The Book of Enoch, an apocryphal Jewish work composed in the last few centuries before the Christian era, significantly influences certain interpretations of the azazel goat in Leviticus 16. Though bearing the name of one of God's faithful servants, this book was not written by the prophet Enoch but by individuals during the intertestamental period, with scholars estimating its earlier parts around 300 BC and the remainder before 100 BC. While it includes biblical themes and names, much of its content contradicts the rest of the biblical canon. In the Book of Enoch, Azazel is depicted as a fallen angel who teaches mankind unrighteous ways, leading to his binding and sentencing to the desert forever. Additionally, it presents a tradition often associated with the Day of Atonement, asserting that Azazel is the author of human sin, with the statement, "And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin." This perspective from the Book of Enoch contributes to the tradition that identifies azazel as a demonic being, shaping some understandings of the azazel goat's role in the atonement ritual.

The Book of Enoch, an apocryphal Jewish work, is referenced by some, including Seventh-Day Adventist scholars, to support the doctrine that the azazel goat in Leviticus 16 represents Satan. In this text, Azazel is depicted as a demon blamed for all the sins of mankind, though not the chief demon, being subservient to another named Semjaza. According to the Book of Enoch, Azazel is bound and cast into darkness, confined to the desert until the day of judgment, which some correlate with the azazel goat being sent into the wilderness. However, this connection is textual rather than scriptural, and there is no parallel between the purposes or outcomes of the azazel goat and the binding of Satan as described in other contexts. The reliance on such apocryphal literature, alongside other non-biblical traditions, is questioned as a valid foundation for doctrine within God's church, emphasizing that only the Word of God should serve as the basis for understanding spiritual truths.

The Hebrew word azazel appears to be a compound noun, so the possibility exists that it is a name. Between the testaments, Jewish folklore invented a lesser demon named Azazel, who was blamed for all human sin. A millennium after Leviticus 16, the word azazel had been turned into a name. Many Jews of this time used a saying that reveals how they intertwined Scripture with folklore: On the day of atonement, a gift to Sammael. These Jews viewed the live goat as an offering sent to Samael, the Devil, who blended with their myth of Azazel, as folklore is wont to do.

The Book of Enoch is referenced as a source that contributes to the interpretation of the word azazel in certain traditions. It is noted as one of the influences among Arabic tradition, rabbinical interpretation, and Jewish mysticism that supports the view of azazel as a type of satan, as cited by Adventist scholar J.N. Andrews in his work. Additionally, it is suggested that the carnal imagination of the writers of the Book of Enoch may have played a role in shifting the understanding of azazel from a substitutionary sacrifice to a representation of the source of sin, portraying it as inherently evil or demonic rather than as a bearer of transferred sins. This perspective contrasts with the scriptural depiction of azazel as a substitute bearing the guilt of others, highlighting a divergence influenced by such apocryphal sources.

The Book of Enoch introduces a narrative that significantly influences interpretations of the term azazel, portraying Azazel as a demon blamed for the sins of mankind. This apocryphal Jewish work, written approximately 300 years before the Book of Revelation, suggests a scenario of binding and imprisonment for this being, which some connect to later prophetic imagery. By combining earlier prophecies about satan's fate, such as imprisonment and being cast into a pit, the Book of Enoch crafts a story that appears to prefigure certain biblical themes through imaginative storytelling. This narrative has contributed to a traditional view where azazel is seen as a name for a demonic entity, overshadowing other potential understandings and leading to interpretations that diverge from a focus on the Messiah's role in atonement. When researching the meaning of azazel, this perspective from the Book of Enoch often emerges, shaping conclusions that align with Jewish mythology rather than a singular emphasis on the redemptive work of Jesus Christ.

The identification of the azazel as a type of Satan does not originate from Scripture but from ancient Jewish literature, particularly the inventive Book of Enoch. This apocryphal tradition holds that all sin should be ascribed to a fallen angel named Azazel, and it is commonly taught that the real cause and actual author of human sin is Satan. However, the Word of God shows that this is not true, emphasizing that human responsibility for sin lies with the individual, not with Satan.

