The azazel goat in Leviticus 16 is central to understanding the Day of Atonement ritual. God's stated purpose for the azazel goat is to bear all the iniquities of the children of Israel to an uninhabited land, symbolizing the complete removal of sin from view. Leviticus 16:21-22 instructs the high priest to lay both hands on the azazel's head, confessing over it all the iniquities, transgressions, and sins of the people, indicating a symbolic transference and substitution. This goat, designated as the goat of departure or complete removal, contrasts with the first goat, which cleansed the holy place, while the azazel bore the sins away entirely. The fulfillment of the azazel goat points to the Messiah, as Scripture states that our iniquity was laid on Him, He bore our sins, and He took them away, leaving no need for any other being to accomplish this. The casting of lots for the two goats, as described in Proverbs 16:33, ensured that God determined which goat would be sent away, emphasizing that He dictates the terms of worship and chooses between functions, not personalities. This process served as a reminder of the priest's fallibility and the necessity to look to God for direction in the ritual.

Azazel is not the name of a wilderness demon or a type of Satan. The Hebrew word means "goat of departure," from roots meaning goat and to go away, and Brown-Driver-Briggs gives "complete removal." The identification with a fallen angel comes from apocryphal tradition, especially the Book of Enoch, not from Scripture, and no second or third witness places Satan in Leviticus 16 or in the atonement for sin. The two goats of Leviticus 16:5 are a single sin offering. The lots show that God, not man, assigns each goat's role. "For the LORD" means the first goat belongs to God as a sacrifice satisfying His justice; it does not mean the goat represents Him. The azazel goat fulfills a second purpose: carrying sins away to an uninhabited land and removing them from view. Sacrificial animals had to be unblemished, which excludes Satan, whose long sinfulness makes it impossible to picture him as innocent. The two birds in the leprosy cleansing ritual of Leviticus 14 are equal elements serving different roles, and the two goats are equal in the same way. As the live bird is dipped in the blood of the slain bird, the live goat is presented before the Lord to be sanctified for its task. Together the goats show both payment for sin and its complete removal from sight and conscience. Jesus Christ accomplishes both, not Satan.

The azazel, the second goat of Leviticus 16, is a type of Jesus Christ, not Satan. The identification with Satan comes from ancient Jewish literature, especially the Book of Enoch, and not from Scripture. Lots determined which goat was for the Lord and which was the goat of departure. The first goat's blood paid for sin and purified the Holy Place, the Tabernacle, and the altar. The live goat then bore all Israel's iniquities out of sight into a land cut off. Christ fulfills this: He bore the sin of many (Isaiah 53; Hebrews 9:28; I Peter 2:24), alone, as the azazel did. The Hebrew word for bearing means to lift up, carry, and take away, and it is never used of Satan. "Land cut off" matches Christ being cut off from the land of the living and taken to the grave, the land of forgetfulness, where sins are not only paid for but forgotten, no longer a factor in God's dealings with us. Satan cannot fit the role. He has his own guilt and cannot substitute for anyone. Each sinner bears his own guilt (Ezekiel 18), and Satan can deceive but cannot force anyone to sin. Scripture contains no concept of divided guilt or a co-sinner. Satan's binding and later casting into the Lake of Fire do not match the goat's release. Placing the sins of mankind on Satan also shifts blame and credits him with work that Christ alone accomplished.

On the Day of Atonement, as described in Leviticus 16:5, two goats were central to the unique offering for the sins of Israel. The second goat, known as the azazel or the goat of departure, had all the sins of the people laid on its head, bearing them to an uninhabited land, a land cut off. This ritual symbolizes the complete removal of sins from the community, taking them to a place of forgetfulness. The releasing of the azazel into the wilderness has been linked by some to the binding of satan, yet this connection is problematic. The account in Revelation 20:1-3 makes no mention of sins being placed on satan's head; instead, his binding is to prevent deception of the nations for a thousand years, not to provide expiation. The ceremony of the azazel, as detailed in Leviticus 16:21-22, involves the sins of the people, not of satan, emphasizing the removal of human transgression. In the broader context of atonement, the role of the azazel aligns with the work of Jesus Christ, who is shown to bear the sins of many, as prophesied in Isaiah 53. Hebrews 9 and 10 provide extensive evidence of His fulfillment of this role, describing how He put away sin by His sacrifice alone, canceling and bringing sin to nothing for those who repent and come under His blood. Hebrews 10:4 uses terminology that mirrors the azazel, describing Christ's sacrifice as necessary and sufficient to remove sins completely, bearing them to a land cut off, and cleansing the consciences of those who accept Him. Scripture remains silent on any involvement of satan in bearing human sins, offering no support for such a role in the atonement process. The focus remains on Christ's completed work, as He by Himself purged our sins and sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, indicating that the bearing and removal of sins, as typified by the azazel, are fully accomplished through Him.

