I looked up the Kyle-Delitzsch commentary on Lev. 16:8, where a lot is cast for two goats on the day of atonement, one for Yahweh and one for Azazel. Kyle-Delitzsh is, or at least used to be, a prince among commentaries. They write:

“The words, one lot for Jehovah and one for Azazel, require unconditionally that Azazel should be regarded as a personal being, in opposition to Jehovah. … We have not to think, however, of any demon whatever, who seduces men to wickedness in the form of an evil spirit, as the fallen angel Azazel is represented as doing in the Jewish writings (Book of Enoch 8:1; 10:10; 13:1ff.) … but of the devil himself, the head of the fallen angels, who was afterwards called Satan; for no subordinate evil spirit could have been placed in antithesis to Jehovah as Azazel is here, but only the ruler or head of the kingdom of demons. The desert and desolate places are mentioned elsewhere as the abode of evil spirits (Isaiah 13:21; Isaiah 34:14; Matthew 12:43; Luke 11:24; Revelation 18:2). The desert, regarded as an image of death and desolation, corresponds to the nature of evil spirits, who fell away from the primary source of life, and in their hostility to God devastated the world, which was created good, and brought death and destruction in their train.” (Biblehub Commentaries on Leviticus 16:8)

My comment: In the Book of Enoch, Azazel was not the head of the Watchers who married human women (Gen. 6:4). He was, however, the leading teacher of immorality among them, and is mentioned first later in Enoch.

This may be your first encounter with the “scapegoat” actually being the “goat for Azazel,” but it definitely was “for Azazel” and not “the scapegoat,” though “goat for release” is a good translation of Azazel’s name.  Also, Azazel was described as buried in a specific place in the desert, bound in chains, alive but in darkness. A later Mishnah suggests the Israelites made an effort to throw the goat down a rocky cliff, directly to where Azazel might be buried.

You might also have heard that the Jews tied a scarlet cord around the goat’s neck. What a sweet depiction of what they actually did! They tied the cord around the goat’s neck and around a rock, and they used the weight of the rock to take the goat down the cliff to be killed by the rocks on it.

I got this information from various sources, but primarily from Gospel over Gods by Tyler Gilreath (2021, Gilreath Publications).

Early Christian References to Azazel

Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Bk. I, ch. 15, par 6 (c. AD 185), attributed by Irenaeus to “that divine elder and preacher of the truth,” supposed by some scholars to be Pothinus:

Marcus, thou former of idols, inspector of portents, skill’d in consulting the stars, and deep in the black arts of magic, ever by tricks such as these confirming the doctrines of error, … which Satan, thy true father, enables thee still to accomplish, by means of Azazel, that fallen and yet mighty angel …

Note: Marcus was a gnostic teacher, still alive when Irenaeus wrote this. Pothinus was an elder (likely) of the church in Smyrna under Polycarp as bishop. Smyrna is where Irenaeus grew up and knew both Pothinus and Polycarp.

From Origen, Against Celsus, Bk. VI, ch. 43 (early third century):

And, further, who else could the destroying angel mentioned in the Exodus of Moses⁴⁴⁹² be, than he who was the author of destruction to them that obeyed him, and did not withstand his wicked deeds, nor struggle against them?  Moreover (the goat), which in the book of Leviticus is sent away (into the wilderness), and which in the Hebrew language is named Azazel, was none other than this; and it was necessary to send it away into the desert, and to treat it as an expiatory sacrifice, because on it the lot fell.  For all who belong to the “worse” part, on account of their wickedness, being opposed to those who are God’s heritage, are deserted by God.

Note: Don’t take Origen’s word as gospel! He was a highly respected teacher in his day, but he loved to speculate. When he asks something like “Who else could the destroying angel be?,” he is arguing, not passing on apostolic tradition that has been preserved in the church and handed down to him. I would take the idea that Azazel was the destroying messenger of the Exodus with a few grains of salt. The point of this quote is that the early churches knew who Azazel was, knew about the Book of Enoch (which is quoted by Jude in the Bible), and knew the goat of Leviticus 16 was the goat for Azazel.