the bible is so ingrained in our society that people fail to realize when the say something of biblical origin. in this case, the word "scapegoat."
scapegoat comes from leviticus chapter 16, in the kjv. it's poor translation of a proper name: azazel.
azazel is another heavenly entity. he's one of two things: the only foriegn god the israelites are commanded to sacrifice to, or the only angel named in the torah. in enoch's watchers, azazel is the angelic being that teaches man to make war on the nephilim. he and his rebel angels (200 i think) are cast down by god for this sin, into the pit of hell. azazel is one of the origins of the modern christian satan story.
but one thing is certain from the biblical text: he is the personage that the people are to sacrifice TO and not the sacrifice.
john is not making sense. the lord cannot have only one begotten son.
quote:Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
quote:Job 1:6 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them.
quote:Psa 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, "Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee."
note that last one. it's first person, and not written by jesus. and here "begotten" can't mean actually fathered by god. it's talking about a king being set up on the mountain of god, and MADE into the son of god. it's a coronation.
"son of god" it turns out is what the ancient hebrews called all their kings. david was the son of god. so calling jesus "the son of god" is calling him king. but the only king? sure, figuratively i guess. but there were other kings.
now, about the genesis and job verses... i'm starting to think they might just mean kings, and this whole angel/foriegn god business is all later interpretations.