The term azazel, used exclusively in Leviticus 16 to describe the second goat in the Day of Atonement ceremony, appears only four times in Scripture, leaving its meaning shrouded in uncertainty. Without a defining verse, understanding azazel requires careful consideration of various starting points, none of which provide a definitive foundation due to the lack of multiple scriptural witnesses. One interpretation suggests azazel derives from roots meaning "the strength of God," combining 'azaz (to strengthen or prevail) and El (a title of God), though this does not clearly connect to the second goat's role. Another view posits azazel as a location east of Jerusalem, a difficult and accursed place where the goat bore the nation's sins, yet this is problematic since Leviticus 16 was given in the wilderness with no fixed camp location. A third perspective breaks azazel into 'ez (goat) and 'azal (to go away), suggesting "goat of departure" or "entire removal," aligning with the goat's action of being sent away, though some scholars debate the root for "goat." A fourth interpretation views azazel through a negative lens, combining 'azal (removal) and 'az (strong) to mean "the strong and obstinate one destined to go away," implying a derogatory name, but this relies on selective meanings since 'az can also describe neutral or positive strength. Finally, a traditional view holds azazel as a type of satan, rooted in historical teachings from certain groups, though this lacks direct scriptural support and often leans on external sources or sequential symbolism that selectively interprets elements of Leviticus 16. Focusing on the actions described in Leviticus 16, the azazel goat has the iniquities, transgressions, and sins of the people laid on its head and bears them into the wilderness, away from God's presence. These actions find clear fulfillment in Messianic prophecies, such as Isaiah 53:6, where the Eternal lays our iniquities on the Messiah, mirroring the high priest's act of transference. Isaiah 53:11-12 further confirms the Messiah bearing sins, as does Hebrews 9, which presents Christ as fulfilling the Day of Atonement by bearing sins, with no mention of satan's involvement. Peter also attests that Christ bore our sins in His body on the tree, aligning directly with the azazel's role of substitutionary bearing of sin during prolonged suffering outside the camp, as Christ suffered outside the gate. Paul's statement in II Corinthians 5:21 that God made Christ to be sin reflects the azazel becoming sin through the transference of guilt, a role underscored by Christ becoming a curse for us, as seen in Galatians 3:13 and Deuteronomy 21:23, paralleling the cursed state of the azazel when sent away. Additional verses like Psalm 103:12, Colossians 2:14, John 1:29, and I John 3:5 reinforce Christ's role in removing and bearing away sins, matching the azazel's function. In contrast, Scripture provides no record of sins being laid on satan or satan bearing sins, highlighting that the azazel's essential roles point to Christ's work alone.

The concept of Azazel within the context of the Day of Atonement ritual in Leviticus 16 has been subject to various interpretations, often influenced by external traditions. Some views, rooted in Jewish mythology and carnal traditions, suggest that Azazel is a name for satan or a lesser demon. One perspective holds that the live goat, designated as the Azazel, represents satan, with the sins of mankind to be placed on his head in the future through his binding. Another variation posits that the Azazel goat bears satan's own sins, though Leviticus 16 specifically mentions only the sins of the children of Israel being confessed and borne by the goat. A third interpretation, found in some modern translations, suggests the goat is not called Azazel but is sent to a demon named Azazel, an idea stemming from Jewish folklore rather than the scriptural narrative. However, the ritual's focus remains on the sins of the nation, not on any demonic entity. The casting of lots in Leviticus 16:8 determines the roles of the two goats—one for the LORD, for cleansing and atonement of holy objects, and the other for Azazel, for the complete removal of sins. There is no indication that the lots assign representation to opposing personalities. Instead, the goat for Azazel serves as a substitute for the people, bearing their iniquities away, just as the second bird in the leprosy ritual symbolizes removal without implying a connection to satan. The scriptural emphasis is on the removal of human sin through a sacrificial substitute, fulfilled by Jesus Christ, who bore the sins of many and became a curse to reconcile us to God.