The Book of Enoch, an apocryphal Jewish work from the last few centuries before the Christian era, presents Azazel as a fallen angel who is bound and sentenced to the desert forever. It further states, "And the whole earth has been corrupted through the works that were taught by Azazel: to him ascribe all sin." This notion of ascribing all sin to a fallen angel stems from Jewish tradition, which also identifies Azazel as a demon. However, such ideas are not supported by the word of God, illustrating how reliance on tradition can undermine divine truth.

The Book of Enoch, an apocryphal work containing some biblical themes alongside significant heresy, presents Azazel as a demon who is the source of human sin, with all sins laid upon his head. This notion contrasts sharply with the biblical perspective, where the Hebrew word azazel is not a name but a description meaning the goat of departure, indicating a function rather than a demonic identity. Relying on the Book of Enoch to identify the azazel goat as satan leads one away from the inspired word of God into speculative and unfounded territory. In the imaginative narrative of the Book of Enoch, the sins of mankind are attributed to a fallen angel, whereas the Bible consistently holds each individual accountable for their own sins.

During the Intertestamental Period, a significant body of Jewish literary activity emerged, including the Pseudepigrapha, a collection of writings attributed to famous figures from Israel's history to lend them authority, though the true authors remain unknown. Among these, the Book of Enoch stands out as a work that has captured attention, often sparking curiosity about its validity. It is part of this broader collection of Jewish books that bear counterfeit author names, reflecting a deceptive practice to enhance their perceived significance. These writings, including the Book of Enoch, were produced in a time of spiritual and political ferment, yet they lack the divine inspiration and continuity seen in the canonical Scriptures.

The Book of Jude, though a brief epistle of only twenty-five verses, carries significant weight in its sharp denunciation of false teachers. One notable aspect that nearly excluded it from the canon is its quotation of two passages from apocryphal works, including the Book of Enoch, written in the intertestamental period between Malachi and the New Testament. Despite this, Jude unhesitatingly references these texts, demonstrating their relevance to his message. God, in His wisdom, included Jude within the pages of Scripture, affirming its value for His people across the ages, particularly for addressing timeless issues within the church that resurface periodically.

The concept of various 'worlds' is often used to describe distinct realms or spheres of existence, ranging from cultural and historical divisions to speculative and unseen dimensions. Among these, the spirit world, also termed the angelic world, emerges as a significant focus. The Book of Enoch has notably influenced cultural ideas about angels and demons, though it is not part of the canonical Scriptures. According to the Lexham Bible Dictionary, much of the contemporary understanding of these spiritual beings in our culture derives from apocryphal texts like the Book of Enoch, rather than from biblical revelation. These extra-biblical sources are often considered adjacent to Scripture at best, and many of their ideas are deemed false when measured against the limited but purposeful information provided in the Bible about the spirit world. God's design appears to reveal only what is necessary for our spiritual journey, cautioning against supplementing biblical knowledge with external, speculative content such as that found in the Book of Enoch, which may lead to misunderstandings or distortions of the truth about angels and their roles.

Some maintain that certain verses assert that angels married women before the Flood and engendered a race of giants. This idea sounds like the sub-plot of a science fiction story. However, the sons of God mentioned in these verses were not angels, as angels do not marry. Jesus clearly states that in the resurrection, humans neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. Angels, being spirit beings, cannot cohabit nor reproduce with women, who are human beings, as different kinds cannot breed. God establishes a strict law that each kind must reproduce only after its own kind. In the context of these difficult scriptures, God speaks of fleshly mankind, not angels, indicating that the sons of God were simply human members of mankind in general, men who had forsaken God and were intermarrying in defiance of His law. Additionally, giants and extraordinarily mighty men existed both before and after these marriages, showing that such huge and powerful men were not solely the result of these unions. God's holy Word interprets itself, and we do not have to believe bizarre, man-made interpretations of these scriptures, even though their meanings may not be initially clear.