was the new hot thing, especially since it was a proof text for the Adventist doctrine of Annihilationism rather than Hell being Eternal. This I think is the real problem or issue, and most likely will not go away with this post but it is the real "Elephant in the room".

Closing
1) In closing, I will concede that in this heterodox teaching Adventists did stumble on an important point, the name of the Scape Goat and its significance. When it comes to types and anti-types in the Bible there is a lot going on, and I do find significance in the name of the goat but I believe that is symbolizing other stuff like the Fallen nature of Man, the robber Barabas that was released in place of Christ, even a foreshadowing of Christ, "being tempted in the Wilderness" a scene that somewhat has enacted out the scape goat literally and metaphorically.

2) And lastly, I will raise one point brought up by a Calvinist Theologian and Historian on this issue, that Adventists tend to miss. He claimed that somebody went out and followed the Scapegoat after it was released to make sure it did die eventually after a few days. While I have not found yet officially been able to confirm this fact (few people write on it and post their work to the internet), I do believe it based on study and common sense. 1) Because all other near eastern peoples had similar kind of rituals where that was the case, but more importantly 2) Because of the fact, that the wilderness of the region was a dry dessert, and a domestic farm animal like a goat, is not designed to deal with the lack of water like a camel, mountain goat or similar wilderness creature. But going back to typologies and their spiritual meanings, I do see some important meanings from this. Simply being temporarily pardoned for our trespasses and sins, is not enough. We will all will eventually die from them, to be free we need something, really somebody that can fix things permanently and not just put on a spiritual Band Aid (of simply covering our sin) and that person is Christ.

 

[quietthinker]

It's patently clear Pavel, you've got it in for SDA's. Ever wonder whether you've lost a healthy perspective?

 

[Hobie]

Satan as the Scapegoat

This Blogstyle post was written to explain to the Adventists that hung around one of my Facebook groups why Christians find their doctrine of the Scapegoat objectionable.


1) Animals in the Old Testament were supposed to be "without defect", foreshadowing and symbolizing Christ "being without sin". Satan does not fit this, only in his early days "as a ministering Cherub" before his Fall would he fit this. In his actual state, Satan is the antithesis of this important Biblical theological motif.


2)"The Divine Economy of Romans 5:12-21"
King James Version
12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the [a]offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man’s [c]offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.) 18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. 19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. 20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
This passage has been summarized by great saints like Gregory of Nazianus and Athanasius as "that which is not assumed is not healed"and"that which is not united to his Divinity is not saved."



View attachment 43248

So who is responsible for sin, that's the real issue as you surely can't blame God for it.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
FAQ: Since God created us the way we are; then why isn't He is responsible
for our conduct?

REPLY: Some years ago I went into a music store in San Diego and noticed
that one of the store's glass display cases contained a rather large variety of
curious bottles. So I asked the clerk what they were. He said they were
bongs. You mean for smoking dope? I asked. He replied: Yes; that is their
purpose. So I responded: But isn't dope illegal? He replied: Yes, dope is
illegal, however we don't sell dope; we only sell the means to smoke it. You
see; the responsibility for smoking dope was on the end-users of bongs
rather than upon the sellers of bongs.

In a similar incident, I went into an electronics store to purchase a mobile
CB radio and noticed an array of devices in the display case that I didn't
recognize. The clerk told me they were linear amplifiers; which, he said, are
devices for boosting a standard 5-watt CB's signal strength. I asked the clerk
if that was legal. He said no, it isn't legal to boost the standard signal.
However, he said, it isn't illegal to own equipment with the capability to do
so. In other words; the law placed the responsibility for boosting CB signals
on the end-user of linear amplifiers rather than the sellers of linear
amplifiers.

What I'm getting at is: God created humanity with the capability to make
bad choices. But at the same time, He created humanity with the capability
to make good choices too. For example:

"Then Yahweh said to Cain: If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?
But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to
have you, but you must master it." (Gen 4:7)

In the forbidden fruit incident, Adam chose poorly. Does it make sense to
blame God for Adam's choice? No; Adam knew the risk going in; but
proceeded anyway. (1Tim 2:14)

But you see: so-called "product liability" is a convenient way of blaming
others for our own failings. In other words: product liability's proponents
insist that the availability of things like forbidden fruit, bongs, and linear
amplifiers constitutes enablement. So these days instead of saying "The
Devil made me do it; therefore my conduct is his fault" now people say "I
was provided the means to do it; therefore my conduct is the provider's
fault."

Many of the products under sinks and out in garages are toxic; so
manufacturers put warning labels on them. They do the same thing with
electrical equipment, power tools, and mechanical devices so people can
operate them safely and avoid injury. Now; placing those products for sale
to the public constitutes enablement, but they're assuming end-users are
intelligent enough to read warning labels and/or user's manuals. If users
ignore warning labels and the cautions printed in manuals; it's their own
fault for being stupid.
_