The concept of Azazel, as the goat of departure in the Atonement sin offering, has been linked by some to the binding of satan as described in Revelation 20:1-3. However, this connection is not supported by any scriptural evidence showing that satan's binding serves as an expiation of sin. The purpose of satan's binding is to prevent his deception of the nations during the Millennium, a temporary measure that does not address the final justice or the true reconciliation between mankind and God. The role of Azazel, as part of the Atonement ritual, has already been fulfilled through the finished work of Jesus Christ, who alone provides the legal satisfaction and removal of guilt necessary for atonement. Furthermore, the idea that satan's removal or binding could achieve atonement overlooks the fact that even during the Millennium, when satan is bound and unable to influence, people will still sin. The presence of sin, not the presence of satan, is what separates humanity from God, and only through Christ's work can this separation be bridged. In the context of the Day of Atonement, the only work permitted was by the high priest and the man who led the Azazel goat away, both of whom required atonement themselves, symbolizing that human effort is useless in achieving true atonement.

The recent revelation of the azazel goat's identity, as the second goat of the Atonement offering sent into the wilderness, brings to light that not all long-held beliefs are entirely accurate. Even church leaders with God's Spirit can be mistaken until He chooses to reveal the truth. For decades, the misunderstanding of the azazel goat's identity persisted, relying on human reasoning from ancient Jewish texts, apocryphal literature, fictional Jewish works, and Arabic/Islamic traditions, which proved to be unreliable sources tainted by opposition to God. God's timing in unveiling this knowledge now raises questions about His purpose, possibly to test loyalties to Him and His Word over tradition and human reasoning, to humble us by showing that truth comes only through revelation by His Spirit, or to warn even the elect against deception. This misunderstanding serves as a reminder to redouble efforts in checking the foundation of all beliefs and practices, ensuring they are built on the Rock, Christ and His Word.

On the Day of Atonement, a unique sin offering for the congregation involved two goats. Through the casting of lots, one goat was designated for the LORD to satisfy or appease Him, and its blood, untainted by the record of sin, was used to cleanse the objects nearest to the Lord. The second goat, known as the azazel, had all the iniquities, transgressions, and sins of Israel confessed over it, symbolically taking them away. This live goat received the defilement of the people, bearing their sins as a representation of removal. In fulfillment of this type, Jesus Christ bore the sins of many, as Isaiah 53:6 states that the LORD laid on Him the iniquity of us all. Scriptures such as Isaiah 53:11-12, I Peter 2:24, and Hebrews 9:28 affirm that He Himself bore our sins in His body, was offered once to bear the sins of many, and accomplished what the blood of bulls and goats could not—taking away sin.

The Day of Atonement features a unique ritual involving two goats, central to its meaning of atonement for sin. One goat is chosen for the Lord and sacrificed, its blood sprinkled by the high priest on the Mercy Seat in the Holy of Holies. The other, known as the azazel goat, remains alive; the sins of the people are laid on its head, and it is led into the wilderness to be abandoned. This ritual embodies the essence of atonement, opening the possibility of unity with God. The azazel goat is often thought to represent satan, suggesting through the Atonement ritual how God addresses the issue of satan's rebellious influence on humanity. However, this view is incorrect, as satan cannot bear away or remove human sin, a role reserved solely for Christ, the Lord. The dual aspects of Christ's work—paying for sin through His sacrifice and removing sin through forgiveness—are symbolized by the two goats, excluding any involvement of the devil in this divine initiative to resolve human sin.

The identity of the Azazel goat has long been a point of curiosity regarding the Day of Atonement. Initially, it was understood among early desert dwellers in the Sinai that the name Azazel referred to satan, the devil. However, a more recent understanding reveals that Jesus Christ plays a dual role in this single sacrifice. The sins of all mankind, past, present, and future, were laid upon Him, as seen during the darkness over the land at His crucifixion, when He cried out, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" meaning, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?" This act represented the Father disconnecting from His beloved Son due to the burden of sin. Scriptures such as Isaiah 53:6 confirm that the Lord laid on Him the iniquity of us all, highlighting Jesus as the goat of departure who became sin for us, bearing our iniquities in obedience to the Father.

