While all four gospels mention Barabbas in their accounts of Jesus Christ's sacrifice on Passover day, Matthew, by a wide margin, pays the most attention to that aspect of the crucifixion story. He appears to have gone out of his way to include specific details, making scholars curious about why this event was so significant in his mind and what motivated his recounting of it.

One theory is that in Matthew's gospel, the Barabbas incident represents a fulfillment of part of the Day of Atonement ritual. In it, two goats were brought before the high priest, one to die and the other to be released. Notice some commonalities:

» In Christ's day, two men were brought before the authority: Jesus and Barabbas. One was killed, and the other was let go.

» Though not specified in Scripture, the rabbis in Judaism held that the two goats should be as identical as possible. Jesus Christ was the Son of the Father. Likewise, Barabbas means "son of Abba"—that is, "son of the father." As shown in the footnote at Matthew 27:17 (New King James Version), some manuscripts say that his name was even "Jesus Barabbas," which would translate as "Jesus, the son of the father." Both were notorious and considered criminals. To those without spiritual eyes, the two men may as well have been identical.

» Also in Rabbinic Judaism, the goat specified as "for the LORD" (meaning, for the LORD's service, satisfaction, or appeasement; Leviticus 16:8; c.f. Exodus 30:37; Numbers 31:3; Deuteronomy 13:16) had a scarlet cord tied to it (Mishnah tractate Yoma 4:2). Similarly, Matthew notes that the robe put on Christ was scarlet (Matthew 27:28). This is significant, not because it fulfilled God's instructions, but because Rabbinic Judaism was the prevailing practice at the time of His death. To any thinking Jew, these symbols would have been recognizable.

» As in the Atonement ritual, a ceremonial washing occurred: Pontius Pilate washed his hands after finding Jesus guiltless (Matthew 27:24). Scholars debate about whether this washing corresponds to the high priest's washing (Leviticus 16:24) or the washing of the "fit man" who led away the second goat after he finished his work (Leviticus 16:26).

» As in the Atonement ceremony, there was a symbolic designation of guilt: ‘And all the people answered and said, "His blood be on us and on our children'" (Matthew 27:25; see Leviticus 16:21).

» Christ's crucifixion included a casting of lots (Matthew 27:35; see Leviticus 16:8-10). Grotesquely, the soldiers cast lots for Jesus' clothing. In casting lots, they symbolically indicated that they were seeking God's will (see Proverbs 16:33) on who should receive the spoils of the Innocent, not how God wanted the proceedings to take place.

Although these elements overlap with aspects of the ritual in Leviticus 16, they are also terribly profane demonstrations of it. They illustrate a leadership and populace entirely out of alignment with God and His Word, not an unequivocal or undeniable fulfillment.

In God's instructions, the Aaronic high priest, under God's direction, presided over the Atonement ritual. In contrast, a Gentile governor, Pontius Pilate, who did not fear God, presided over Christ's crucifixion.

As Matthew shows, Pilate presumptuously gave to the people the choice of which man should fulfill each role, while God specifies that the high priest had to seek His will about which substitute would fulfill each role (Matthew 27:17, 21-23; see Leviticus 16:8). When given this choice, the people and leaders chose Jesus for crucifixion and Barabbas for release, not because they recognized Jesus' role before God, but to condemn Him—so they could continue their lives without disruption. They had Jesus destroyed because they despised Him, not because they valued His pure blood that would provide cleansing, like the first goat's (Leviticus 16:15-19; see Hebrews 9:7, 11-14, 23-25).

Notably, Barabbas bore no sins that day—not even his own! Pilate pardoned him. No one led him outside the camp to bear away the nation's sins as a symbol of sin and under a divine curse (Leviticus 16:22; see Matthew 27:31; Hebrews 13:11-12; II Corinthians 5:21; Galatians 3:13). The idea that Barabbas was worthy to bear the sins of the nation is completely at odds with the tenets of God's sacrificial system, which required an innocent substitute. Barabbas could not have been part of a symbolic sin offering that day because he was not unblemished (see Leviticus 4:3, 23, 28, 32; Deuteronomy 17:1).

While it seems that Matthew deliberately incorporated elements of the Atonement ritual (as well as some from Jewish tradition) into his crucifixion account, his object may well have been to show how misaligned the people and leadership were with God's will. All the elements of the Day of Atonement found in Matthew's account are shown to be incorrectly applied.

The true, scriptural fulfillment of the ceremony in Leviticus 16 does not require massaging symbols nor arranging prophetic events in a particular sequence. Jesus Christ perfectly fulfilled the roles of both goats that Passover day. Hebrews 9:12-14 shows His fulfillment of the first goat with His own blood and how superior His shed blood was, even to the point of cleansing consciences.

Likewise, Scripture records Christ's unambiguous fulfillment of the second goat, the azazel, through His bearing and taking away sins. Isaiah 53:6 declares, "And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all" (emphasis ours throughout), just as the high priest laid Israel's sins on the azazel each year. Christ likewise bore our sins, another function of the azazel:

» He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, for He shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the strong, because He poured out His soul unto death, and He was numbered with the transgressors, and He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:11-12)

» . . . who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree . . .. (I Peter 2:24)

» . . . so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. (Hebrews 9:28)

Jesus Christ is the only Being who could fulfill the role of the azazel—and did (Colossians 2:14; Romans 11:27; I John 3:5). While Barabbas played a part in the events of Christ's crucifixion, his role that day was entirely unrelated to the Day of Atonement.