In the Day of Atonement ritual involving two goats, the Hebrew text refers to the living goat as azazel (Leviticus 16:8, 10, 26), often translated as scapegoat. The New King James Version (NKJV) states that the goat on which the lot fell to be the scapegoat azazel shall be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to let it go as the scapegoat azazel into the wilderness, describing the role of the goat as bearing the nation's sins for complete removal. In contrast, the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) translates it as the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel, suggesting it is sent into the wilderness to a personality named Azazel. Some scholars interpret azazel as a name, influenced by Jewish folklore between the testaments that invented a lesser demon named Azazel, blamed for all human sin. A millennium after Leviticus 16, many Jews intertwined Scripture with folklore, viewing the live goat as a gift to Samael, the Devil, blended with their myth of Azazel. However, if the Israelites sent a sacrificial animal to Azazel at God's command, it would imply gross idolatry, which is directly prohibited in Leviticus 17:7 and other scriptures. God did not enshrine the name of a demon in the instructions for this solemn day, nor did He intend His people to acknowledge or placate a false god with a sacrificial animal. Instead, He commanded an Israelite to lead a substitutionary animal bearing the nation's sins away from the camp, calling that animal azazel, signifying complete removal.

Scripture records Christ's unambiguous fulfillment of the second goat, the azazel, through His bearing and taking away sins. Isaiah 53:6 declares that the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all, just as the high priest laid Israel's sins on the azazel each year. Christ likewise bore our sins, fulfilling another function of the azazel. Jesus Christ is the only Being who could fulfill the role of the azazel and did so perfectly.

The azazel goat is not Satan. On the Day of Atonement the high priest performed a ceremony with two goats that together comprised a single offering for sin (Leviticus 16:5). The Hebrew azazel could mean "goat of departure" or "entire removal." The idea that Azazel is a demon blamed for mankind's sins and then bound comes from an apocryphal tradition, a counterfeit that arose well over a thousand years after Moses. Once that myth is rooted out, the inspired text shows that Satan plays no part in removing sin. His eventual binding cannot expiate either our sins or his, and the ceremony covered only the sins of the people (Leviticus 16:21), for which Satan is not responsible and for which he has no solution. One goat cleansed the sanctuary, including the incense altar and the Mercy Seat (Leviticus 16:19-20; Hebrews 9:8, 11-14). The high priest left the azazel goat alive, confessed all the nation's sins onto its head, and sent it into the wilderness (Leviticus 16:21-22). Christ fulfilled the actions of this second goat as well. Our iniquities were laid on Him (Isaiah 53:6), He bore our sins (Isaiah 53:11-12; I Peter 2:24; Hebrews 9:28), and He took them away (John 1:29; Colossians 2:14; Hebrews 10:4; I John 3:5). No scripture shows sins laid on Satan. The Day of Atonement therefore pictures the complete cleansing of sin through Jesus Christ alone, not the binding of the Devil.

The Day of Atonement ritual in ancient Israel centered on two goats, with particular significance attached to the second goat, the azazel, which was left alive to bear away the nation's sins. Leviticus 16:21-22 describes two essential actions: the high priest laid hands on the goat, confessing all Israel's iniquities upon it, and then the goat carried those sins away into the wilderness, away from God's presence. These two actions find their fulfillment in Isaiah 53:4-6, where the Messiah bears griefs and sorrows while God lays the iniquity of all upon Him, just as the priest transferred sin to the azazel. The live goat functioned as a substitute, innocent yet symbolically bearing the guilt of others, prefiguring Christ as the antitype. Isaiah 53 reveals that sin's penalty extends beyond death to include agony, disfigurement, and separation from God, explaining why the Messiah endured prolonged suffering rather than a quick death. Isaiah 53:11-12 twice confirms that the Messiah bore iniquities, paralleling the azazel's primary role. Hebrews 9 reinforces this typology, distinguishing the first goat's blood (which purified the Holy Place without confession of sin) from the Messiah bearing sins for many, echoed in Hebrews 9:28. Peter likewise testifies that Christ bore sins in His own body on the tree, linking His stripes to both physical and, more importantly, spiritual healing that turns souls back to the Shepherd. Paul's declaration in II Corinthians 5:21 that God made Christ "to be sin" reflects the Hebrew term chatta'ah, which denotes both sin and sin offering. When the high priest laid Israel's iniquities on the azazel, the goat effectively became sin; likewise, Christ became sin itself, not merely an offering for it, fulfilling this same dreadful role. The azazel also symbolized a curse, being sent away from God's presence just as Adam was expelled from Eden. Galatians 3:13 identifies Christ as becoming "a curse for us" through crucifixion, fulfilling Deuteronomy 21:23's declaration that one hanged is cursed of God. His cry of forsakenness on the cross reflects this bearing of the curse in humanity's place, a curse fulfilled through death, resurrection, and ascension. The location of Christ's suffering further confirms this typology. While standard sin offerings were slain at the Tabernacle, the azazel was led outside the camp. Similarly, Hebrews 13:12 notes that Jesus suffered "outside the gate," likely on the Mount of Olives, sent away from the Temple just as the azazel was sent from God's symbolic presence. Unlike the first goat's immediate death, both the azazel and Christ bore sin over an extended, conscious ordeal. Ultimately, the azazel was a substitutionary sacrifice, innocent yet made to bear guilt, curse, and separation so that the guilty need not. Recognizing that Christ fulfilled this shameful role reveals the full weight of His sacrifice and the depth of mercy by which reconciliation with God becomes possible.

The traditional identification of the azazel goat as Satan stems not from Scripture but from the apocryphal Book of Enoch, where Azazel is named as a wilderness demon upon whom human sin is placed. This identification is problematic because the Hebrew word azazel never appears in the Bible as a demon's name. Instead, it is formed from two roots meaning "the goat of departure," describing a function rather than naming an entity. By importing this extra-biblical concept, the Day of Atonement has been mistakenly transformed into a day about the Devil, when Scripture presents it as being entirely about the cleansing of sin, in which Satan plays no part. Leviticus 16:5 makes clear that the two goats together constitute a single sin offering. One goat is sacrificed as a propitiation, symbolically paying the death penalty for sin, while the second goat—the azazel—is sent away alive after the sins of the nation are symbolically placed on its head, illustrating the complete removal of sin from view. Both goats typify the work of Jesus Christ: He pays the penalty for sin, and as living High Priest, He also cleanses the conscience so that sin is entirely removed. Satan cannot fulfill this role, since the goat of departure had to be unblemished, representing complete innocence, and Satan is never depicted in Scripture as bearing the sins of mankind. That responsibility belongs to Christ alone. Scripture consistently teaches that each sinner is accountable for personal sin, so if Satan already bore humanity's sin, the ritual of transferring sin onto an innocent representative would be meaningless. Furthermore, mankind's estrangement from God stems from sin itself, not from Satan's presence, since even during the Millennium, when Satan is bound, people will still sin. This correction raises a further question: if the Day of Atonement pictures the payment and removal of sin, does the Passover teach the same thing? The answer is no. Passover is not a sin offering but a form of the peace offering, also called a thanksgiving or fellowship offering. Unlike the sin offering, which was performed outside the camp, the peace offering was a sweet-smelling sacrifice eaten in fellowship, symbolizing that the relationship between God, the priest, and the individual is harmonious and satisfying. This pattern appears in Melchizedek's blessing of Abraham, where fellowship and God's favor—not sin—are emphasized. It appears again in the Exodus Passover, where the meal celebrates deliverance and favor already secured through the blood as a sign, and once more in Christ's final Passover, where He speaks of fellowship, joy, union, and indwelling with the Father, without mentioning the disciples' sins. Thus, there is no duplication between the two festivals. The Day of Atonement pictures the payment for sin and its total removal, while Passover celebrates the resulting fellowship and intimacy believers now enjoy with God through Christ's completed work as Savior and living High Priest.

The discussion of Azazel serves as a case study illustrating Paul's warning to Timothy that all Scripture, not human tradition, must be the foundation for doctrine. The booklet Pagan Holidays or God's Holy Days Which?, published by the Worldwide Church of God, builds its explanation of the Day of Atonement on the claim that understanding the meaning of Azazel is the key to the whole ritual of the two goats. To support this, the booklet cites the Comprehensive Commentary, which states that Spencer and Rosen, following old Hebrew and Christian opinions, thought Azazel was the name of the Devil, and that the word "scapegoat" signifies the goat that went away. This quotation, however, merely reports the opinions of other scholars rather than offering an explanation drawn from Scripture itself. Despite this weakness, the excerpt has been repeatedly re-quoted by various churches that emerged after the WCG's breakup as foundational support for identifying Azazel with Satan. Investigation into the source reveals that no other WCG literature references the Comprehensive Commentary, suggesting its writers did not have direct access to it. The quotation's earliest known appearance is in an 1846 article by O.R.L. Crosier, a figure who shaped early Adventist views of Satan as the scapegoat. It appears again in a work by J. N. Andrews, who also drew heavily on Charles Beecher's Redeemer and Redeemed, a book that itself relies on Jewish fables, including the apocryphal Book of Enoch and the Zohar, sources of the very kind Paul warned Timothy and Titus to avoid. Tracing the actual source, identified as William Jenks's Comprehensive Commentary on the Holy Bible (1837), exposes a critical omission by Crosier and Andrews. Digital scans of the original work show that Jenks was merely surveying diverse viewpoints on Leviticus 16:8, not endorsing the Satan interpretation himself. In his subsequent notes on pages 412 and 413, Jenks argues zealously that the azazel actually prefigures Jesus Christ. He explains that the two goats together formed one offering symbolizing Christ, that God laid on Jesus the iniquity of us all as foretold in Isaiah, that Christ bore sin and its punishment in His body on the tree, suffering outside the camp, and was made sin for us. Just as the azazel carried Israel's iniquities into a land of forgetfulness, so Christ takes away the sin of the world by bearing it Himself. This portion of Jenks's commentary, grounded in clear scriptural cross-references, was conveniently omitted by those who quoted only the earlier passage listing human opinions. This selective quotation, whether an honest mistake or a deliberate effort to prop up preexisting belief, demonstrates precisely why Paul's admonition to Timothy remains urgently relevant. The Azazel example shows how a doctrine can be built upon human commentary detached from Scripture and then propagated uncritically across generations and denominations. It underscores the necessity of testing all things, prioritizing Scripture as the true standard, since only God's Word is like silver purified seven times, while human interpretations, however longstanding or widely repeated, must be rigorously examined and discarded if found wanting.

The azazel, the live goat of the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16:21-22, is the type of which the Messiah is the antitype. Aaron laid both hands on its head and confessed over it all the iniquities, transgressions, and sins of Israel, and the goat then bore them away into an uninhabited land. Laying sin on its head made the goat a representation of sin, just as the Hebrew word for sin offering is also the word for sin. Sending it outside the camp made it a curse. Isaiah 53:6 shows the Father laying the iniquity of us all on the Messiah, and Isaiah 53:11-12, Hebrews 9:28, and I Peter 2:24 show Him bearing it. Paul says God made Christ to be sin (II Corinthians 5:21) and that Christ became a curse for us (Galatians 3:13). Both statements are startling, yet they are true, and they mean Christ fulfilled the azazel's role. Christ was not accursed in the sense of remaining under a curse, because the curse was carried out in His death. Like the azazel, He was led outside the gate and was not killed at the temple. The two goats were a single sin offering, and the azazel's life was consumed by its role of bearing sin even though it was not slain at the tabernacle. Likewise, Christ bore sin in His own body on the tree for hours, enduring shame, anguish, piercing, and crushing before He died. Rejecting this role overlooks one of His major works.

The identification of the live goat of Leviticus 16 as a type of Satan does not come from Scripture. The Bible never makes that identification, and Leviticus 16:21 says it is the iniquities of the children of Israel that are placed on the goat of departure, not Satan's sins. The claim that Azazel is Satan rests instead on Arabic and Islamic tradition, some Protestant commentaries, and finally Jewish tradition. The Jewish source says Azazel was probably a demonic being, drawing on apocryphal Jewish works from the last few centuries before the Christian era. One such work, the Book of Enoch, portrays Azazel as a fallen angel bound and sentenced to the desert, and it declares that the whole earth was corrupted through the works Azazel taught: "to him ascribe all sin." So the same Jewish tradition that names Azazel a demon is the origin of the idea that all sin belongs to a fallen angel. Neither part of that tradition is backed by the word of God. Building on the identification, the ceremony is then said to place man's Satan-inspired sins back on Satan's head. That conclusion contradicts the biblical teaching that each person bears his own sin. It is a vivid example of tradition making the word of God of no effect, and it calls for testing whether a belief comes from Scripture or from the traditions of men.